Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I am happy to give an independent view on the inter-party rivalry that has been evident for the past hour or two. Fine Gael and the Labour Party, given their position, are perfectly entitled and correct to call for an election. Equally, the Government is correct to say there should be none.

I have been here long enough to see changes. I am sorry some of my friends in Fine Gael have not been present for this debate. I could give examples of changes that occurred when there were changes of Government. Senator Bradford was a Member of this House when we dealt with the road traffic legislation in the 1990s, which was introduced by former Minister Michael Smith. We tabled amendments on this side of the House on all sorts of issues, including speed limits and licences. We were very solid and committed regarding the legislation and we were all working together on it but then the Government fell over the Brendan Smith case. Next thing the Government changed without an election such that the people who were on this side of the House were then on the other. I said we would at least effect some changes as a consequence. When the legislation was considered under the new Government, Senator Ross and myself re-tabled all the Fine Gael amendments tabled before the change of Government in the belief we would have the full support of the other side of the House. Did we receive it? We did not. We have learned the hard way over the years. We listen to comments and know people are sincere in what they say when they say it. This does not mean it will ultimately turn out to be what they want. This is a lesson for all of us.

The Labour Party and Fine Gael are correct to be hammering the Government at present. I met the leader of the Green Party casually yesterday and said I was sorry his party did so badly in the elections. Like Senator Buttimer, I congratulate those who put a name on the ballot paper and I feel sorry for anybody who did not get elected or lost a seat. I am genuine in saying this and Members on both sides of the House, irrespective of party affiliations, share my view.

I said to the leader of the Green Party that I could list measures he could have adopted that would not have cost money, would have received widespread support and would have been good for Fianna Fáil, bearing in mind that the Green Party was not able to convince Fianna Fáil. He asked what the measures were and I replied that the Joint Committee on Climate Change, of which I am a member, produced legislation called the foreshore Bill, which would be very important in terms of bringing energy resources ashore. It was the first joint committee ever to produce a Bill. I asked why the Government did not say it was a great idea and consider it. The Government would have had a wide selection of people dealing with issues that Senator Butler has raised under another heading on various occasions, including the problems associated with developing renewable energy. Senator Butler invited to Leinster House those responsible for the Spirit of Ireland proposal. Spirit of Ireland brought many strands together but the first depends on this legislation. I also mentioned to the leader of the Green Party the Climate Change Bill, which was produced by Members in the Opposition benches. The concept was agreed by the Government and it said it would bring forward its own Bill. There are many such measures that could have been considered.

I referred yesterday to Seanad reform. Perhaps the Government will consider Seanad reform with a slightly less jaundiced eye given that Fianna Fáil has probably lost two quotas in every single panel. I stated that, in my county, the naming of my home town cost the Government votes. I spoke to a young Fianna Fáil man who said residents were waiting for the Government to do something about the name of the town, which was changed by the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív, but it did nothing. These are the issues that arise. I am picking small matters although I could go through list after list of those that arise all the time. I sometimes wonder what programme managers are doing.

Senator Daly referred to headlines. I have been reading headlines and full, detailed commentary over the past year stating for a fact that Fianna Fáil was at 20%, that the percentage associated with the Labour Party was mid 20s and that the percentage associated with Fine Gael was in the 30s. We looked at the results of the local elections, in respect of which commentators say a different result is produced, and at the results of the European elections. The European elections showed the Labour Party to be just under 14%, Fine Gael to be at 29% and Fianna Fáil to have a percentage in the mid-20s. The opinion polls were completely wrong in respect of the three main parties. It is worth our while examining this.

Everyone has the same interest in the register of electors. We considered it some years ago and sorted it by sending guys out at the weekend from local authority offices to check where people live. A statement was made by the Communication Workers Union – I believe it had the support of An Post – that the only people who can reliably compile a register of electors are the people knocking on doors every day delivering the post. If I were tasked with saving money and achieving efficiency, I would remove responsibility for collecting television licence fees from An Post and impose an audiovisual charge on all households in the country, unless they opted out, such that the fee would be imposed through the taxation system. I would also pay An Post to compile the register of electors. The postman or postwoman knows who lives in each house and nobody could compile the register better and with more efficiency over time.

Consider the issue of moral authority, the Government's mandate and the question of the incompatibility of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Labour Party and the other parties. Senator Ross and I, and perhaps the Minister of State, Deputy Finneran, were told in 1989 by an important Fianna Fáil backbencher on the plinth that under no circumstances would his party go beyond the final frontier and go into Government with the Progressive Democrats. Four hours later he walked out of a meeting having established a commitment to a Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government. The same man is the Minister for Transport today, thus demonstrating how circumstances change. The question of incompatibility does not arise in these issues and parties have their policies. It is true that the Fine Gael and Labour Party policies are incompatible at present but they are incompatible only in so far as they do not change. Politics is the art of compromise and there is no point in Fianna Fáil saying the Opposition could never form a Government given that it and the Progressive Democrats set out what they wanted and agreed a common programme for Government. This is how it is done. Differences are not irreconcilable as one just works out the programme for Government. The bigger party gets the most and one proceeds in that manner.

A proposal was made yesterday by Senator Hanafin, who said in respect of the banking crisis that all parties should spell out exactly what they mean in a question and answer session in the House. I understand NAMA and believe it is a good idea. I have questions about it and am not enthusiastic about it but believe it could work. I like the idea that we will ultimately own the property in question. I understand the first step of the Fine Gael policy but do not understand what would happen after setting up the toxic debt banks or what would happen if one decided not to meet the commitments on bonds sold internationally. I will have worries about this until the system is explained to me. That is not to say Fine Gael's proposal is wrong; I am just outlining how I see it as a person considering all the sides.

The Labour Party speaks of part nationalisation. This is fine and it is the first step. I do not believe there is a great problem with it but I wonder what happens next. What do we do with the toxic debt? It is fine to say the people who took the risk should take the plunge. I would have no problem with that either and am assured that NAMA will be going in this same direction but, when the transfers of assets are complete, there will be debts and a problem that will still need to be resolved. I do not understand how the Labour Party would resolve the problem but that is not to say it has no solution; I am just saying I have not had it spelled out to me.

My Fianna Fáil colleagues have not boned up on these issues and do not fully understand them. They are not speaking with conviction. I say this because whenever they speak they always attack Members on this side of the House. If I were in the parliamentary party I would tell people that they should understand what they are doing and go out and argue for it. They should forget about those on the other side of the House. They should explain what they are doing and be committed to it. The country needs a solid strong Opposition and we should congratulate Fine Gael and Labour in that respect. The rest of us need to ensure we understand completely what everybody is proposing and move away from the practice of shooting across the aisle and get the facts down in front of us.