Paschal Donohoe (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Mansergh, back to the House. I listened to the contributions of Senators Boyle and Hanafin and was struck by the number of times I heard them say there is no alternative and there is nothing that could be done differently. Listening to them I realised that not only is the economy under the vicious assault of which we are all aware, the nature of politics we practise here is under assault. I have heard person after person stand up and say there is no alternative nor no other way other than what the Government is doing.

There is always an alternative. Politics is about generating choices and options and there are always different ways of handling things and tackling a crisis. Fine Gael, in its contribution up to now and in the contribution it will make before budget day, has shown it would respond and handle this crisis in a different way. Senator Hanafin praised the care and the lavish detail the Government has given to preparing the current budget, but that is what the Government is there for. That is its job and that is what we expect from it. If less time had been spent running around the country opening swimming pools, newsagents and hairdressing salons between 2002 and 2007 as opposed to the Government doing its work and looking after the long-term plan for the country, we would not be in the mess we are in now or we would be in less of a mess. Senator Hanafin praised the Government for its care and attention, but if a fraction of that attention had gone into considering a long-term plan for the country and economy, not just by the next election, but afterwards, we would be in a better place now.

If times had been a little less good in previous years, they would be a lot less bad than they are now. That is the choice we faced and the reality of where we are now. When preparing for this debate I took a quick look at the front pages of two main investment newspapers, the Financial Times and The New York Times, to see what they are saying about Ireland's current position. I want to be serious and move away from party politics in this regard. Today's Financial Times printed an article entitled "Investors tear up old rules on behaviour" which examined what is happening in Dubai. Having analysed the situation in Dubai and what is happening with regard to debt there, it turned its attention to Greece and Ireland. It mentioned that Ireland's debt-to-gross domestic product is forecast to rise by 80% next year. This was the front page story today.

With regard to the story in The New York Times, after it mentioned what was happening in some parts of eastern Europe, it turned to Ireland and stated the burdens are even greater in Ireland than in Latvia because economic boom here was driven by easy credit and soaring property values which have now given way to precipitous busts. It stated that public debt in Ireland is expected to soar to 83% of gross domestic product next year, from 25% in 2007. Today, when considering where the markets might be looking to next for the next sovereign bond scare, the front pages of two of the main investment newspapers mention Ireland. This brings home to us the precipitous state in which we find ourselves.

When Senator Hanafin began his speech, he started off with a little diatribe against the Opposition and talked about coherence between the Opposition parties. We have no requirement to be coherent. We are here to put forward our different political ideas and try and gain the support of our parties. We are not in government. One gains coherence if one is lucky enough to be in government. That is when the discipline kicks in. We have Fianna Fáil saying one thing about the tax burden. It says it wants to make all the savings out of expenditure as opposed to taxation, but Senator Boyle, on the front page of The Sunday Times every week, says the exact opposite. He says what we need to do is broaden the tax base. Where is the coherence there? There is a basic incoherence.

Another matter strikes me repeatedly and it was very apparent during the debate. I refer to Senator Boyle's contribution. He said that when people heard the budget, they would gasp. What is there to be praised? We are not here just to make people gasp but to offer them hope and to say there is a way forward. When Senator Hanafin was making this point, he deliberately slowed down wonderfully and I thought there was going to be an epiphany, that he was going to reach out to us across the party political divide and make a point on which we could agree-----