Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I ask the Leader to arrange a debate on good governance. It would be a useful exercise to reflect the views of various sides of the House on what constitutes good governance. Yesterday, we saw an example of appalling governance at the Committee of Public Accounts to which Senator MacSharry referred. How such people reach certain positions must raise questions about the selection and recruitment process in the public service. The delegation's dismissive attitude and failure to display any command of their responsibilities and brief was alarming and spoke for itself.

A good governance debate could also include the Construction Contracts Bill 2010 which has not been enacted. The Bill has knocked around for the past four years. It was inspired by the good work of our colleague, Senator Feargal Quinn, and addressed the issue of hard-pressed subcontractors, many of whom have gone to the wall in the interim with the loss of a high number of jobs. Our legislation and modus operandi favour banks as the preferred creditors but there is a need to examine that provision.

It is farcical that people from this State must go to our neighbouring island to be declared bankrupt in order that they can have some time and be able to earn a living and, hopefully, create jobs. Unfortunately, many of those entrepreneurs may not return here and their skills and potential to create jobs will be lost. It is appalling that the legislation has been delayed.

In many ways - and I have spoken about the subject before - its a reflection of the dysfunctional nature of the public service system. We have far too many people in the public service who simply mark time and do very little yet earn good salaries. Their primary objective is to get as much as they can for as little input as possible. I have criticised the system for the past seven years. There are excellent people in the public service without whom it would collapse but we need to root out the bad. The Minister for Public Service and Reform needs to change the public service, as a matter of urgency. The Minister identified in his budget speech savings of ¤150 million yet admitted almost a year later that the most savings he can achieve is ¤3.5 million. It shows that he is not up to the job or acting in the best interest of the country. I ask the Leader to examine the issues and to arrange a debate. The Government has the largest majority in the history of the State but that privileged position is being squandered. We are back to the 1980s when all the Government did was squabble among itself, mark time and double the national debt. We are in a disastrous situation and can ill-afford behaviour that will lead to a complete catastrophe for the people.