Seanad debates

Saturday, 29 January 2011

Finance Bill 2011 (Certified Money Bill): Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

11:00 am

Photo of Joe O'ReillyJoe O'Reilly (Fine Gael)

The arguments have been well rehearsed. I strongly support the recommendation tabled by Senator Alex White and his party. I congratulate him because it is worthwhile.

Spending will have to be rigorously assessed in the future and the two criteria that will have to be used are whether the funding will contribute to job creation, on the one hand, and, on the other, alleviate the needs of the vulnerable and contribute to the good of society. In other words, a cost-benefit analysis of expenditure needs to be conducted and waste eliminated. In that sense, the principle underpinning the recommendation is a good one. Senator Alex White accepts the timeframe would be tight at one month and it needs to be adjusted.

Government Members have eloquently said that within the schemes there was the good, the bad and the ugly and delineated cases of each. Implicit in what they have said is the need for an evaluation and, in that position, a vote in support of the recommendation. To use that awful contemporary cliche, the recommendation is a no-brainer in the sense that one could not posit a view in contemporary society that one would spend money without having projections before it was spent and, having spent it, without assessing its impact.

The urban renewal scheme was interesting in that it did a great deal of good, but it also had a negative effect by creating small ghettos in the alleyways of towns and with unpleasant apartments constructed in areas where they were not appropriate. The ghost estates are the most awful outcome of the recent schemes, but significant good was done also. Job creation must also be a criterion for similar schemes in the future.

I came across an interesting case in Bailieborough, County Cavan. It was proposed to create a small ecotourism village with a residential area in which interesting courses would be provided and so on. It had job creation potential and tourism and other implications. It was a well presented scheme, but it was undermined by the windfall tax on land. We had to meet departmental officials who were helpful. However, there are good exceptions to general rules and they need to be evaluated. Constant evaluation and monitoring are needed. The principle of the recommendation is a good one and as such, we should all support it unanimously.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.