Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail)

I join with others in welcoming the Minister, Deputy Shatter, to the House, congratulating him on his appointment as Minister and wishing him and his Government genuine success in the years ahead. I am glad to have the opportunity, however unusual this is in the midst of a Seanad Éireann election campaign, to make a few comments on the programme for Government. There is much in it that all parties and none will find it easy to agree with, considering the economic difficulties in which the country finds itself, and in that regard many parts are uncontroversial. Some issues, of course, arise as a result of the pre-election determined positions of people and parties in respect of what is now within the programme for Government. Notwithstanding this, I genuinely wish the Government well and hope it can make progress on our behalf in continuing to stabilise the country's budgetary position and in trying to achieve economic recovery, not least in the jobs market.

I want to address a number of issues, initially the area of health, where we had the stated pre-election position as regards the abolition of the Health Service Executive. For many years, since the introduction of the Health Act 2004 in this House, I have been critical of the Health Service Executive and the fact that it had control of some 50% of the country's tax take while operating at arms length. However, the programme for Government is somewhat vague as regards what is to happen in this respect. Is the HSE to be abolished? The pre-election position of the Labour Party, for example, to quote Deputy Jan O'Sullivan as reported in The Irish Times on 8 February, was:

We won't abolish the HSE on coming into government. What we are going to do is devolve various functions of the HSE, for example we will give hospitals control over their own budgets.

We also had the proposal to introduce universal health insurance with access according to need and payment based on a patient's ability to pay, and that insurance for public or private coverage be compulsory while at the same time the VHI should be kept in public ownership to retain a public option within the health insurance system. Fine Gael proposed an entirely private system based on the Dutch health insurance model, although what seems to be emerging is a hybrid model. Again, I am not sure how exactly this will work, and clearly in whatever capacity I might serve after the Seanad elections, I look forward to hearing more of the detail on this issue. Certainly more is needed. There was a proposal to the effect that the staff of the HSE should revert to the direct control of the Department of Health of Children, as well as the new health insurance organisation, whatever that might be. I should be interested to know whether the Minister can give the Seanad some further detail on that.

All politics being local, I recall a promise in my area to the effect that within 100 days we would see the return of cancer care services at Sligo General Hospital. No doubt the Minister of State, Deputy John Perry, is making haste with the preparations for that, and I should be most supportive if it is achieved.

The programme for Government proposes setting up a jobs fund. When the Labour Party proposed setting up a jobs fund, Fine Gael was quick to criticise, saying in effect that the Labour Party was placing all its faith in raising €500 million for a vague jobs fund that would see politicians and State agencies seeking to influence matters for their own agendas. Deputy Richard Bruton said on 31 January that it was not clear whether this jobs fund would even yield a return for taxpayers. Another problem with the proposed fund is that it does not seem to be costed. What happened to the Labour Party's promise to allocate half a billion euro to a jobs fund? Is this still a figure we are working towards, or what is the current situation? Again, some further detail on that would be appreciated.

The programme for Government proposes implementing the recommendations in the report Trading and Investing in a Smart Economy. The report was published in September by Fianna Fáil when in government and was heavily criticised by both parties in the present Government. The Labour Party described the plan as being high on targets and short on specifics. It also said that these initiatives were more about an attempt to "rehabilitate the reputation of a discredited Government" than getting people back to work, according to Deputy Willie Penrose, and yet it seems to be an appropriate policy, as outlined in the new programme for Government.

Fine Gael also criticised the report saying it was a "PR joke that no unemployed person would be laughing at, as it contains no funding, no new policies, no new programmes". The jobs target was described as a farce by Deputy Leo Varadkar on 28 September 2010.

The programme for Government proposes the establishment of an export trade council. Fine Gael was highly critical when the Labour Party proposed this in January. Deputy Richard Bruton said the 25 new structures, positions, centres, councils, task forces and expert groups proposed by the Labour Party would not have any impact on job creation unless the underlying weaknesses in the economy were addressed.

We are looking for more detail on some measures. The programme for Government targets a sum of €2 billion from the sale of non-strategic assets. The programme does not identify specific assets, but we know from Fine Gael's position before the general election that Bord Gáis Energy, ESB power generation facilities, excluding hydro plants, customer supply companies and RTE masts and towers, excluding the television stations, were all up for grabs. The Labour Party has been very critical of the proposed sale of assets. Recently Deputy Joan Burton said she found it astonishing that Fine Gael would suggest the sale of assets such as energy and power companies at a time when Ireland's credit rating was rock bottom. We would be selling at rock bottom prices. The programme for Government incorporates Fine Gael's NewERA plan in name, of which the Labour Party has been highly critical in the past. Deputy Joan Burton, the new Minister for Social Protection, said Fine Gael's NewERA document contained extraordinary figures and that it would be accompanied by the creation of about ten quangos. She also said Deputy Michael Noonan had made a remark in passing that it had been dreamed up by someone in the Fine Gael PR office. I share her recollections on that point. The NewERA programme does not specify how much upfront investment is required. Does the €7 billion figure apply or is there a new one? Is the investment of €7 billion included in the capital programme already under way?

The establishment of a strategic investment bank is referred to in the programme for Government. The real concern is whether it will attract much-needed funding from the main recapitalised banks, AIB and Bank of Ireland. The position of the Tánaiste is that €2 billion from the National Pensions Reserve Fund will be used as initial capital for such a strategic investment bank and that it will be used to leverage a further €20 billion. I am interested to know how this could happen. The funding of this bank will be difficult, considering the difficulties we are having in keeping the banks going. While the aspiration of what the money will be used for is honourable, it is difficult to see how we could come up with the finance for another bank. At a committee meeting in 2009 the Governor of the Central Bank, Professor Patrick Honohan, referred to the dangers of State-owned banks. There was no mention of such a bank in the Fine Gael banking document, "Credit Where Credit is Due". I appreciate the need for compromise in negotiations on a programme for Government. At the same time, the need for compromise cannot be used as the reasoning behind the basic denial of some policies in favour of the adoption of others when both partners in government were diametrically opposed to them at other times.

On political reform, we are in the middle of the Seanad election and it is in order for me to say it is populist to propose the abolition of Seanad Éireann. If we were to propose the abolition of Dáil Éireann, we would also find supporters. The same applies to the Presidency and other institutions of the State. We should focus in a serious way on trying to use these institutions correctly. They need reform before we opt to abolish them. Political hierarchies of all parties and none have chosen to use this institution, Seanad Éireann, as a breaking ground for new talent and a safety net for also-rans. It could be much more valuable. In his address the Minister in the context of European legislation spoke about the Government's focus on the scrutiny of EU legislation. There is no better forum than this to do that. I hope the Government can examine the possibility.

If the Cathaoirleach will indulge me for one minute, I wish to raise two other issues. The programme for Government does not seem to mention, other than in passing, the Croke Park agreement. I come from a business background and the nature of my responsibilities in this House is to reflect business. It is disgraceful in the extreme that we continue to preside over a Croke Park agreement which proposes so many worthwhile savings yet nothing has been implemented. If it was a business and a business plan, it would have been agreed yesterday and implemented today. The delay is inexcusable. I am interested in hearing about the Government's immediate plans to rectify that.

My last point relates to mortgage arrears and families having serious difficulty meeting their repayments. I advocate the protection of the primary family residence. Given his legal background, I ask the Minister to consider the amendment of the Enforcement of Court Orders Act to prohibit the granting of a court order for the repossession of a primary family residence unless three things happen, namely——