Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I am glad to have an opportunity to say a few words in this debate. I am looking forward to the NAMA legislation which will come to the House within the next few weeks. In that regard, it would be important, notwithstanding the urgency of having the legislation finalised, that we would have sufficient time in this House to reflect on the legislation. There has not been any legislation passed through the Houses of the Oireachtas which has not improved as a result of detailed and genuine analysis in this House. Therefore, the Minister of State might advise both his colleagues in Cabinet and the Leader of this House that it should not be rushed legislation as far as Seanad Éireann is concerned and we have more than a role to play in the debate. I am sure there will be viewpoints, analysis, suggestions and possible amendments from this House which could certainly be taken on board by the Government and I would hope that we will have sufficient time to debate the legislation in full when it will come to us within the next week or two.

As an overarching summary of my views, there have been alternatives to NAMA presented. There has been a well-thought out Fine Gael analysis of the financial crisis and the banking crisis and how we could respond, there has been a Labour Party analysis and there have been other various ideas put forward, but it appears, by virtue of the Second Stage vote in Dáil Éireann, that for better or worse NAMA is now finally the only show in town and we will be obliged to work with it. There is a responsibility to try to ensure it works well and that it is amended in so far as it can be. I hope the suggestions being presented by the various Opposition spokespersons are being listened to and reflected upon. It is in the interests of every citizen of this country that NAMA works because we need a working banking system. The financial response is not about saving bankers; it is about saving a banking system. We know that an economy cannot work and work cannot be created without a proper banking system. The broader debate is about the banking system, not about individual bankers. We all know that what many of them did was wrong, that the taxpayer is now facing a considerable bill, that the Government and the political establishment, if there is such an entity, faces significant choices and challenges, but we must respond and put a banking system in place. One House of the Oireachtas has decided that the NAMA approach is what we are now left with and we must work with it and try to see how it can be improved.

Public confidence in NAMA and in the Government response to the banking crisis is crucial if this is to work. We cannot expect that every citizen of the State is an expert on economic matters, on banking matters and, certainly, on NAMA, yet everybody has some degree of knowledge of NAMA because of the presentation it receives from the media, the considerable degree of public comment and the significant degree of political debate. There is not a radio show to which one can listen or a political show on television which one can watch without NAMA somehow coming into the debate. Those in the media and we politicians are entitled to our own opinions but sometimes they are not always entirely accurate. From the point of view of good governance and acceptance of the project, but more importantly from a perspective of public knowledge, information and confidence, it is important that there be clear information available about what NAMA is and where it is going, not only to every Member of this House but to every citizen of the State.

I ask the Minister of State to suggest to his colleagues in Government that the Minister for Finance would communicate to every household in the State outlining where the country is from a banking perspective, what needs to be done, what NAMA is and is not about, the financial parameters and the future expectation of where the taxpayers' money is going. It is important that there is not simply a broad acceptance, because that is a political issue in that one cannot force people to accept something, but that the Minister should be in a position to advise them on what exactly is being done, what the plan is and what the hope is for light at the end of the tunnel. Every household in the country should be apprised of the Government's proposal and the Minister's idea as to how NAMA is to work so that it is not simply picked from the front pages or the back pages of newspaper or the leftovers of Oireachtas debates and Oireachtas reports.

Of my two greatest concerns about the NAMA business plan and the NAMA legislation to which we will return in the Second Stage debate in this House, my first would relate to our ability or otherwise to ensure the banks will work in the sense that money will be available to small business. My colleague, Senator Twomey, and one or two other Senators raised this earlier. There does not appear to be a section or emphasis in the legislation to ensure the reconstituted Irish financial banking system will make as a priority the lending of money to small business, to agriculture and to small enterprise to get the economy moving and to save and create jobs. Perhaps there is a hidden line, section or subsection in the Bill to ensure it will happen. We believe there is a moral responsibility on the part of the financial institutions to respond to Government and to the taxpayer, but moral authority does not always work. Legal authority would work a little more effectively. I want to know why we can be so confident that lending will flow again. I am sure that question has been asked of the Minister of State on many occasions previously and I look forward to his response.

The second issue of concern, which also was raised by Senator Twomey, relates to our expectation, which is written into the law and was certainly part of the Minister of State's speech and is part of the Minister's speech every time speaks on the matter, that the taxpayer will be protected by virtue of NAMA chasing these developers and lenders who have built up such enormous debts for every remaining euro and cent available. As was pointed out effectively by Senator Twomey, however, in many cases that appears unlikely to work because with new company formations and assets being transferred, many of those who have built up these considerable debts and who have caused the grave financial crisis in which the country finds itself will be able to escape the rigours of the chase by NAMA. That is something that will disappoint the taxpayer, not in a begrudging, bitter way that we should be chasing after these persons but simply from the perspective that money is owed, the taxpayer is footing the bill to a significant degree and it should be possible to extract the maximum possible financial redress from the maximum number of these persons. I am just not sure how it will work when, under company law with limited liability etc., many of these persons will have no personal exposure to the debts which they have created. That is an area where public confidence is low and where we must try to restore public confidence if this broader NAMA project is to work.

We all understand the scale of the crisis. We all understand that the issue of the future of this project and whether it works is central to the economic recovery of this country. That is why it is important, in so far as we in the Opposition have proposed alternatives, that we now have to accept the weight of majority opinion in the other House, which has made a decision as to what is the plan going forward. We must try to bring forward ideas and suggestions as to how to improve that plan, and the Minister of State and his Government colleagues should be willing to listen in so far as they can learn from some of the ideas that will come forward from this House.

Public confidence is the key. It is disappointing that so much of the debate at present is sloganeering. We make bold, bland statements that bankers caused the problem and that it has nothing to do with us, so let somebody else solve it. In one sense, that could be correct but, of course, that cannot be the solution because we will all become part of the solution. With NAMA, every single household in the country will take on in some intangible way a certain proportion of the debt. We need to keep the public very much advised as to what is the project. We need to be able to demonstrate that there is a workable solution in place and that there is light at the end of the tunnel. It is very important to transmit hope to the Irish public in this grave economic crisis. If we want to turn it around, we have to point out clearly what we propose to do but we also have to offer some degree of hope and confidence. Much of that is lacking in the NAMA debate to date and we need to transmit the explanation to the public and give them an idea as to how this proposed solution will turn into reality.