Sean Barrett (Independent)

I thank the Minister of State for his speech. There are many fine items in it, as noted by Members on all sides. From 1 July we need to create a completely different kind of banking system than the one we had to rescue. The data show that between 1996 and September 2008, when the banking system had to be rescued, total lending went from €42 billion to €391 billion. Of the extra €350 billion, only €9 billion was spent on agriculture or manufacturing. The banking system was designed for construction, financial intermediation and real estate. No wonder the average house price increased fourfold in that period. We cannot have a banking system that ignores the productive sectors of the economy, as the Minister of State seeks to remedy in his speech. It cannot be entirely based on property development. I wonder whether banks have sufficient expertise to recognise good projects, given that they neglected manufacturing and agriculture for so long while focusing on the property sector. Do the banks have directors alert to this?

I recall a Bloxham report on banking in Ireland, which showed that banks outside the State were much more inclined to lend to manufacturing businesses than the banks we rescued. We must have a completely different kind of bank when restructured on 1 July.

My second point concerns procurement. The point made by the Minister of State is important but sometimes the watchdogs who look after the interests of small business do not bark. A notable case was the Public Transport Regulation Act two years ago, where the screening regulatory impact analysis says that all Departments had either approved or did not reply to the request from the Department of Transport for their observations. As 79% of buses are owned by people in the small business sector someone should have replied on their behalf because the purpose of the legislation was to guarantee every penny of subsidy to one company and to guarantee its entire network against new entrants. That is a small business up and down the country that could do much in terms of rural transport and in competitive tendering for the large subsidies we give to public transport. On that occasion, the vigilance to promote small business was not in operation. It must be at least as good as the vigilance of those who promote monopolies when they bring legislation to this House.