Seanad debates

Thursday, 4 November 2010

10:30 am

Photo of John Gerard HanafinJohn Gerard Hanafin (Fianna Fail)

In addition, the amount taken in through corporation tax has increased significantly. It does not follow that jobs are created first and then businesses profit. It is the other way around. Yesterday's announcement is a good indicator that there will be further increases in employment in the future. The quantitative easing taking place in the United States is another positive factor. I am saddened, however, by the fact that commentators appear to be seeking every reason other than those of a positive nature for the drop in unemployment. This is indicative of how some elements in the media view the way the economy is being run. I am of the view that it is being run prudently and that matters are more positive in nature than the elements to which I refer suggest.

I congratulate the Opposition on winning the vote on Private Members' business yesterday. It is some achievement to win a vote against the Government. I question how realistic it would be to have 23 people elected separately. The quota required would be in the order of 50,000 and some individuals might attract 70,000 votes. How could we expect those elected on foot of receiving 70,000 votes to be informed by a Minister for Finance, who may only have garnered between 10,000 to 12,000 votes in a general election, that they cannot deal with financial matters? If people want to change the way the Seanad operates, they must be realistic. Some of the ideas put forward were fairly hare-brained in nature. It was suggested, for example, that the Seanad election could be held on the same day as a general election. How could candidates from the various panels canvass Deputies and councillors in the middle of a general election campaign? If people want good Seanad reform, they should consider the allocation of extra responsibility rather than changing a system which does not necessarily need to be changed.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.