Mark Dearey (Green Party)

-----nomad for the past month, since my arrival. I was enjoying my new surroundings when I noticed a sticker on a window across the courtyard saying: "Don't blame me - I voted Labour". That bumper sticker was clearly a back reference to the local elections or the last general election. The Labour Party should be aware there will be the father and mother of a blame game if this deal is not approved by a majority of public sector workers. Much of the blame will focus on the party's relative silence and non-participation in this debate. It has created a smokescreen for itself and does not want to tell people what to do. I urge Deputy Gilmore to reconsider that position because it will be a close thing and it will need all available support to get it across the line. It is profoundly in the national interest that the deal be approved and that the international opinion concerning our solidarity to which I referred, and to which Senator Donohoe referred in the Financial Times today, is reinforced, not shattered.

We have come a long way from the December breakdown and I am very anxious to see the deal completed. I say this against the background of the most recent vote of the Civil and Public Services Union, CPSU, members. I heard the union leader, Mr. Blair Horan, speak about it on the radio this morning and he attributed the defeat to lower paid workers not trusting the Government on the issue. He expressed the view concisely and I took account of it.

The response of the Minister of State today also takes account of the issue. He mentioned paragraph 1.28 of the draft agreement, which states that the implementation of the agreement "is subject to no currently unforeseen budgetary deterioration". That will be seen by anyone on the other side as a get-out clause but it is also a necessary precaution. Over a number of years and in fluid economic circumstances, agreements must have conditions attached taking into account a breakdown of economic order that would prevent the deal from being delivered.

I can understand how a line like this might create a high degree of unease and suspicion among union members voting on the deal. The Minister of State's response to that trust issue is important. It is not envisaged, on the basis of any currently known facts, that the clause would be utilised. I speak for Members on all sides of the House in saying that it is our profound hope that no such scenario would arise. The language is self-evident and it is only in extremis that such a clause would be called upon. As we begin to see some signs of economic improvement, the possibility of such a position is receding by the day. I hope the response from the Minister of State will be noted by the unions in general and Mr. Blair Horan in particular as a statement of good faith in the deal. Although the clause had to be included, it is not something anyone wants to use.

The kind of posturing and calls for demonstrations of anger we have seen are unhelpful in our current position. Most people, even those experiencing the sharp end of the deal, will see that there is no advantage in open aggression or the kind of activities we saw outside the gates of Leinster House some days ago. That will not help people to rationally assess their enlightened self-interest or vote in the national interest. It will stoke resentment and rupture the solidarity I have spoken about. It will create another "us and them" scenario that we came close to but have since moved away from. It will ultimately lead to the failure of the deal despite the lack of a fall-back position. That will lead to industrial chaos which should be avoided at all costs. I thank the Minister of State for his time.