Blog

If Minister comes to the Seanad, we’ll need answers

17th February 2009

We keep returning to the issues of accountability and the role of the Houses and the committees. These Houses are not providing any real forum for accountability, and that is the problem. There is fury and outrage and there must be an opportunity for the Minister to come to the House to answer questions. However, Ministers regularly come to the Seanad. The Leader can agree to invite the Minister to the House next week or the week after, be it Deputy Mansergh or Deputy Brian Lenihan, if he has the time, but it will not make any difference because we do not get any answers.

What is the point? I do not say we should not invite them but what is the point?

Senator O’Toole said the committee is not a Star Chamber. Nobody expects it to be a Star Chamber, but people are crying out for accountability and for questions to be answered. They are not being answered anywhere else so why can they not be answered in the Parliament of the people? If the Minister comes to the House, can it be on the basis of a real expectation that he can give answers to questions?

I recall the Minister for Finance being in the House last September, on that long dark night of the soul we experienced. I recall asking him what exactly had happened on the day the Government extended the guarantee. We never got an answer as to what happened in the room that night. Does anybody, apart from the Minister and those who were present, know what happened that night? It has never been revealed to the public. What precisely was said by the bankers and their advisers to persuade the State effectively to commit the deeds of the State, as others have described it, in a guarantee to the banks? What was the reason for this? It might have been the right thing to do, although I believe it was not and many commentators are coming around to that view. I might be wrong but we will never be able to assess that or work out who is right and who is wrong until we are told why. I mean something more than the bland statement the Minister constantly makes about the system and the worries about it, with this and that bank having systemic importance, and all of this kind of stuff that we can get through. What was said and what was going to happen if the decision was not made? As somebody asked this morning in the Seanad, what was said in the immediate lead-up to the nationalisation of Anglo Irish Bank? What was the trigger reason that was done on the occasion when it was done?

We cannot have any debate, whether in a committee, here, in the public press or anywhere else if we are not being given the information. What is the basis upon which these decisions are being made? None of that has been provided here in the other House or in the committee, and we need to wake up to that fact because we are only fooling ourselves.

In relation to that, in the newspapers today there is a report of the Minister wanting to revisit the question of TDs’ and Senators’ expenses, allowances and otherwise. This is a sensitive topic for my colleagues in the House but look at what is happening. People are losing their jobs. There are people in this building, public servants, who are having the State delve into their pay in respect of their pensions. Are we seriously going to maintain the position that as Members of these House we ought not to sacrifice something as well? Is there anybody in this House who will take that view? If so, he or she should stand up and say so because this is a very serious situation.

There should be transparency, but it looks as if there needs to be more than just transparency, there needs to be a significant reduction in these matters. Personally, I support any suggestion that has been made, whether it is from the Green Party or from the Minister, that there should be moves on this and it should be done soon.

We are where the Government brought us

6th February 2009

Yesterday there was an all-day debate on the latest Government proposals on the Economy. I had a chance to speak and below is a transcript of what I said.

I begin by making a technical point. The Seanad is, of course, not being asked to vote on the measures introduced by the Government this week. I understand the Seanad’s constitutional position in respect of financial matters. It gives a slightly different focus to our debate. We are responding to the statement made by the Minister of State at the beginning of the debate. The advantage of that is that it gives us an opportunity to make more general remarks and give a more general account of where we are coming from on these issues. It is important to remind ourselves that we are not being asked to vote for or against the Government’s measures, which were passed by the other House a couple of hours ago.

I do not disagree with Senator Brady’s remarks, which are fresh in my mind, about the importance of not wallowing in a sense of blame. I agree that we will not make much progress on the grave issues before the House by wallowing in the past or immersing ourselves in petty finger-pointing. Having said that, it would be absurd to suggest that there is no room in this debate for an analysis or assessment of how we got here. I often hear Senators on the Government side using the phrase, “We are where we are.” I even heard Senator O’Toole use it today. That, and nothing more than that, is supposed to be the basis for discussion. It is suggested that we should confine ourselves to proposing how we should get ourselves out of where we are. I would amend the phrase slightly - “We are where the Government brought us.” That is where we are, and it should be the starting point. If we do not honestly analyse what has occurred, I do not think we can hope to achieve the public or social solidarity that will be needed to address these issues in the future. When one asks people to make sacrifices, one needs to have their support and confidence. If one is entirely silent on what has happened, that is not possible. People are not stupid. They are discussing among themselves how we got to where we are. The Government has to be clear on that.

I noticed a marginal reference in the Minister of State’s speech to mistakes having been made. It is like the first cuckoo in that it is the first acknowledgment of mistakes I have spotted in a Government speech over recent weeks. I may be wrong in that respect. The Minister of State touched on the construction issue in that section of his speech. The relevant section lasts just four or five words, but at least it is there. It is necessary. Perhaps the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, made some similar remarks in the other House last week. I am not entirely sure. The Government cannot expect people to come together in any serious way to support its decisions, or at least give it some space when making them, if it is not straight and honest about what has occurred.

Read More

Ericsson job losses shocking news for workers and Dublin South

5th February 2009

The announcement by the telecoms firm Ericsson that it is to lay off 300 workers at its plant in Clonskeagh is terrible personal news for the employees concerned and yet more bad news for the Irish economy

I am calling on the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to ask the industrial development agencies to give priority to the search for a replacement enterprise for this area.

This is the latest instalment in what has seemed like an endless saga of bad news on the jobs front this week.

Because of the huge increase in the numbers on the live register those who are to be laid off will face huge difficulties in finding alternative employment.

The reality for the economy is that the loss of 300 more jobs will mean additional expenditure of €3.465m in direct social welfare payments and the loss of almost €2.4m in taxation.

It is not the problems in the public finances that are causing the job losses. It is the rate of job losses that is contributing to the huge hole in public finances.

If the job losses continue at their current rate not only will our economic crisis worsen, but it will lead to significant social problems.

The government has to treat the jobs crisis with the seriousness it deserves. The emphasis has to change from cutting services to promoting economic growth and job creation.

If the Taoiseach’s statement contains nothing of substance, then he must travel to the Phoenix Park

3rd February 2009

How can the Seanad take itself seriously, or how it can have any self respect if there is no debate following the Taoiseach’s remarks at 4 p.m? I have appealed to the Leader to answer that question. Apparently the Leader will suggest that it is not entirely clear whether that statement will contain any substance. This is even more worrying. If the Taoiseach’s statement contains nothing of substance, then he must get into his car and travel to the Phoenix Park. That is the only place for him if he has nothing to say to the people this afternoon. There has been months and months of inaction, despite the worsening news regarding the public finances, job losses, failure to put forward proposals and so on. It amazes me that after so many months of inaction, the Government could turn around at dead of night in the middle of a blizzard and table proposals at 2 a.m. or 3 a.m. and expect to resolve such massive issues. This constitutes taking people less than seriously in this entire discussion.

Members of the main party on the Government side always have prided themselves on being in touch with the people. Consequently, I presume they know what people are saying at present, which has gone far beyond people simply complaining about this or that decision by the Government. People are saying there is no Government, that no one is in charge and no one is making decisions. This is an extremely serious moment for Ireland, which I do not underestimate. I certainly do not make light of it. It may surprise some Members on the Government benches that Members of the Opposition do not seek to grasp this opportunity to engage in political point scoring of the nature that could be seen from the parties on the Government benches when they were in opposition. This is a highly serious moment for our country and a debate is required in this House this afternoon. Even if no Minister is available, Members should have the debate anyway, as Ministers have not contributed greatly to this debate in the last couple of weeks.

The Government as a whole should engage to some extent with the Opposition parties. The latter merely seek some information and as Opposition parties do not seek necessarily to be making the decisions because that is a matter for the Government. However, some information should be provided to and there should be some engagement with, the Opposition parties. Moreover, there should be a little respect for the institutions of this House.

Alex on the Radio

2nd February 2009

I appeared on the radio twice over the weekend and you can now listen back to them. On Friday I was a guest on RTE Radio 1’s Drivetime programme with Mary Wilson to discuss the events of the week. My fellow panellists were Alison O’Connor of the Sunday Business Post and Mark Hennessy of The Irish Times. You can listen to the debate by clicking here.

On Sunday I appeared on Sam Smyth’s Sunday Supplement on Today FM. The panel included journalist Alan Ruddock and Cllr Mary Fitzpatrick. You can listen to the show in full by clicking here.

Gilmore to move writ on By-Election next week

30th January 2009

Statement by Eamon Gilmore TD:

The Labour Party has tabled a motion moving the writ for the Dublin South By-election. It is expected that the motion will be taken in the Dail early next week.

The Party Leader, Eamon Gilmore TD, said that Labour had made the decision to move the writ because of the failure of the government to take any decision as to when the by-election would be held.

“It is now almost seven months since the death of the much-respected Seamus Brennan. I have, on several occasions, raised the matter of the by-election with the Taoiseach, but the standard response I have received on each occasion has been that the matter had not yet been considered by the government.

“On the last occasions when vacancies occurred in the Dail, the by-elections were held within a matter of months. John Bruton and Charlie McCreevy both resigned as Deputies in November 2005, and the writs for the by-elections in Meath and Kildare North were moved in the Dail by the Government Chief Whip on February 15th.

“The people of Dublin South are entitled to the full level of representation in the Dail provided for under the constitution. It is simply not acceptable that the government should deny them that level of representation by refusing to hold the by-election.

“Furthermore if the government believes that it has the confidence of the people in terms of its performance in office so far and particularly in regard to its handling of the economy, then surely it should put this to the test by having the Dublin South by election as early as possible.

“The fact that the country is experiencing serious economic difficulties is no reason to suspend normal democratic procedures. Nor is the possibility of an embarrassing result for Fianna Fail and the Greens sufficient justification for the continued refusal to hold a by election.

“I hope that there will be support from all parties for the moving of the writ and the setting of an early date for the by-election.”

The campaign begins…

28th January 2009

Alex's ad in Dublin South

This week sees the beginning of my campaign to secure the support of the people of Dublin South in the forthcoming by-election.

Over the coming weeks, I will be out and about meeting the people of Dublin south, listening to their views on the challenges we face together, and sharing with them my perspective on the need now for a fresh approach to politics.

To mark the beginning to this intensive period of campaigning, we have mounted a short outdoor advertising campaign which will run on bus shelters and Luas across the constituency.

Remember to keep an eye on the website and blog and I have just launched my new Facebook page. You can become a supporter of mine on Facebook and receive regular updates from the campaign trail, along with receiving notification on the where we’ll be canvassing.

I hope to meet and exchange views with as many constituents as I can. In the meantime, you can contact me by using the ‘Contact Alex’ section of the site.

More :: Visit my Facebook page by clicking here
More :: Visit the main website at alexwhite.ie

Should we expect the Govt’s ‘single transferable speech’?

27th January 2009

We face a spectacle later when there will be a debate in both Houses on the economy and I suspect we will be treated to a contribution from the Government along the lines of the single transferable speech on the economy to which we have been listening in the House for three or four months. I hope I am wrong and if I am, I will accept it. However, I do not expect the Minister to come to the House later to outline what the Government intends to do regarding the economy. However, at the same time, the Government is circulating a document to the social partners which will not be laid before the Oireachtas. Such proposals should be circulated by way of a completed document to the social partners that is published and laid before both Houses in order that we can have a meaningful and realistic debate.

I understand the process of negotiation as well as the next person and the necessity for people to be careful during negotiations. However, this relates to the future of the economy, the single most important issue facing any politician or government. We are not clear on whether any proposals have been made. However, we read newspaper reports about various decisions that will be made.

They were then denied by Ministers as late as this morning saying it was just newspaper speculation. Apparently there was a meeting of the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party last night at which the members of that party indicated to the Taoiseach that they supported his ‘approach’ to dealing with the economy. What is that approach? Perhaps some of the Members on the Government side will share some of the information as to what the approach is to dealing with the economy because it has not been published to the people. It has been described by people who have caught glimpses of it in the social partnership talks as a blancmange. What exactly is it and where are the proposals?

It ill behoves the Government, whether Fianna Fáil, the Green Party or any other member, to demand the answers from the Opposition in circumstances where it has tabled no proposals whatever to address, for example, the crisis in the public finances. For the Government to come in this afternoon with a platitudinous and single transferable speech containing no specifics or clarity is not acceptable in any democracy.

More :: There will be a debate in the Seanad on the current economic situation this evening from approx. 4.45 p.m. To view the proceedings, click here.

Alex receives a lesson in Science!

9th January 2009

awyoungscientist 
Yesterday, I was pleased to attend the BT Young Scientist and Technology Exhibition in the RDS and meet with pupils from some local schools. I was thoroughly impressed by the high standards the students have set themselves this year, and local students were particularly inspiring!

I managed to catch up with students from Wesley; Our Lady’s Grove Secondary School; St. Columba’s and Pobail Scoil Naomh Choilm Cille.

Above is a photo of myself with Danielle Ronan from Mount Anville Secondary School. She explained to me her project on producing Siamese Fighter Fish!

More :: View more photos of the BT Young Scientist and Technology Exhibition at the Labour Flickr Site

Genuine accommodation of obvious concerns needed before ‘Lisbon 2’

16th December 2008

 The Report of the Sub-Committee on Ireland’s Future in European Union provides and interesting and timely opportunity for us to revisit the issues we have previously discussed in the House. Like others, I do not want to repeat all the arguments in which we have engaged on the various occasions we have discussed the Lisbon treaty.

I welcome the report and congratulate Senator Pascal Donohoe on this extremely detailed and readable document. It begins by placing this debate and the moment we are at in true terms. We cannot shirk from those terms, as they point to a choice that must be made by the Irish that is of enormous importance. It cannot be shirked by people on either side of the argument. Those of us who supported the “Yes” vote did not do so on the basis that we would not have liked to change some elements of the treaty. Anybody engaged in a political activity knows that an international treaty involving 27 governments will require compromise and elements that are not liked.

Those of us who argued for a “Yes” vote now have a choice as to how and in what circumstances we might revisit the question. It is a difficult choice because we know and respect the decision of the Irish people, which is the right action. Is it being suggested that we let the issue go? Those on the “No” side also have a choice to make, as I have repeatedly heard people almost pleading that they are as European as the next person. They believe in a strong Europe with Ireland at its heart but they do not like the treaty.

It is incumbent on all of us, including those who argued and voted against the treaty, to come forward not just with repetition and a rehashing of those aspects of the treaty they do not like but to help us point the way. The people should advocate how we can ensure that we are at the heart of Europe in future, particularly through a method other than what I term ‘Lisbon Plus’. There should be some genuine accommodation of the obvious concerns that many Irish people have and had with the Lisbon treaty.

There are 26 other countries that propose to proceed on the substantial basis of what is in the Lisbon treaty. When this point was made before the referendum, it was referred to practically all the time as bullying. It is now a simple fact. There is a choice to be made. If the other 26 countries take the view that they are not prepared to slow progress to the pace Ireland might advocate following our decision in June, what can we say? We should be absolutely blunt. This is a choice between some form of real accommodation post-Lisbon treaty or, at a minimum, a semi-detached status for Ireland in the European Union. If I am wrong and there is a third realistic option, I would like to hear what it is. I do not just mean a theoretical option that someone might advocate. The debate has been put in true terms by the sub-committee. It is no exaggeration for it to say, as it does in its report in paragraph 4 on page 3:

Ireland’s standing and influence in the European Union have diminished following the people’s decision not to ratify the Lisbon Treaty. In immediate terms, this inhibits Ireland’s ability to promote and defend its national interests at a European level. This is likely to affect Ireland’s ability to influence key upcoming policy discussions within the Union. These include, but are not limited to, the development of the EU’s climate change package [by which we mean the future of the planet and our ability to influence it through being involved in discussions]; the negotiations on the future shape of the EU budget beyond 2013 including provision of adequate resources for the Common Agricultural Policy; and responses to the global financial crisis.

Read More

Pay deal or no pay deal?

4th December 2008

What is the Government’s position on the pay freeze contained in the recently agreed wage agreement? The trade union leaders appeared to glean from what the Taoiseach said in the Dáil yesterday that the matter should be re-opened. When the Taoiseach returned from Berlin last night he indicated that he did not propose to re-open the matter. Senator Boyle, presumably on behalf of the Green Party component of the Government, said that the 11-month pay freeze should be extended beyond August of next year. What in fact is the Government position?

There is a strong argument to be made that in agreeing the pay deal in September, the Government acted precipitously and it should have waited until the budget statement was made and the true position on the public finances was known. A very compelling argument can be had as to why it entered into that deal at the time. However, having entered into it, the credibility of the Government and all the social partners is greatly undermined by these suggestions that it might be re-opened eight or nine months prior to its actual implementation, in August of next year.

Does the Minister think FÁS expenses are acceptable?

3rd December 2008

The series of revelations in relation to FÁS has been commented on in the media over the past 10 days. Yesterday, the Seanad called the Minister for Labour Affairs, Billy Kelleher to attend a debate on the body. Below is my own contribution.

We are all aware we are in a serious economic crisis. On 15 October the House had statements on unemployment. When I rose to make my contribution then, I complained that the Minister of State’s speech did not seek to address the jobs crisis and the growing problem of unemployment. I invited my colleagues on the other side of the House, and the Minister of State, to show me anything that was new in that speech. It was tacitly accepted there was nothing new.

I was listening with heightened interest to learn if there would be anything new in this speech. I accept the Minister of State is dealing with the specific area of FÁS and the question of job creation and the Government’s economic policy extends further than FÁS. However, the Minister of State claimed “the Government is putting measures in place to ensure those who become unemployed are provided with effective employment service and training supports.” He also referred to the increased budget allocations provided to FÁS, an additional €5 million for training the unemployed and an additional €4 million to subsidise redundant apprentices in 2009. Whereas I am not suggesting these points were made in the debate in October, they seem not to include anything new in the past six weeks.

The Taoiseach has said Ireland is in a dire crisis. The people look to the Government to come forward with proposals as to how we can address this. There is no sign of the Minister of State or the Government doing this. From his speech today, there is no evidence, with all respect to the Minister of State, of anything new being presented to us regarding the deepening employment crisis, which all commentators agree will get worse in early 2009. I accept the Minister of State can criticise me for not resisting the opportunity to make a political point. The Government announced last week some initiative on research and development. When can we expect a plan from the Government? When can we expect direction and policies from the Government to address the unemployment crisis? Will it be next week or in January? Will it ever come?

It is not just the case that unemployment is rising but the type of unemployment. A few days ago David Begg of the ICTU pointed out that unemployment is biting at the new services industries, such as financial services, legal and architecture, that have located in Ireland in the past 12 years and account for much of the expansion in employment. There are large numbers of young people in their 20s and 30s, highly trained and educated, who are losing their jobs. I am not arguing that the Minister of State can employ them all but what I am looking for is some sense of initiative, urgency and concrete proposals from the Government.

The Minister of State said the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment is carrying out a review into the efficiency and effectiveness of labour market programmes delivered by FÁS and Skillnets from which a new labour market strategy will be completed by the middle of 2009. That is too far away - up to six months. It is not good enough. This issue does not appear to be treated with a sufficient level of urgency given the ferocity of the problem with unemployment.

I am sure there will be a measure of political co-operation across the board in the event of a serious economic crisis. However, we look to the Government in the first place to come forward with the proposals. It is not happening. I hope it will happen sooner rather than later.

Read More

Govt must act on shameful exploitation of workers revealed on Prime Time programme

2nd December 2008

The Prime Time Investigates programme on RTE last night revealed a shocking story of the exploitation of immigrant workers that demands urgent action by the government.

There can be little doubt that a minority of employers are engaging in the shameful exploitation of workers. What was revealed last night was nothing less than a systematic pattern of failure to pay even the minimum wage, provide contracts of employment, honour tax and PRSI regulations and adhere to safety standards.

One of the most disturbing revelations in the programme was the blatant disregard shown by a number of haulage companies for safety regulations which restrict the number of hours and days that a driver can work without a break. Failure to adhere to these regulations involves not simply unfair and unjust abuse of workers, but it also exposes other road users in Ireland and abroad to real danger.

Of course exploitation by some employers is not limited to immigrant workers, as many Irish workers also have to endure similar conditions. We now need far more effective action at government level to stamp these practices out and to ensure that all workers are protected from abuse and exploitation.

There are a number of measures that were promised when the Towards 2016 Agreement was concluded more than three years ago that have still not been implemented. For instance the Employment Law Compliance Bill, which is designed to put the National Employment Rights Authority on a statutory basis was published in March, but nine months later the government has still not started the legislative process. Other promised legislation to regulate the employment agency sector has not even been published and we still do not know when the EU Directive on Agency Workers will be given effect in this country.

While there has been increase in the number of labour inspectors, additional personnel and resources are still required if we are to stamp these sort of practices out and ensure that all workers get fair treatment.

More :: View the RTE Prime TIme Investigates Programme by clicking here

Alex at Conference 2008

1st December 2008
Eamon Gilmore gives his keynote speech at the Labour Conference on Saturday night

Eamon Gilmore gives his keynote speech at the Labour Conference on Saturday night

We had a busy and productive conference this weekend in Kilkenny. The mood among party members was one of optimism and bouyancy, much encouraged by Eamon Gilomore’s superb speech  on Saturday night.

I got to speak myself over the weekend and the videos are below. Firstly, I spoke as Party Spokesperson on Children in relation to the National Recreation Policy and the lack of forward thinking on policies affecting young people. View this video by clicking here.

Secondly, I spoke on the aftermath of the Morris Tribunal report and in particular, the unwarranted criticism of my colleague Deputy Brendan Howlin. View this video by clicking here.

Finally, I was priviliged and honored to be asked to introduce Leader Eamon Gilmore to the stage for his keynote address. View this video by clicking here.

More :: Visit the Labour Party Conference website by clicking here
More :: Watch the RTE’s ‘Week in Politics’ special from the Conference including my interview
More :: Labour beginning to savour political freedom of single life (Irish Times)

Collapse in State revenue was well underway before international banking crisis

27th November 2008

I was struck by the following curious point in regard to the reports today about the banks. A new group of investors have offered the Minister for Finance a solution to the problem. Last week, another group of opportunists, investors with international connections, offered a solution to the Minister for Finance. A picture comes to mind of the Minister for Finance sitting in his office, tapping his fingers on the desk almost waiting for people to come to him with suggestions. Surely, it should be the Minister who makes such bold moves. I do not agree that there is not a requirement for recapitalisation of the banks. Manifestly, there is such a requirement. There needs to be a debate on how it should be brought about and on the controls that should be put in place by Government in that regard.

I would like to hear from the Minister for Finance what he and the Government proposes to do other than waiting for others to come to them with suggestions. This seems to be the manner in which Government is being run in regard to these serious issues. The Taoiseach, when Minister for Finance, made a reasonably thoughtful speech a year ago at the Indecon conference.

I wonder if he would take out that speech, dust it down and read it again to see what it is he would propose by way of addressing the palpable sense of not alone uncertainty but real fear, which is increasing by the day and almost by the hour, across the community. Everybody is seeking a solution to the problem. We accept the Government cannot solve every problem. However, we are looking to it for some measure of inspiration and hope and for a plan, but we are not seeing anything of that nature. The budget was botched and there is a failure to face up to many of the problems that led us to where we are now. One cannot work out one’s future course until one is clear about how one arrived at where one is. We must face up to rather than dwell on the fundamental mistakes of recent years.

The extraordinary, treacherous and reckless priming of the property sector happened under the watch of this Government and this must be faced up to. Decentralisation - it appears it will be reversed in the public service reform document - was a serious mistake and a shocking proposal, one that ought never have been brought forward. We are now seeing it being at least partly reversed in the new proposals on efficiency in the public service.

The collapse in State revenue in this country was well underway before the international banking crisis emerged. That is a fact, not an opinion. We must face up to these facts and have a proper debate on them. I respectfully suggest that the Seanad is a good place to have that debate, a somewhat more relaxed and thoughtful debate than is possible in the other House.

More :: After the opposition’s repeated calls, it has just been announced that there will be an all-day debate in the Seanad on the state of the economy with the Minister for Finance present. It will take place on Friday 5 December.

Bill is not correct way to deal with stem-cell research question

27th November 2008
Stem Cell Research
Last night the Seanad debated the Stem-Cell Research (Protection of Human Embryos) Bill 2008 . Below is my own contribution to the debate.
I would not, and do not support the Bill introduced by Senator Mullen. I do not believe it is the way to deal with this complex problem. A Bill that is, essentially, founded on criminal sanctions or at least includes such sanctions as a crucial component in respect of embryonic stem cell research is not the way to deal with this complex matter. I agree, however, with those who said that this issue must be wrestled with and dealt with by the Legislature.

I compliment the Minister of State, Jimmy Devins TD on the comprehensive treatment he gave to the topic. However, ringing in his ears and in the ears of all of us are the demands and very strong suggestions from a number of bodies for regulation to be introduced, and for legislation in this crucial area. As recently as this year, the Irish Council for Bioethics made such a demand. Regulation is the way in which we should approach this matter.

I am sure Senator Mullen has a continuing interest in this topic. However, it is probably true that this debate was triggered by the decision of UCC some weeks ago. Whatever one might say about the particular call made by the ethics committee in UCC and, ultimately, by the governing body of the university, at least they wrestled with this question and came up with actual decisions. Some people may believe it to be a good thing to be uncertain, as it were, about where they stand. This may not be something to criticise. From an intellectual point of view, I understand and appreciate someone who takes that viewpoint but ultimately it is the case that decisions must be made.

Senator Maria Corrigan referred to President Bush. I remind the House that President Bush vetoed a Bill passed in the Senate in respect of the promotion and funding of stem cell research. President-elect Obama proposes to reverse that veto. These are decisions made in a much more complex and wealthier country which, no matter what way one looks at it, is likely to be at the forefront of these issues more quickly than we ever will be. Americans have faced up to the fact that they must make decisions.

Read More

‘Public service reform’ is a fantastic phrase - but what does it mean?

26th November 2008

Are we wasting our breath asking the Leader of the Seanad to arrange a debate on the economy? We keep doing so but, as a child might say, “It keeps not happening.” Is there any point in our seeking it?

I have just come from addressing a group of school students on the south side of the city. They all want to talk about the economy and the recession and what Governments and politicians are doing about it, yet we cannot have a debate thereon in the House. We were supposed to have a rolling debate? What is a rolling debate? In any event, it is what we were promised two or three weeks ago. It certainly has not started rolling yet.

Today the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance are to announce a programme of significant public sector reform. I welcome the programme for two reasons, the first of which is that no reasonable person could object to a serious programme of reform in the public sector. The second reason I welcome it is that I hope it will put an end to the phoney debate on the public service.

Very often people make statements about the public service that are long on rhetoric and short on specifics. This will give us the opportunity and will provide the context for Members on both sides of the House to explain what they mean by public service reform. Public service reform is a fantastic phrase, like motherhood and apple pie. What do people mean by it? Where do they wish to see the cuts and the redundancies? Do they wish to see redundancies?

We might consider any particular service that is provided for the people. In the Seanad, Members are constantly calling for improvements and expansions to services and opposing the abolition of different agencies and services. As politicians, we must face up to the fact that if staff numbers are reduced efficiencies can, of course, be brought about and it is good that such might be done. However, very often, when staff is reduced the service is reduced. It is not as simple as that but that is very often the outcome. Fewer staff means a service that is not as good for the public. Let us face up to that and let us all, on both sides of the House, face up to the fact that it is not good enough to come in here and make rhetorical snipes at the public service and public servants without being specific, by which I mean giving examples.

I welcome another aspect of the announcement that apparently will be made today, namely, that the Government feels it must take time to see which posts can be amalgamated, which ones should be abolished and, as a consequence, which services must be removed. It will take time. In the event of such a debate, I call on all my colleagues to be specific about what they mean, to be clear and to face up to the fact that if staff numbers are reduced very often service is lost.

Child protection investigation a very serious matter

20th November 2008

The decision by Children’s Ombudsman Emily Logan to launch an investigation into the implementation of Child Protection Guidelines must be treated as a very serious matter indeed.

It must be a cause of major concern that Ms Logan feels that she has no option but to take this course of action. It is of particular worry that there seems to be some considerable weight of information, opinion and correspondence being brought to Ms Logan’s attention indicating that all is not well.

Once again, the operation of the Health Service Executive, the statutory agency responsible for the implementation of the Children First Guidelines, and the Department of Health and Children are to come under the microscope. References by Ms Logan to non-implementation by the HSE of the guidelines in some instances are alarming, and all the agencies involved must give every possible support to the Ombudsman in her investigation.

Ms Logan seems concerned that that these guidelines are being breached. If this turns out to be the case there is a strong argument that the guidelines should be established on a statutory basis.

Today’s development paints a bleak picture of the extent to which children are being failed by this government. We already know that social work teams are considerably under-resourced, and thanks to the HSE staff recruitment embargos and cutbacks just about every one of them is operating well below full staff complement. Local child protection teams simply don’t have the resources they require to make early interventions, in order to prevent a problem in a family escalating into a crisis.

When you consider the massive backlogs in many areas of the country, the lack of an out-of-hours service, and the lack of specialist residential places for children with challenging behaviour, the scale of the problem is massive.

More :: Read the statement from the Ombudsman for Children, Emily Logan
More :: Ombudsman to investigate child protection (Irish Times)

Alex on the Radio

19th November 2008

I have been on two radio shows in the past number of days, and these are now available online. On Sunday, I was a guest on Sam Smyth’s Sunday Supplement on Today FM. Other members of the panel were Fine Gael TD Lucinda Creighton and the Minister for Integration Conor Lenihan. You can listen to the show by clicking here.

Last night I was on The Late Debate on RTE Radio 1 with Senator Deirdre DeBurca, Michael Clifford of the Sunday Tribune and Aine Kerr of the Irish Independent. You can listen to the show by clicking here.

Strong arguments should counter Czech President’s views

12th November 2008

I disagree profoundly with the position of the President of the Czech Republic in relation to the European Union but an issue arises in respect of the maturity of the debate we have.

If the President of the Czech Republic states his position in Ireland, surely the way to counter that is through the strength of the arguments against what he is saying rather than suggesting he does not have the right to speak. It has been suggested that it is outrageous that a foreign leader should come to Ireland and make such points. It is not deemed outrageous, however, if foreign leaders who hold the opposite view come here and make their case.

I disagree with the position taken by the President but we have more strength in us to deal with these arguments than to simply suggest that every time somebody such as Mr. Klaus opens his mouth, it constitutes interference in our process. The lesson of the Lisbon treaty debate, be it in the media or the political fora, is that those in favour of the treaty missed the opportunity to demonstrate a much more robust and self-confident approach and instead often seemed to want to exclude views with which they disagreed.

More :: Martin says Klaus comments on Lisbon ‘inappropriate’ (Irish Times)

Seanad relevance questioned with lack of Government legislation

12th November 2008

There is an extraordinary absence of Government legislation in the Houses of the Oireachtas. We have debates on efficiency and relevance in respect of the public service and apparently the debate is bubbling away. Members have asked whether we should spend time considering efficiency in the public service but it may not be long before eyes start looking at this wing of the public service and deciding whether it is up to scratch in terms of its contribution. It is really extraordinary that, week in, week out, not a single Bill is brought forward. This draws attention to the debate on the efficiency and relevance of this House. We are to have statements on a number of issues this week but we do not have any opportunity to debate the issues that Members on this side of the House have been raising and on which they have been asking for a debate.

The Leader, Senator Donie Cassidy, told us we were to have a rolling debate on the economy. When will it start rolling? It has not happened yet. There is a very considerable debate taking place outside the Houses on whether the banks require capitalisation. It is taking place everywhere except in the Parliament of the people. Why can we not have scrutiny in the House and debate the various arguments for and against capitalisation? It seems the banking policy rests entirely on the guarantee that was given. The remainder of the policy is a matter of keeping one’s head down and hoping for the best. This is a fair definition of our national policy on the crisis that everybody else in the world recognises. We appear to believe it does not exist.

More :: Click here to see this week’s schedule in the Oireachtas

“Now, we have the prospect that the US will again become a force for good”

5th November 2008

Barack ObamaAt a time when the predominant mood in politics and public life is one of pessimism, I join others in conveying our congratulations to President-elect Obama. It is a moment of considerable optimism, which is an antidote to the deep pessimism we all see around us with regard to our economy and the world economy. It is a fantastic moment and it is truly the end of an era.

It is not just the end of the Bush era but of a somewhat longer era in American politics, which has an impact on world politics. I see it as the end of the Reagan era, an end to the neo-liberal model of capitalism, which was fostered by President Reagan and Margaret Thatcher and which has its apostles in this country, or at least it used to, although they are disappearing. It is truly a political moment of considerable importance.

There was an overwhelming sense of joy on the part of many millions of people that we saw last night on television. In many cases these people felt in the past that they never had a stake in their own country or in the political system, society and communities of which they were part. Now they feel this is their moment and they can truly engage with their society and their country.

I have criticised the US in the past, as have other Members of the House. Sometimes we are accused of being anti-American when we criticise American foreign policy. I never thought there was anything so absurd as the suggestion that because one criticises the foreign policy of a country, one is against that country in some way or is guilty of being anti-American.

It was nonsensical. We have criticised the US, but this is a moment to remind ourselves of its considerable achievements and the democratic experiment under its constitution. It is an amazing and extraordinary achievement, and this moment is one to relish, not just for the US but also for us.

This may not be a moment simply to calculate the gains and losses for this country. Illegal Irish immigrants and foreign direct investment are important issues, but we might reflect on the larger international picture. This is a huge story. Unfortunately, the contribution of the US in recent years to the international stage has not been good and has often been divisive. There is now real hope that there will be a reversal in that contribution because the great institutions of the United Nations, its human rights achievements and other institutions are nothing without the support of the US.

They are, and have been, seriously undermined by the US in recent years, and we now have the prospect that the US will again become a force for good.

“Those employed in broadcasting need to be trusted to make important decisions”

5th November 2008

We must exercise great care in a debate on broadcasting standards. There is a long tradition of politicians in chambers repeatedly having a go at broadcasters and broadcasting. We must be extremely careful regarding the way we proceed and not just for the reason that many politicians cannot afford to be critical of the media because the day might come when those in the media might turn the tables and have a go at them. I am more concerned about the issue of principle.

Despite what we might like to think, we politicians occupy a privileged position. What we say in the House is included in the Official Report, broadcast on television and published in the media, and people pay some attention to it.

What we say can and often is broadcast, or at least we hope it will be. Our words are also published in the media and people pay attention to them. That is a privilege we ought not to abuse or take lightly. We should resist the temptation, and I am not saying anybody has not done so during this debate, to grab the opportunity to engage in partisan or sometimes even personalised attacks on broadcasters, especially in the political field.

The word “liberal” has been repeated many millions of times in recent weeks in America - who is a liberal, who is more liberal, if Senator Obama is liberal and what does “liberal” mean anyway.

It is another of those words. It is often used by people who are not socialist but they have a good view about what they think socialism is or should be and they indulge themselves in that. To come back to the notion of liberal, Senator Walsh went on to speak about people who wish to shape public opinion on an issue. Often when that point is made, it is a case of somebody saying: “I do not like those people shaping opinions; I would prefer opinions to be shaped by me or somebody who holds my viewpoint on an issue.” It is not an objection on principle but an objection to the person doing the opinion shaping.

This issue struck me quite often during the debate on a slightly different subject. It is an analogy worth drawing, although not many Members might agree with me. During the debate on political censorship and section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, as a broadcaster I was strongly opposed to the section for reasons which Senator Walsh might describe as liberal in the sense that I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of expression. I do not believe broadcasting should ever be permitted to be used for incitement, but we have legislation to prevent that. However, in terms of the exclusion of views or the expression of views on radio and television, it is necessary to exercise considerable care that we do not leave ourselves open to the accusation that we are simply trying to exclude views with which we disagree from being broadcast.

Read More

White calls for international commission of inquiry

4th November 2008

Labour’s leader in the Seanad, Senator Alex White, today called for Ireland’s support for an international commission of inquiry following the recent stoning, beating and murder of a young girl in Somalia.

Senator White said the international commission of inquiry was needed to investigate this and similar incidents.

Speaking in the Seanad, Senator White said he hoped that when the US election is over that the eyes of the international community would fix, at least briefly, on the recent shocking reports by the BBC and Amnesty International in respect of the most horrific stoning, beating and murder of a young girl in Somalia in shocking circumstances.

“She had been accused of adultery, which is in breach of Islamic law. Her father and other sources had informed Amnesty International that she had been raped by three men and that she attempted to report this rape to the militia that controls the city in which she lives.

“Amnesty International has done extraordinary work in the past few days to identify this story, pointing out that this 13 year old child suffered a horrendous death at the behest of the armed opposition groups that currently control Kismayo.

“I ask the Deputy Leader to raise urgently with the Minister for Foreign Affairs that Ireland should support immediately the setting up of an international commission of inquiry into this incident and similar incidents in Somalia.

“If we are truly to begin a new era on the international scene, which I hope we will do tomorrow, this is precisely the kind of incident which the international community must not countenance,” Senator White concluded.

More :: Somalia: Girl stoned was child of 13 (Amnesty Ireland)

“A police force is nothing without the trust of the community”

4th November 2008

Last week, the Seanad had an opportunity to debate the findings of the recent final part of the Morris Tribunal findings. There was particular interest in the judgement of Mr. Justice Morris in respect of Members of the Oireachtas. Below is my own contribution to the debate.

I will begin by echoing the remarks of other Members in respect of Mr. Justice Morris’s work during the preparation of his eight reports. I refer to the extraordinary amount of work that was input, the careful consideration and sifting of evidence and allegations, as well as the highly detailed and, as Members have commented, in many ways shocking contents of the reports that have been published as a result of the inquiries the judge carried out. I also add my congratulations to those who worked with Mr. Justice Morris in his tribunal, including the lawyers, high-paid or otherwise, who performed an important public duty by sifting through a considerable number of allegations, sometimes of great complexity, as well as hearing evidence and reaching conclusions based on the evidence put before the tribunal and publishing the reports it was charged with providing to the Oireachtas when it was first established.

The most recent report is the one we are at present considering in greatest detail but, as other Senators have noted, the most serious of conclusions were reached by the Morris tribunal and each of the eight reports makes for disturbing reading. As others have quoted from the findings, I will not rehearse them other than to note that a police force in a democratic society is nothing without the trust of the community. The Garda has a remarkable tradition of coming from the community but if that connection is undermined, it will hit at the core of the confidence that the public must have in its police force for society to function and justice and policing to be administered efficiently and fairly. If authority is rooted in the society which it serves, it will be successful.

Unfortunately, the example of what occurred over a number of years in Donegal, which the Minister of State described as a dark period in our history, could be repeated and suspicions remain that similar practices continue. Ongoing scrutiny and engagement are needed in respect of these issues because we cannot be absolutely confident that the dreadful deeds set out in the Morris reports will never be repeated. Perhaps ominously, Mr. Justice Morris was of the opinion that the gardaí serving in Donegal cannot be viewed as unrepresentative or an aberration from the generality. He was reflecting on concerns that he was not inquiring into an isolated case and reminding us of the need for constant vigilance and proper mechanisms to ensure public confidence in the Garda Síochána.

Read More

Local schools to lose 14 teachers in budget cutbacks

29th October 2008

Senator Alex White, Labour Leader in the Senate and his party’s candidate in the Dublin South by-election, has expressed dismay at the fact that primary schools in Dublin South will lose up to 14 teachers under the new pupil-teacher ratios set by the Government as a result of the Budget changes.

Speaking prior to a Labour Party motion in the Dáil on class sizes, Senator White stated that: “The Government are saying that class sizes will be increasing by only one child. In reality, it’s much more serious than that. Schools will lose teachers, every child’s education will be compromised, and class sizes in Dublin South will be as high as 32.

“The worst case is St. Colmcille’s National Schools in Knocklyon, who will lose an extraordinary 5 teachers according to initial figures from the INTO. This is the same school that, in the last election, the Government promised to redevelop, ending the plight of 500 students in prefab accommodation. Today, the Government will still not let the school apply for planning permission.

“The INTO have also reported that Taney NS, Dundrum and St Mary’s NS, Lamb’s Cross will each lose a teacher. Holy Cross NS, Dundrum will lose 3 teachers and Oatlands NS, Stillorgan will lose 4 teachers under the new rules. 14 teachers is a shocking number to be lost in one constituency, and this doesn’t include the loss of English Language Support Teachers.

“The Government has responded by insisting that these measures are required in these tight budgetary times.

“However, Minister O’Keeffe is ignoring the fact that the people who will be most affected by his cuts are children, who in many cases already have had to endure high class sizes, and low standard accommodation.

“What Labour is asking tonight is simply for the Minister to stick to his own Programme for Government - which promised to decrease class sizes, not increase them.”

More :: Labour’s Private Members’ Motion will be taken in the Dáil at 7.30 pm tonight. You can view the proceedings live by clicking here.

HSE must beef up crèche regulation enforcement

29th October 2008

Today’s Irish Examiner investigation into conditions in our crèches, is a real eye-opener and is a clear indication that the enforcement regime needs to be beefed up as a matter of urgency.

The conditions in some of our crèches as outlined in the report are absolutely appalling. There was one horrific instance where a young child fell and fractured his skull, but no medical attention was sought. In another case a different child fractured an arm and the parents concerned were not even notified.

It is unthinkable that such cases could possibly arise in an area that is supposed to be regulated by the HSE. This report is a litany of negligence, ignorance and potential disasters. Currently crèches are visited by the HSE inspectorate on average just once every three years, which is quite clearly grossly inadequate. We now need a clear plan of action from Minister for Children Barry Andrews, outlining how he intends to tackle this.

Parents deserve to be able to send their children to crèches, safe in the knowledge that their children will be properly cared for in a safe, secure, and nurturing environment.

Failure to act on this report could give rise to the most serious consequences.

Labour Seanad motion seeks reversal of cuts affecting children with disabilities

24th October 2008

The Labour Party will urge the Government to reverse the cuts affecting children with disabilities when it tables a motion in the Seanad next Wednesday.

The text of the motion reads:

  • Seanad Éireann notes that in addition to severe cuts in allowances for young persons with disabilities, the recent budget statement contains a significant number of measures affecting children with disabilities.
  • Seanad Éireann further notes that children with disabilities are more prone to hospital visits, and are therefore likely to be disproportionately affected by the increase in A&E charges, the increase in hospital bed fees and increases in medical insurance costs.
  • Seanad Éireann believes that it is essential that children with disabilities have access to mainstream education for as long as possible. In this regard, class size is an essential ingredient of success for both the teacher and student. The increase in permitted class size from 27 to 28 per teacher will adversely affect every child’s education, but most especially those with disabilities.
  • Seanad Éireann deplores the deferring of implementation of the “Education for Persons with Special Needs Act”, together with the 1% cut in funding for voluntary disability bodies which comes on top of an already implemented 1% cut to the same organisations by the HSE.
  • Accordingly, Seanad Éireann calls on the government to reverse these unacceptable cuts forthwith.

Despite not being referred to in the Budget, the Minister’s callous move to stop disability allowance for 16 and 17 year olds has caused great upset for those families affected.

The Minister told the Dáil he was looking out for those most vulnerable in society. Children with disabilities, and their families were not even considered. Instead we have an insensitive and unsympathetic Government whose cuts have been aimed at those they hoped would not complain.

Get in Touch :: I have already received numerous calls and emails in relation to this issue. If you are affected, or have any issues or concerns you would like us to raise in the Seanad, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Remember ::  Labour’s Private Member’s Business in the Seanad onchildren with disabilities takes place on Wednesday 29 October at 5.30pm. You can watch the proceedings live by clicking here.

Share the cost of health care across the board

23rd October 2008

One of the 15,000 to protest outside Leinster House yesterday

One of the 15,000 to protest outside Leinster House yesterday

Prior to the unprecedented events we witnessed outside Leinster House yesterday, I raised the matter of Medical Cards and the health system as a whole at the Order of Business in the Seanad. Below is an edited transcript.

 

We need to have a debate on the medical card for the over-70s issue today. Everyone in the country is talking about these issues while we seem to be the only body that is not, apart from the opportunity to raise it on the Order of Business. We should amend the Order of Business to allow a debate with the Minister for Health and Children on this issue today.

There is nothing short of chaos in the entire budgetary process. Yesterday I made the point that people do not believe what they are being told. That is a very serious matter for a government. It is one thing to disagree with a government but another not to believe it. There is a credibility gap with the figures behind yesterday’s reversal and many other issues. The Government needs to engage seriously with the people, giving them the information and clarity they require and deserve.

Over the summer holidays, the Supreme Court brought in a serious judgment which involved criticism of the Legislature in respect of the health insurance scheme and BUPA. I am very critical of the ideology espoused by the Minister for Health and Children regarding the health services. This is one area, however, in which I agree with her. I supported her position in the BUPA case in which she argued in the Supreme Court that the important principle of risk equalisation was a fundamental prerequisite for the effective operation of community rating. In other words, it is to spread the cost of health care across the board by charging younger and healthier people the same cost for health insurance, in order to support those who are older and more in need of services.

It is a very noble communitarian principle which I would extend. The entire community, in particular those well able to pay more for health services, should be called upon to pay their fair share for a truly universal system of health care.

The communitarian ideals the Minister argued in the Supreme Court in the BUPA case should be extended across the board. For once and for all, let us face up to the need to have a proper health service with the same minimum standard of health care for all citizens, irrespective of income.

The risk equalisation scheme was interrupted in 2005 and has not yet come into place. When will the legislation be introduced for dealing with the effects of the Supreme Court judgment in the BUPA case? Will the Leader invite the Minister for Health and Children to debate the risk equalisation issue and allow us an opportunity to consider the wider question of universal health care which arises from this case?

Lack of accessible childcare is major failure of last 15 years

22nd October 2008

When at some time in the future we look back over the great achievements of the past ten to 15 years in the Irish economy and society and do the balance sheet, perhaps we will see that our greatest missed opportunity in the course of that time was not to put in place a reliable, well-funded and universally accessible system of child care.

Members of the Government and parties who support the Government bear a political responsibility for failing in that task. It is manifestly the case that the Government has failed in that regard.

The National Economic and Social Forum has made the point repeatedly, and as recently as last autumn, that the subvention scheme in our community our child care system is not considered to be workable and may leave low income families at risk of not being able to continue in employment.

In other words, they might have to abandon the fledgling child care services. There was little or no consultation with those who are affected by the scheme. The NESF make the point that provision of early education for children in this country is one of the lowest in the OECD countries but that child care costs, relative to earnings, are the highest in the OECD, at nearly 30% of net family income. That’s more than double the OECD average.

The pressures and dilemmas faced by child care centres in respect of taking in children, the rates they pay and trying to train and retain employees. In any sector, be it child care, education or the health service, there must be trained professional staff. Until we understand that we require properly trained people working in child care centres and that we must give them a stake in their own work and future, we will not hold onto excellent people in the way we must.

Of course, the background to this is that so many of these centres grew from voluntary activity, where people, often young parents, got together to organise a centre. This voluntary effort at the start evolved into a more long-term proposition. They obtained a grant and then became employers. They must now proceed as a business.

However, they are incredibly frustrated by the administrative requirements in running a child care centre and they have to engage in lengthy form filling and are obliged to inquire into the means of parents proposing to send their children to the centre. They are being diverted from the job they should be doing, that is, running and developing excellent child care centres. The frustration is palpable.

The Minister for Children, Barry Andrews (FF) said in his speech to the Seanad that the eight major child care organisations that are supported by the Government and how they have contributed greatly to the development of quality child care. He was correct but proceeded to state, “I hope to strengthen those links in the coming months with the location of expertise from the Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education, the CECDE, into the early years policy unit of the Department of Education and Science”.

This should read that the Government has abolished the centre in recent weeks. When I referred on the Order of Business to our not being given the full story, this is the kind of action I mean. The centre is gone and the notion that it has been integrated into another is incorrect; it has been abolished. If we just used plain English, we might be able to make more progress in our discussion.

Alex on The Late Debate

22nd October 2008

I joined the panel on last night’s edition of RTE Radio 1’s Late Debate. Also on the panel were Sean Ardagh TD, Harry McGee of the Irish Times and Aileen O’Meara of the Sunday Business Post. The discussion centred around the changes to the Medical Card Scheme and the 1% levy.

You can listen to the show in full by clicking here.

How many more climbdowns are likely?

22nd October 2008

Can the Leader indicate how many more changes, reversals or climbdowns are likely to result from the Budget Statement the Minister for Finance made in the other House last week? Does he agree that our community and society is a laughing stock, internationally and domestically, because the budget, which is the major economic statement of the year, has degenerated into such a shambles over recent days? I agree that this is a question of candour, honesty and clarity. When will the Taoiseach look the Irish people straight in the eyes and tell them, in a clear, honest and candid manner, what precisely is happening to this country’s economy? Why are we getting a drip feed of information, for example in the statements which are made in this House?

I would like to mention the most shocking - I use the word advisedly - experience I have had since I was elected to this House. Last week, the Leader, reasonably, ordered a debate on unemployment in this Chamber. When the Minister of State came in to the House, his so-called statement did not contain a single new proposal to deal with what looks like the greatest crisis this country has faced for many years.

I do not mean that there were very few new proposals in it, but that there was not even one. The point has previously been made that the budget contained no proposals on how to deal with the scandal of unemployment that is about to return to this country. If we are to have serious debate in this House, that kind of treatment of the Seanad is disgraceful and should never be repeated.

There is an issue of confidence in the Government and particularly the Taoiseach. The Taoiseach is an able and experienced man, but is not levelling with the Irish public. Scrappy interviews in the second part of the 9 o’clock news on television, early morning press conferences and rushes out to RTE are not the way to engage with the Irish people in this sort of situation. We need serious engagement and while I accept that we in the Opposition also have a responsibility, the principal responsibility rests with the Government and particularly with the Taoiseach.

Down the road there will have to be a political reckoning for what has happened in recent months regarding when the Taoiseach, and his predecessor, knew what was coming down the line, what he knew and when he knew it. All those issues will have to be reckoned with in due course. For now, we urgently need leadership, honesty and candour from the Government, and we are not getting it regarding the banks and the economic situation. We need Goodbody Stockbrokers to tell us there will have to be a second budget some time early in 2009. We are not being told what the situation is. It is the same approach that was, unfortunately, taken by the Government on the Lisbon treaty referendum.

One cannot treat the Irish people in this way. They are angry, frustrated and concerned, and have a right to be so. They demand, and are entitled to, a straightforward approach and account for itself by the Government, and they are not getting it.

[polldaddy poll=1028966]

Alex selected as Candidate in forthcoming by-election

21st October 2008

Alex with Local Election candidate Richard Humphreys at tonight's convention

I’m pleased and deeply honoured to have been selected by the Labour Party organisation in Dublin South as our candidate in the forthcoming By-Election in Dublin South. This By-Election, necessitated by the sad passing of Seamus Brennan, will now come at a most crucial time for our country.

Never before have we had such a clear opportunity to make decisive choices about what are the important values to our society. The recent budget statement – now apparently unravelling by the day – is the clearest evidence yet of this government’s failure on its most crucial responsibility: to secure the wellbeing of the citizens of the country, and to promote a caring and equal society. We are now reaping the errors of ten years of mismanagement and poor governance.

In due course, there will have to be a political reckoning as to what happened. As to what the current Taoiseach and indeed his predecessor as Taoiseach knew – and when did they know it. It is simply not credible to the Irish people that this economic crisis came out of nowhere. The vulnerability of our economy lies to a very considerable extent squarely at the door of the government. This is an issue which we will need to address in vigorous political debate.

At the moment, however, we are in a crisis. The solutions proposed by the government to redress the budgetary imbalance have seen cruel and unnecessary attacks on the future education of our young and the health and well being of our old. After many years of unprecedented growth and wealth generation these solutions are simply unacceptable. Labour, on the other hand, has put forward a bold and innovative programme to stimulate our economy. Over the coming months we will take this plan out to the doorsteps.

I look forward, along with many of my parliamentary and party colleagues to meeting with you and discussing the issues that are important to both of us, as we work towards delivering a decisive statement to this government that enough is enough, and that change is now required.

In this challenge, I hope I can count on your support.

Levy most dishonest tax increase ever seen

15th October 2008

Labour leader in the Seanad, Senator Alex White, described the announcement in the Budget of the new levy on income tax as the most “dishonest tax increase ever seen”.

Speaking during the Order of Business, Senator White said: “The levy represents the crudest, most regressive and most dishonest tax increase ever seen.

“It is a tax increase, yet the Government dares not speak its name.

“Recently, the Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, appeared to advocate higher taxes for the higher paid, the rich and the super rich, with which I agreed. He stated that he would try to achieve such in Government, in which respect I would have supported him. Regrettably, he did not achieve it.

“Let us face up to the taxation system and the dishonesty and unfairness therein. The Government appears to want to have it both ways.  The Government is telling us to leave the debate on tax to the Commission on Taxation next year. But it then introduces an aggressive tax, undermining any suggestion of equity,” said Senator White.

Senator White added that the Government appeared to have embraced the notion of performance-related pay.

“Members of the Government have taken 10 per cent cuts, presumably based on their performances in recent months. I hope that they will revert to the House in the coming months regarding proposals on the inevitable further cuts in pay that they will need to take. The ultimate cut that they should take is not 10 per cent or 20 per cent. Rather, it is 100 per cent.”

Budget lacks vision on childcare

15th October 2008

Yesterday’s Budget was yet another disappointing example of the Government’s lack of vision and innovation on childcare.

Proposals by the National Economic and Social Forum, which were supported by my party, set out a universal system of early child care, which would cost less than the combination of funds currently dedicated to child care through the early child care supplement and the subvention scheme.

And yet, yesterday the Minister for Finance put more pressure on parents and childcare providers by reducing by almost a quarter the allocation for the National Investment Programme.

That programme provides grants for childcare providers, helping them set up new businesses and maintaining existing ones. Although providers want to maintain the cost of childcare at a manageable level for the average parent, this cut will only heap more pressure on providers and parents.

The Government is reneging on its own promise to stimulating childcare places and jobs in the sector.

It is yet another example of this Government’s lack of ambition and innovation to help the youngest and most vulnerable in our society.

At these pressing economic times, children should never be first to be targeted.

We could be innovative and adopt a child care system that would require less investment while achieving something real and substantial for our children.

We need to bring such thinking to bear on the budget in the coming days. I hope we will do that and discharge our responsibility as a Parliament in doing so.

At present there is no Irish guarantee

8th October 2008

I support and agree with concerns about the delay in bringing forward the scheme which the Minister for Finance said would come before both Houses. We have seen what happened this morning in the UK. I do not believe it is accurate to say that the UK Government has copied the Irish Government. That is not true. The UK Government has taken preference shares in the banks it has proposed to assist and it has included a requirement that any bank wishing to participate in the scheme must sign up to an agreement on executive pay and dividends. There are many other differences between the UK Government’s proposal and what has been done here.

The Financial Regulator has said there is no difficulty with the capitalisation of the Irish banks. However, we have been asked to accept other statements from and about the banks in recent months which have proven not to be true. I note a nuance in the comments of the Minister for Finance this morning. He says he does not believe there is a difficulty with under-capitalisation. However, the Minister for Finance rather ominously stated that things are changing by the day. Therefore, it is not at all clear that there is not a difficulty with under-capitalisation in the Irish banks. What is the current position in Ireland with respect to the guarantee?

There is no guarantee is the answer.

The Minister for Finance and the Government announced an intention to provide a guarantee, which was a plan for the future, but there is no guarantee for today. This is a serious situation of which I do not make light as a topic for debate. However, the seriousness of the situation is increased with a further delay in the presentation of the scheme.

The delay also raised the question of what we were doing here last week in the overnight session. What was the point of it? We passed enabling legislation which has not been acted upon. Therefore, apart from the amendments to the competition legislation which, although important are marginal, the content of the legislation, the scheme and the guarantee are meaningless because nothing has been carried out. What were we doing here overnight last week? I do not have any difficulty with making myself available, nor do my colleagues. However, the sum total of our efforts add to nothing as nothing has changed. Our job is not to provide an overnight supporters’ rally for the work of the Government or the Minister for Finance. We are legislators and we are constitutionally required to scrutinise proposed legislation. The scheme was supposed to be brought before the Houses. Unless and until this happens there is no Irish guarantee; it simply does not exist yet. This is a reflection of the seriousness of the matter.

The Government’s intentions are becoming less, rather than more, clear with each day. The Minister for Finance has now indicated, perhaps correctly - I do not claim he has no basis for the comments, but it shows how unclear the position is - the possibility of a limit on the amount of deposits banks can take on. The developments in the UK this morning will have implications for foreign owned banks operating in Ireland. That may have implications for our scheme and there is the wider EU context. The situation is sliding by the day. All of the talk and congratulation we indulged in last week for being first into the breech now rings hollow. It looks like we are now one of the last into the breech in completing a proper scheme to put before the Houses and implement a guarantee. At present there is no Irish guarantee.

More :: I raised these issues in the Seanad and they were featured on RTE’s Oireachtas Report. Click here to view the programme (from 6min 10secs onwards).

Good intentions on hunger need to produce clear results

8th October 2008

I welcome the publication of the Hunger Task Force’s excellent report. It contains not just an account of the problem but also contains quite a few compelling and clear pointers as to what might be done by countries, including Ireland, to attack this problem. I noted in particular the reference in the report to hunger being a failure of governance. If anything this is an understatement. The distinguished authors of the report state, “This amounts to a governance failure at many levels.” Perhaps the most devastating statement in the entire report is a self-evident statement but which bears repeating. “Despite numerous commitments, there appears to be a willingness amongst both the international community and national governments, to live with the current extent of global hunger.” It is unfortunate but this appears to be true. Whereas practical steps have been taken and many more can be taken, this is not a problem that we can say, with hand on heart, has in any sense been genuinely or substantively tackled by the international community with any kind of clear results in recent years, despite a considerable amount of good intentions at international level.

The Minister of State for Overseas Aid used the term, “war on hunger”. I agree with his use of such a phrase. However, it may seem a strange view but in the context of the war on terror, the notion of an international war on something has been devalued in many ways because of the manner in which that rhetoric has been used in the past six or seven years by some world leaders. The idea of a war on terror has been reduced to a rhetorical notion. When the Minister of State refers to a war on hunger I know he does not intend that to be a rhetorical statement but one that has real meaning. His reference to the question of political will is well taken because it is a question of political will. We can outline and describe the problem and give examples and recall the historical significance of hunger and famine in our own country. I do not mean to devalue the contributions but it is more difficult to ensure that the fundamental problem is dealt with.

I congratulate the authors of this report and I congratulate the Government for publishing it. We have had in recent days a good deal of political debate and argument about a certain other matter, described by a Minister as “the current position” regarding the banking and economic crisis. There will be political disagreement on that issue but there will never be political disagreement with the Government on the part of my party in so far as the Government is dealing with this issue. There will not be one moment of disagreement nor a moment of opposition from my party.

Read More

Some humility is called for from the banking community

7th October 2008

Today’s Order of Business focused on the continuing story of the financial situation and the news that came from Aer Lingus last night. Here’s an edited transcript of what I said:

Some humility is called for from the banking community and especially its leaders. We have all suffered from sleep deprivation in recent days given the onerous task which was before us. However, I had to rub my eyes when I heard that one of the individuals concerned made a series of demands regarding what the Government should do with universal child benefits, which he believed should be attacked, State pensions, and that medical cards for the over 70s should be abolished. This proposal comes from one of the people who were saved and whose bank was in some difficulty last week. If this person has trouble with his day job, which appeared to be the case last week, perhaps he could have a future in the entertainment industry as a comedian of some sort?

For this person to suggest to the Government that it should consider such cuts when he has been the beneficiary of such largesse, the extent of which we do not yet know, seems extraordinary.

Today the Irish Congress of Trade Unions sponsors a very important event, called the world day for decent work, which I wish to comment on briefly. Such days come and go and frequently they do not mean much, but this is important. The notion and principle of regulation have been dirty words for two decades. However, they are suddenly back in vogue in certain quarters because of the banking crisis. Aer Lingus announced today its intention to chop off whole sections of its operation, replacing reasonably well paid jobs with what inevitably will be lower paid jobs.

In those circumstances, it is timely that we should draw attention to the fact that approximately 200,000 people in this country earn less than €10 an hour. That is the reality of what an army of low paid and low skilled employees are facing. I call for a debate on unemployment but we must look to see what we are talking about in that regard. It is not just a notional issue. These are real people who face real challenges in terms of living their lives on low pay and without much hope being offered to them by the Government. We should have that debate.

Everybody is now coming around to the view held by those on these benches that regulation is something that should be examined again.

Time for the Oireachtas to scrutinise the financial mechanisms

1st October 2008

It is completely misleading for anybody to give the impression that the package proposed in the legislation currently before the Dáil does not come at a cost to the State and the Exchequer. The extent to which that was suggested, implied or, I believe, stated by the Taoiseach yesterday was that no money is changing hands. On the face of it, that is true, but it is only half or a very small part of the picture. First, there is the obvious cost associated with a risk, namely, if this guarantee is called upon at some point in the future. The guarantee would not be given or would not count for anything unless there was a prospect or a possibility at least that it would be called upon at some point in the future. That is a cost or at least a contingent cost or liability.

A second cost is that there is a real risk that the ability of the Irish State to borrow and the interest rates that would be charged to the State on foot of those borrowings will be affected by this. There is a real risk that will occur. That takes the matter into the political arena. It was always a political question but it makes it a highly political question for us and a huge issue in terms of the democratic dimension for these Houses because it affects the ability of the State and the Exchequer to expend money on public services, including health. The Minister for Health and Children said yesterday that the likelihood of increases in expenditure on health would be negligible in the coming period. There is a not even a potential but a very real and likely cost to the State.

This brings me back to the point I raised yesterday, which relates to these Houses and the effect or involvement we should have in this regard into the future. We want more detail from the Minister for Finance as to how he will exercise the powers he will take and the extent of the scrutiny that will be brought to bear on the banks, but what about the scrutiny that the Houses of the Oireachtas should be involved in regard to these matters? I mentioned the issue yesterday in regard to the Joint Committee on Finance and Public Service and that perhaps we should consider having a more dedicated committee or facility for the Houses to examine the question of the banks. The Joint Committee on Finance and Public Service dealt with this issue and I took the opportunity last night to check back on the debate on the matter in July.

I suggest that people examine the transcript because on any reading of it, one would not describe what occurred as a debate. It appeared, from what was stated, that there was no problem at all. The representatives of the various banks stated that there were no issues arising, that there few loans at 100% and that there were no concerns. That was the tenor and level of the debate that took place in July.

What happened in the interim? We are aware of what occurred in the United States but what gave rise to the so-called catastrophe into which we were facing? The Houses should be involved in considering what took place during the past three months. The role of the Financial Regulator should be examined. What about the role of the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland? There are already suggestions in the United States that there should be criminal investigations in respect of what occurred on Wall Street. I am not stating that something similar should happen here but there should be a role for the Houses in scrutinising what took place during the past three months that led us to the position that obtained from Monday night into early Tuesday morning.

For the past six to 12 months, people in pubs and restaurants throughout the city have been discussing the possibility of a major bank collapsing. We were informed yesterday that this almost happened. There is a complete disconnect between these Houses, the Members of which are the democratic representatives of the people, and what is happening in the real world.

In that context, I reiterate that we should put in place a mechanism that would allow the Members of both Houses to scrutinise what is happening in the banks, examine the extent to which the new facility being afforded to them will be applied and consider the sensible proposals put forward by Opposition spokespersons in respect of what will be the payback to the taxpayer in light of the real cost that arises on foot of this proposal.

More :: Click here to read the Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008

“Irish taxpayer is potentially being turned into a sucker thanks to Lenihan’s ‘succour'”

30th September 2008

In terms of this morning’s news from the Minister for Finance, it is not entirely clear whether we have a decision or a proposal. We were told this morning the justification for the decision is to avert a catastrophe and the word “catastrophe” was used quite liberally. It is a big word, particularly when until recently we were told Irish banks did not have liquidity problems and there were no fundamental difficulties with their position. However, the word “catastrophe” has now been used.

Politicians on all sides have a responsibility to hold back and wait to hear the rationale for the proposal being brought forward and to debate it carefully. However, the public is entitled to have spelled out to it what momentous catastrophe would happen if this decision was not made. We are entitled to be told that and not have to guess at it. We should be told precisely what was likely to happen and the consequences of this decision not being made.

What are those consequences? I do not refer to general issues and suggestions that we should look to what is happening in the United States or that if we do not act the sky may fall in. I want more detail because the Irish people are entitled to be told the precise nature of the so-called catastrophe - that is not my word - which we are seeking to avert. We can then compare the action that is proposed with the consequences of not taking it. I support what has been said by others in regard to the level of scrutiny that is needed of the banks and financial institutions if this proposal is to be adopted.

We are a far cry from the point some months ago when the banks appeared before the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service. This is the most momentous economic decision that has been taken in a considerable period of time. Surely an argument can at least be made for the establishment of an Oireachtas committee. Sometimes we are criticised for having too many committees, but if there was ever a need for an Oireachtas committee dedicated to a central economic question, surely it is now. There is a compelling argument for a committee to deal with banks and the banking system so that Members of the Oireachtas can be afforded opportunities on a regular basis to scrutinise the banks, understand precisely what is occurring and raise questions about the history of loose and reckless lending and the issue of executive salaries. Such a committee would also provide a forum through which Irish people can ensure that banks and financial institutions pay for this extraordinary bail-out and what I heard the Minister for Finance describe as “succour”.

I sat in my car and reached for the Kleenex tissues at one point while listening to the Minister. I know it is important not to make light of this issue but he claimed that the measures had to be taken in regard to these six Irish banks because they had nowhere else to go for succour. I had a different kind of “succour” in mind when I heard that phrase from the Minister and it is the Irish taxpayer who is potentially being turned into a sucker in this.

Meeting Wesley Students

25th September 2008

On Tuesday 16 September I took some time out to meet with students from Wesley College in Ballinteer. I was invited by Ms. Henderson to address her CSPE class on politics and life in the Oireachtas and got a good grilling on the current economic situation!

I first told them about how parliament works and how the Seanad and Dáil pass legislation and then invited them to ask any questions they wished. Topics such as the Lisbon Treaty, the economy and the power of their vote made for a lively discussion.

I may have even encouraged a few students to enter into politics when they’re a little older…

Closing preschool education unit ‘shortsighted’ and ‘ludicrous’

23rd September 2008

The decision to close a unit, the Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education, established to develop education for pre-school children is extremely short-sighted and a clear indicator of this Government’s lack of commitment to early education.

According to the department the closure of this unit and the loss of eight jobs is so the department can reconsider the structures established to support early education. If that is the case why shut down a unit staffed with experts in the field. What this decision does demonstrate is the Government’s lack of coherent childcare policy which is in stark contrast to Labour’s policy which is committed to the creation of a national system of child-centred and learning-focused preschool education.

As it stands less than one out of four of Irish children aged between three and four years old are currently in structured pre-school education. This contrasts with our European partners where at least two in every three children of that age enjoy such education. It is clear given that the Irish spend on per-school education is one of the lowest in developing countries, there is no serious consideration for pre-school education from the Government, at the very least the decision to close the unit proves this to be the case.

Education is the most important investment that we, as a nation, can ever make. Universal education is the key which unlocks the potential of every child. Pre-school education has been proven to tackle disadvantage which makes the decision to close this important unit in St Patrick’s Drumcondra all the more ludicrous. I am calling on the Government to reverse this cutback and commit properly to pre-school education.

More :: Education cutback closes pre-school unit (Irish Times)
More :: Click here to download Labour’s policy on pre-school education (PDF)

Labour warnings on new childcare funding scheme coming to fruition

26th August 2008

The government’s new Childcare Subvention Scheme is having a significantly negative effect on low and middle income families – just as the party had predicted.

Parents who are not in receipt of social welfare or Family Income Supplement are now facing into a winter of rising childcare prices which will inevitably result in a number of them either moving to part-time employment or leaving work altogether.

Last December in the Seanad I criticised the ‘narrow and limited focus’ of the scheme saying that they would do nothing to help the majority of families for whom childcare was ‘difficult to access and very expensive’.

Parents are now saying that they will have a price-hike of up to 100 per cent and for some it will make better economic sense to leave the workforce and care for their children full-time.

The Minister for Children launched these changes by repeatedly emphasising how much money - €153 million – was being spent ont he scheme. But again, it is those low-income families who fall just outside the social welfare criteria who will be hit the most. I was told of a family just yesterday who were paying €200 per week for the care of their two children but will now have to pay €360 under the new rules. The children’s mother is now considering leaving her job.

The changes to the scheme were motivated entirely by a short-term focus on cost, rather than on the needs of the child and working families.

Parents want what is best for their children. They are paying as much for childcare as they are in mortgage repayments. What we need is a real commitment to childcare for all families, and not the piece-meal and unjust system put in place by this government.

More :: Childcare price rises are looming, parents warned (Irish Times)
Keep in Touch :: Are you affected by the new rules on Childcare Subvention? Get in touch with us by commenting below or click on the ‘Contact Alex’ button.

Government ignoring Forum’s recommendations on Pre-School Education

29th July 2008

The release of the National Economic and Social Forum’s Periodic Report this week highlights the Government’s neglect of pre-school education.

During the general election campaign in 2007, Labour committed itself to offering one year of free pre-school education for every child regardless of income. It was part of a child-centred learning-focused system of childcare.

The NESF Report is damning of the government’s inaction in this area. This is their own advisory body labelling government policies as ‘weak’ and the report paints a picture of too many departments sharing responsibility for children.

It was the same body whose cost-benefit analysis showed that for every €1 spent on early childhood education the State would receive €7 later.

Labour took the analysis of the NESF and incorporated it into the Putting Children First document. Ireland spends less than 0.2% of GDP on our children when the EU average is 0.5%. A commitment to pre-school education is not in the current Programme for Government.

At a time when the Government is telling people to tighten their belts and look towards cost-savings, it would benefit the State to invest in pre-school education. The estimated €136 million annually it would cost to run the Labour-backed one year of free pre-school education is significantly less than the current early childhood care supplement.

As this report demonstrates, children were not a priority during the boom times. But it would be profoundly short-sighted to target childcare support in these more uncertain times.

More :: Click here to download the NESF’s Fifth Periodic Report (PDF)
More :: Click here to download Labour’s Putting Children First document from Election 2007

Alex on Drivetime

21st July 2008

I was invited to join Mary Wilson on Drivetime on RTE Radio 1 last Friday evening. The other guests to review the week’s news were communications specialist Terry Prone and journalist Sean Donnelly. The discussion included the Supreme Court ruling on Risk Equalisation and the visit of French President Nicolas Sarkozy this week.

To listen to the show, click here. (Discussion begins at 39mins 45secs)

« First‹ Previous891011Next ›