Paul Bradford (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House and thank him for bringing forward this legislation for our consideration. One factor in Irish politics is that by the time we get to deal with legislation in this House, the debate has more or less concluded on the outside. We need a better and more substantive way of discussing major matters of financial importance. That is a debate for another day, however.

As we try to bring about some degree of hope and confidence to the economy and down to the citizens of our Republic, we cannot ignore from where we have come. Sometimes it is easy to forget that it is little over 100 weeks ago since the Government took office at a time when our country was almost financially bankrupt, entirely devoid of any sort of political leadership and every citizen was genuinely fearful not just about their own economic position but the very plight of the country and its financial independence. All sides of the House must agree that this type of thinking has fortunately changed. The public is not lighting bonfires on street corners but there is a degree of stability and an increasing degree of confidence that everyone must welcome. That is the backdrop to this debate about our public sector.

It goes without saying that every single elected politician and citizen fully supports our public sector and the work which it does. We would be doing a great disservice to our public sector and the tens of thousands working in it if we did not concentrate on the fact that we need to ensure there are suitable future careers for all who work on our behalf in the public sector. We cannot pretend there is no tomorrow and continue with certain salary and pension levels when we know they are unsustainable. We must have realism in this debate. We have one of the best educated public sectors across the globe. They know as well as we do the financial plight of the country. Everyone appreciates that no Government wants to do what this one has been obliged to do over the past two years. It would be lovely to believe that this is the end of it and all gardens are rosy but it is not as simple as that.

We must ask about the language not just of this debate but of the whole economic debate over the past 18 months. Obviously, if I were in opposition I would keep using words such as “austerity” to bring about a mindset of doubt, fear and concern. Our challenge must be to move beyond that language of austerity and point out a route of progress and hope. What is austerity?