Martin Mansergh (Tipperary South, Fianna Fail)

I thank Senators for their contributions to this thoughtful and high level debate. As a former Member of this House, I deprecate some of the attacks made on its usefulness, usually by those who take no obvious interest of any type in its proceedings. Among our commentators there is generally interest in the power play and in particular personalities, but there is often insufficient interest in serious policy debate such as took place in this House today. The Seanad has always been characterised by a somewhat less partisan spirit than that which often reigns in the Dáil.

Senator Twomey questioned whether anybody acknowledged the role played by Mr. Alan Dukes in the Tallaght strategy. I have done so. If he cares to look at my contribution in this Chamber on 2 November 2005, he will find a reference in this regard. I have made several other complimentary references to the commission on the future of agriculture which the then Deputy Dukes was asked to chair by a Fianna Fáil Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

Reference was made by way of differentiation to benchmarking. It is worth bearing in mind that, as a former president of the University of Limerick has observed, if there were to be another benchmarking exercise today, any revisions would most likely be in a downward direction. Decentralisation is another initiative that was castigated as a failure by Senator Twomey. I am surprised to find this attitude in a Member from a provincial town. Fine Gael is very much in favour of particular decentralisation projects at a local level and wishes to see them completed.

I agree with Senator Twomey when he said the Opposition should not be expected to come up with a grand plan because such is not its role. He said the Opposition would produce ideas, provide opinions and back the Government with some of its suggestions. That is fair comment. It is the job of Government to take the hard and necessary economic decisions and, as Senator White acknowledged, to be accountable to the Dáil in that regard in matters strictly related to finance.

In the exceptional and difficult economic times we now face, the budgetary choices before us are stark. It is clear we must all help shoulder the economic burden. I agree with Senator White that the Government does not expect plaudits, does not expect to be regarded as courageous for taking decisions on how that burden is to be distributed or taking other necessary measures. It is simply our responsibility and our duty. The approach we adopt seeks to share the burden as fairly as possible across all sectors of society and of the economy, public and private. On a progressive basis, it asks the better off to do more in order that impositions on the less well off can be minimised.

This was bound to be very difficult. The most difficult matter to reach consensus upon is equity. What is fair to some people seems very unfair to others. I would prefer that somebody, even a relatively low-paid person, would complain about the unfairness of what has been decided rather than that he or she should be without a job. The Government's approach emphasises supporting and maintaining jobs, rather than supporting and maintaining incomes. This will be difficult.

I agree with Senator White that it is important to have analysis of what went wrong and how we got into the present situation. Equally, I agree with Senator Bradford that, to a very great degree, all of us have been part of the problem and all of us, or nearly all of us, must be part of the solution. That does not deny that some may have been more responsible than others.

In both Houses, there was a critical undertone in some contributions with regard to social partnership. I do not for a second suggest that social partnership should be regarded in an entirely uncritical manner. It has served the country extremely well. The social partners came a long way with the Government in agreeing a basic analysis of the situation and of what needed to be done, even if it was not possible for them to share the responsibility for the decisions that must be taken now.

The Government has already declared it will prioritise school buildings. There is an interesting paradox with regard to energy costs. We all agree that electricity and gas costs are too high and must be reduced. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, said as much at the end of a Private Members' debate in the Dáil yesterday. However, another strand of thinking which comes from environmental concerns states that in order to create proper incentives energy costs should be higher. We must think our way through those issues.

Certain Senators suggested tax changes. No changes will be made before the next budget. With regard to the cross-Border situation, the British decisions are of a very temporary nature, to last a few months. That, at least, is the theory. However, the main pressures have been caused by the exchange rate rather than by the differences in VAT.

With regard to social welfare offices, personnel have been transferred from other parts of the Civil Service to cope with the extra demand. My office, the Office of Public Works, will also examine in which ways it may be necessary to expand accommodation.

Reference was made to the banks. As a German economist put it in a German political magazine during the past week, it might not be particularly palatable to support private interests at this time and thereby prevent far worse damage to the common good. However, it may be necessary. Questions of appropriate rewards and how money can be channelled to meet the needs of small businesses lie within the capitalisation proposals being discussed with the banks. All these issues must be at the top of the agenda. The Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement is charged with scrutinising actual and alleged misdemeanours in the past.

The question of professional fees must be addressed and is dealt with, to a limited degree, by the Government's programme. For example, there is a gulf between the cost of private dental treatment in this jurisdiction and in Northern Ireland. Court procedures often seem extraordinarily antiquated. My consitutency colleague was involved in a case which was called on several different occasions, each time requiring barristers to be paid in full. However, I acknowledge that recent entrants to the legal profession may find it very difficult to make a living. That was always the case in the past.

Senator Shane Ross suggested we should lower the level of corporation tax. I do not believe that would be a wise move. We must take into account a broader European and international context. My argument would be to leave well alone.

The issue of Ministers of State was raised. I have made known my views on that subject.

I reiterate the rationale for seeking an additional pension-related contribution from public servants. This recession is affecting people across the private sector. Unemployment figures are now reaching an unprecedented level, perhaps not in percentage terms but in absolute numbers. Against this background, it is not unreasonable to ask public servants, who enjoy norms of secure employment and guaranteed pensions, to share in the burden of economic adjustment that is borne generally across the economy.

Some Senators criticised the fact that pension payments are tax-deductible and stated this is unfair to the lower paid. We have sought consistently to ensure that, as far as possible, the lowest paid are kept outside the income tax net. Of our workforce, 38% pay no tax and, in addition, many pay no employee PRSI. The wealthiest 5% account for half of all income taxes paid. Almost nobody working at a full-time job in the public service is paid as little as €15,000, but I have not had time to check that. A 3% levy would be the only imposition such a person would pay rather than in addition to other payments. The money must be raised.

Senator Quinn made the point that business is not always fair and, unfortunately, we cannot proceed on the basis that life is always fair. However, we are protecting the livelihoods, jobs and living standards, with some reductions, of the entire population. Even if not everything is perfectly fair, unless we take the necessary action now, rather than later, although further instalments have to follow, we will be in far more severe difficulties and services we take for granted will be seriously at risk. The Taoiseach has made it clear that his door is still open to the social partners regarding details of how matters might be applied. The legislation still has to come before both Houses. To use his words, subject to tweaking of the details, the steps have to be taken to ensure our credit-worthiness. Our credit-worthiness, when we are in a deficit on the scale we are, relates directly to our ability to pay for our day-to-day public services, not to mention investments. The bottom line is that action must be taken. It is unfortunate, and I have every sympathy with people. This may apply to a very large number of people who will have to struggle to adjust to the new circumstances facing society. However, unfortunately, we have to do it.