Alex White (Labour)

It is time the people, politicians and all of the political parties faced up to the serious economic situation in which we find ourselves, which I believe they are doing. However, it is not time for us to consider the suppression of dissent or debate and I know Senator Norris did not suggest this. This is still a democracy and we have different ideas, opinions and views on how the problems of the country could be solved. In a democracy and, in particular, Parliament we are entitled to and bound to have these issues debated, contested and, if necessary, be in conflict in regard to them. They should be resolved and we should move forward. The best and the only way for a democracy to do this is by having a general election. That is when we will close the doors for four weeks, go outside and say to the people how we believe matters should proceed and what we believe the Government should do in the future. That is what all parties should do. The people should get to decide. Let us not lose sight of the fact that this is still a democracy. It is not time for us to panic, advocate some kind of faux consensus, put all our differences aside or imagine there is none. There are and we should not be afraid to say so. If anything, the problem in the past ten years has been that we have not had enough debate about the differences between us. We have not debated these issues enough.

I refer to a suggestion Senator MacSharry made yesterday about having a series of debates on tax, health, education and social welfare issues. I would have no difficulty with this, but let us be honest about what would happen in such debates. The procedure is that a Minister comes to the House and makes the first speech. If that happens between now and the announcement of the budget, the Minister for Finance will not tell us what taxation measures will be included in the budget because he will not be able to do so. That is not even a criticism of the Government because the Minister would have to wait until the budget was announced. Ministers will not tell us what social measures will be included or whether there will be cuts in health and education services because that is the way government works.

It is ridiculous to say the Opposition parties should state what they would do. We should think about this and be honest with each other. It will not be a real debate unless we remove the shackles from the procedures used in this House and say we do not require a debate to be kick-started by a Minister who will not say anything in the lead-up to the budget. We need to remove the shackles if we are to have the debate required in order that we can genuinely contest the issues involved. By all means, let us do so. However, we must think about the procedures used. One should not imagine that in calling for four debates and when the Leader says it is a very good idea, it will make any difference.

On Seanad reform, the Leader should not tell me about the Minister coming back with a proposal because I know all about it. Will he tell the House about one measure he has introduced in the past three and a half years to reform the procedures of the House?