Alex White (Labour)

I refer to next week's business dealing with the NAMA legislation. The Government has already made it clear publically that it intends to curtail debate in this House. It announced the legislation would return to the Dáil on Thursday week, 12 November. It has already made it very clear that the debate will finish here on Wednesday night. That will amount to the guts of three days' debate in the House. We know that decision has already been made. Senator Fitzgerald is right to call for assurances but, in fact, both she and we already have our answer. It is intended to finish the debate on Wednesday night or Thursday morning next week.

It is odd to read in the newspapers today that the Minister for Finance intends to introduce further amendments. It is not odd that he intends to introduce further amendments and I have no problem with this. However, the amendments are so complex - I understand this is the way in which it has been reported in the newspapers today - that he is not in a position to introduce them this week. He requires more time and will not be able to introduce them until next week and he will do so in the Seanad. If he must take a further week to devise and deal with the amendments, how are we expected to deal with such complex matters in a period of one day or one day and a half? We will do our best to do so but it is extraordinary since we have had, rightly, months of preparations for the legislation.

However, the Government seems to take the view that when legislation goes to the Dáil and to Seanad in particular, this constitutes the end rather than the beginning of the debate and that the real work is done by the Executive, not by the Parliament. The Government has taken this position and if I am wrong in this regard, I ask the Leader to disprove my point. The Deputy Leader also might agree to my proposal, which is to publish the amendments at the end of this week. The Leader should not wait until Tuesday morning to publish them but should enable Members to see them. This at least would give Members a couple of days to consider these complex amendments and an opportunity to deal with them when they come before this House. The Government should consider this not unreasonable request.

In respect of the day of protest scheduled for this Friday and the general issues pertaining to the trade union response to events, members of trade unions are perfectly entitled to take a day of action and to protest on the streets of their capital city. Not only are they so entitled but they are perfectly justified in so doing. Every time one makes a point about, for example, NAMA or some other issue pertaining to the economy, Members on the other side ask, perhaps justifiably, what is one's alternative. Practically five minutes into a discussion on the subject, the refrain from Members on the other side is what is one's alternative. I ask those who criticise trade union members who are taking to the streets and considering industrial action what alternative do they propose. What alternative do they propose to people who can see their living standards have dropped and who can see no real stake in the future? The problem people have is there is no clarity and they can see absolutely no stake into the future regarding how these issues should be dealt with in budgetary terms. What alternative is proposed by those people who fill the airwaves with criticisms of trade unions being lunatics and everything else?