Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I was speaking to it and the thinking behind it. The point I was trying to make before a quorum was demanded was that perhaps we should try to learn in terms of from where we have come politically. I believe I am correct in saying the last person to create a major economic Department which was seen as futuristic and novel was the late Taoiseach, Mr. Jack Lynch, when he created the Department of Economic Planning and Development. Professor Martin O'Donoghue who was newly elected to the Dáil became the Minister in charge of that Department. There was much expectation about what it would do and how it would generate jobs and change budgetary policy. I do not have the expertise of some of my colleagues to identify what went wrong, but much went wrong and the Department did not do what it had set out to do. The new Department of Public Expenditure and Reform must do "what it says on the tin".

I know from where we are coming politically and that the amendment will not be accepted, but we must try to take on board the spirit of what is being said and a way of thinking which is reflected not only on the opposite side of the House but throughout society. We are at an economic precipice and can watch what is happening in Greece on television. I am not an expert on its economy, but I know that the system of politics, economics and administration has failed and that we in this republic are not a 100 miles away from it. The political structure the new Department will create must work, but we must also set targets and challenges and have high ambitions.

The Minister of State will probably say she is not in a position to accept the amendment, as drafted, and if the roles were reversed, it would be the same tune but with different dancers. However, it is important that we try to take on board the spirit of what we all must believe, namely, that the Department must work and that we must give it the tools to enable it to do so. We must also set strong challenges and have high expectations. I hope, therefore, that the Minister of State will be as responsive as she can be. While the amendment will probably not be accepted, we should have some political mechanism, whether through the committees of the Houses or otherwise, to regularly monitor what the Department is achieving.

I have said previously in this House that one of the great failings of the State in the past 70 or 80 years is that we have not changed sufficiently how Departments of State have been set up. The way some have been set up has not changed since they were established 70 or 80 years ago. From time to time there is a need to change the way they have been set up and to create new ones to deal with new challenges. If a new Department such as this one is created, let us try to ensure it will not become the Department of Economic Planning and Development of the new millennium because, sadly, 40 years ago that Department did not work. Perhaps the expectations were not high enough and the necessary mechanisms were not put in place to monitor it. Will the Minister of State try to ensure what all of us want to see happen, namely, a Department working, comes to pass, that we will be able to monitor it and that there will be checks and balances, which is crucial in the interests of the taxpayer and the country?