I move:
That Dil ireann reaffirms its confidence in the Government.
I believe this Government merit the confidence of Dil ireann on the basis of our record in managing the nation's affairs and our programme for the future.
I propose to outline the Government's record and performance and our plans for the future within the general framework of economic and social policy, European affairs and the competence and quality of our Administration. My colleagues during the course of the debate will outline their performance and plans in more detail in respect of their particular areas of responsibility.
In order to assess our management of the economy and the public finances it is necessary to look back to the situation that confronted this nation when we took office early in 1987.

Let me remind everyone in this House - and there are many on those benches over there who want to forget it - of the perilous state of the economy and the public finances at the [23] end of 1986. The national economy was in decline with negative growth in the previous four years, the public finances had deteriorated to the extent that the current budget deficit was the highest ever recorded at 8.3 per cent of GNP, the national debt had been virtually doubled in four years.

The enormous burden of taxation had become intolerable. Taxes had been increased in real terms by nearly 600 million between 1982 and 1986. Confidence in the economy at the end of 1986 had vanished and real interest rates were at an exorbitant level. Industrial investment had collapsed. There was a chronic balance of payments deficit. Our external reserves, at the end of 1986, had fallen to a dangerous level.
The effect of this massive deterioration in our economy, its stability and competitiveness, was most clearly marked in an enormous loss of employment. Between 1982 and 1986, total employment fell by 66,000 one of the largest such losses of employment ever experienced in our recent history. That was the disastrous record of the Fine Gael-Labour Coalition of which Deputy Bruton, Deputy Barry, Deputy Deasy, Deputy Noonan and Deputy Spring were all members.
Deputy John Bruton as Minister for Finance ended up with the highest current budget deficit on record in this country. He unilaterally devalued our currency in 1986 only three months afer an EMS realignment. Deputy Bruton as Minister for Finance brought us as near to third-world status as we have ever been. The situation was so bad in 1986 that many believed it was beyond redemption.

The Deputies opposite have some audacity after the way they devastated the Irish economy and our public finances even to participate in this debate.
It was a depressing, intimidating and almost hopeless scene that confronted us in 1987. But we took firm control of the situation. We set about the tough task of putting the public finances in order and generating economic growth.
The extent to which we succeeded can be judged from the fact that by 1990 the economy had been transformed. Our achievements since 1987 have received wide praise from objective external commentators and are regarded as something of a model of non-inflationary growth, which others could well imitate. No other Community country achieved the same degree of improvement in the fundamentals of its economy as we did in the period since 1986.
Most fundamental of all, growth was restored to the economy. We have had, since 1986, a sustained period of growth [25] averaging 4.5 per cent a year, as confidence was restored and investment and production increased. By 1990 the public finances were fundamentally transformed. The Exchequer borrowing requirement fell from 12.8 per cent to 2 per cent of GNP in 1990. The current budget deficit was brought down from the record 8.3 per cent of GNP to 0.7 per cent. Total Government expenditure was reduced from 55 per cent of GNP in 1986 to 41 per cent in 1990. Revenue was reduced from 40 per cent of GNP in 1984-86 to 36.6 per cent in 1990.
These dramatic improvements in the fundamental structure of the Exchequer finances were brought about by firm, skilled and courageous management of the public finances. Many difficult and unpopular decisions had to be made. We made them. Many sacrifices had to be demanded from various sections of our community. They responded generously in the national interest.
It is necessary to remind Deputies opposite that this economy was hauled back by Fianna Fil from the brink of the bankruptcy to which it had been brought in December 1986 by Deputy Bruton of Fine Gael and Deputy Spring of Labour. Under this Government, and their predecessors, the turn-around was dramatic. We have now had a current balance of payments surplus since 1987, giving unprecedented stability to our exchange rate. Our competitive position has vastly improved. Irish firms throughout the country can now compete in a way they never knew before.
The effect of the improvement in the economy was a rise in employment of 40,000 between 1987 and 1990, and we have every reason to believe that those additional jobs are being maintained even in today's most difficult circumstances. Yet Deputies Bruton, Barry, Deasy, Noonan and Spring want this House to express no confidence in a Government who have transformed the Irish economy from the near-bankrupt state in which they left it.
The practical results of our good management of the public finances are, one of the lowest inflation rates now in the [26] Community; a real relief to household budgets; lower interest and mortgage rates; a reduction in the standard rate of income tax from 35 per cent to 29 per cent and in the top rate of tax from 58 per cent to 52 per cent with many improvements in income tax allowances and exemptions, especially for the low-paid with families.
The achievements and progress made in all aspects of the economy and the public finances since 1987 must convince any impartial observer that the affairs of the State are best left in the hands of those who achieved these dramatic improvements I have outlined. What cannot be contemplated is the return of the economy and our public finances to the irresponsible and incompetent care of those who from 1982 to 1986 created economic and social havoc here.
The great departure in Irish affairs made by this Government and their predecessors has been in the radical new way of managing our economic and social affairs that we have established. When we came into office in 1987, we invited the trade unions, the employers, and the farmers to join us in formulating the Programme for National Recovery. We were determined to replace confrontation by consensus. A small society, like ours, living on a peripheral island and dependent, for our living standards, on international markets, can succeed only if all major economic and social interests are prepared to combine with the Government in an agreed programme of economic and social development. That is a self-evident truth which, I hope, now that it has been established will never again be forgotten or ignored.
The approach we have adopted is now the envy of the social partners in other Community countries, particularly when they see the results it has achieved in transforming the economy here since 1986. It has made us into a low inflation country, and brought a truly remarkable period of industrial peace.
These achievements have only been possible because of the willingness of the social partners, in the national interest, to combine together with the Government [27] and accept the sacrifices and disciplines that were necessary to bring about the changes that were made.
This year has brought major difficulties. For the first time since 1987 the international economy has suffered a setback and entered a period of difficulty and recession. Two of our most important trading partners, the US and the UK went into outright recession with output and employment falling. This had a serious effect on our economic performance and prospects, though not to the same extent as others have suffered. In our own case, we had, in common with other Community countries, based our budget on a higher growth rate than can now be achieved. The growth forecast of 2.25 per cent on which the budget was based, was in line with forecasts for Ireland by the EC Commission last December. Other published forecasts were broadly in line.
Deputies will recall however that both I and the Minister for Finance stressed at budget-time the difficult and uncertain international background against which this year's economic and budgetary policies had to be framed. Since January virtually all the major forecasters have scaled back their forecasts for growth. The OECD scaled back its forecast for world growth in 1991 from 2 per cent to 1 per cent; the Commission scaled back its forecast of growth in the Community from 2.2 per cent to 1.4 per cent. Everyone should understand that we are not alone in having to take action to adapt to circumstances which have changed for the worse. All the Community countries are having to do the same. That our hopes and projections of last January will not be realised cannot be grounds for blame. What we could be blamed for would be if we did not quickly identify our problems and take strong corrective action. That is exactly what we are doing.
Let me give an outline of what has been happening and what we are doing about it. Growth in our economy fell away bringing a corresponding decline in Government revenues. Because of conditions in the US and the UK emigration [28] ceased and many of our emigrants returned. Their welcome return increased greatly the number of unemployed on the Live Register giving rise to a major increase in expenditure for social welfare.
As early as last July we took action to curb the deterioration in the public finances by cutting Government expenditure by 100 million this year. Even though we did so, the Government's borrowing this year will rise to 2.5 per cent of GNP instead of the 1.9 per cent we had hoped for.
While this is disappointing, it is not disastrous. In no way does it reflect on the authenticity of this year's budget, and any suggestions to that effect are simply not valid. The combination of factors that caused the deterioration in this year's finances have been clearly identified for all to see and understand. They are the result of the realities we have to face.
Despite this deterioration this year, we still have one of the lowest Exchequer deficits in the Community, and our national debt/GNP ratio will decline again this year. Let me remind Deputies Bruton, Deasy, Barry, Noonan and Spring that the national debt/GNP ratio, when they were in office, rose from 94 per cent to 129 per cent. For them to attempt to lecture anyone on the management of the public finances is like listening to a lecture by the Emperor Nero to the ancient Romans on fire-fighting.

Fortunately, despite lower growth this year all the indications and estimates from commentators are that employment has remained stable this year. This is a clear indicator of the basically sound underlying state our economy has now achieved. Due to this firm foundation our inflation rate, our interest rates and our balance of payments have all been kept under control, and we are [29] ready to benefit from the growth in international trade now forecast generally to occur next year. Our present assessment is, however, that growth next year will be less than we had been looking forward to. For the immediate future, we must accept that economic growth is likely to be modest rather than spectacular. International agencies now predict that growth will return slowly but steadily in the UK and the US in the second half of 1991 and will accelerate in 1992. On balance, international developments should assist some pick-up in our economy in the months ahead. We can therefore hope for a more satisfactory growth rate next year, particularly for consumer spending.
This has special implications for the Exchequer finances. The lower than expected growth next year coming on top of lower than expected growth this year will mean less Exchequer revenue next year than was planned when the Programme for Economic and Social Progress was agreed. That programme was based on official estimates of average growth of 3 per cent over the years 1991-1994 which were presented to all involved in the negotiations. Those rates unfortunately will not now be achieved.
We discussed last week with our partners in the programme the difficulties the Exchequer faces. We agreed as partners to discuss over the coming weeks the problems we face and seek to solve them. All sectors will have to contribute to this solution, and I have every confidence that, given the genuine commitment to the national interest that brought us together in the first place, we will resolve the immediate and essentially short-term problems we now face.
What would be an historic tragedy and what the economy cannot afford is that we should relapse into the old confrontational approach to the management of the economy, in which each sector fights for its own sectional interest regardless of the national interest, and where vital issues are settled on the picket lines or in other equally confrontational ways.
[30] The Exchequer Borrowing Requirement for 1992 that is emerging would be greater than the already disappointing outturn for 1991. That is not consistent with our stated policy objective and cannot be contemplated.
That situation must and will be addressed. We have made too much progress since 1987 to start sliding backward now. We must continue to improve the Exchequer finances in line with the objectives set in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress. These objectives include reducing the debt/GNP ratio to about 100 per cent and achieving broad balance in the current budget by 1993. These must be reached for our own domestic reasons, but also to enable us to meet the new disciplines that will be imposed in the second stage of Economic and Monetary Union. This will require us to look at all the options open to us in both the expenditure and the revenue areas of the public finances. As part of that process, we are now entering into bilateral discussions with the social partners. The Government are also engaged in a detailed examination of all areas of Exchequer expenditure. These efforts are still at an early stage. However, the Government are determined that the necessary steps will be taken to protect the public finances.
I can therefore assure the House that the fiscal discipline which has characterised this Government's dealing with the public finances will be maintained. We have all learned from the mistakes that were made in the past, and for which we are still paying today, when servicing the public debt takes more than three-quarters of the entire income tax yield. Having gained so much ground over the past few years, we do not now propose to throw those gains away, which have been hard earned.
Provided we do what is needed now, however, there is great hope for the future. Given the improvement in our economy in recent years, we are now in a good position to take advantage of the world upswing in economic activity, when it gets under way. In the context of the Single European Market after 1992 [31] and the opening up of markets in Eastern Europe, which should promote a substantial increase in European trade, we can benefit significantly.
Over the past few years, we have been developing the potential of the economy as rapidly as possible and in every area, neglecting no opportunity for growth. There is a new financial services industry; many provincial towns now have international data-processing industries. Many new industrial projects are coming before the Government or the IDA for grant approval. We have had dynamic growth in our tourist industry, with a doubling of tourist numbers since 1986. There has been an unprecedented level of investment in new tourist amenities and facilities. The establishment of Coillte and the more than doubling of the level of forestry planting since 1986 have been a resounding success. Our marine industries are also expanding. We have given a new impetus to science and technology in the service of development.
Under the National Development Plan there has been sustained investment in our infrastructure, especially roads, ports and airports, with corresponding benefit to activity in the construction industry. Every area of this worthwhile, developmental work will be continued, intensified and expanded, all with the overall guiding objective of providing the jobs we desperately need.
The last few years have also been a period of significant social advice. Economic growth has made it possible for us to do far more than was feasible in the stagnation of the mid-1980s. Major improvements have been made in the level of welfare payments, especially to the long-term unemployed with families. Education has been given special priority, with an increase in the provision of third level places, including the new Business School at Carysfort. We have established a new Commission on the Status of Women, and taken action on their initial recommendations. We are also implementing a major programme of legal reform, which includes many enlightened social measures.
[32] We have been effective in bringing about social change, social reform and social improvement. Putting forward popular, high-sounding policies is easy. What counts however is the ability to implement; to take the hard practical decisions, to decide difficult priorities. That is where this Government show their mettle.
The cultural life of our nation is flourishing, contributing to a new vibrant sense of national identity. Our environment policies are working well and there is a completely new national profile and public awareness in this important field. We are sensitive in our approach to issues, small in themselves, but nonetheless of great symbolic significance for our self-esteem as a nation. Our cities, towns and our countryside show many notable signs of an improved appearance.
At EC level, we have been effective in the protection and promotion of Irish interest while contributing fully to the further integration of the Community. We believe that our full membership of an increasingly integrated and developing Community will enable us to exploit to the full our potential as a nation.
The past years have been ones of fundamental change in European politics and present great challenges for the European Community and its member states. Rarely in the recent history of our continent has there been such an opportunity to overcome the legacy of the past and build a stable, secure and prosperous Europe.
The European Community is at the centre of these efforts. It is faced with the tasks of strengthening its own internal cohesion, building new relations with its neighbours, and promoting a more secure European order. Issues are now coming up for decision which are of enormous significance for Europe, for the European Community, and for this country. Developments since we joined have shown conclusively how closely Ireland's political and economic interests are intertwined with those of our European partners. We share common interests and must build a common future. That is why the Government are now involved in a [33] series of complex and far-reaching negotiations - the most complex and far-reaching since we joined the Community - the outcome of which will certainly have profound effects on the future of our people and the welfare of future generations.
The two Intergovernmental Conferences on Political Union and on Economic and Monetary Union are at the heart of the Community's efforts to move forward on the path to closer integration. Their general scope and objectives were settled during the Irish Presidency last year, and negotiations have been proceeding since then. I have kept the House fully informed of those developments throughout the negotiations, and I gave a comprehensive account of all the issues involved, and of Ireland's position on them, in July, after the Luxembourg Summit.
The Treaty on Political Union will establish new forms of co-operation on foreign and security policy and on home and judicial affairs. Progress has been made, but the most difficult part of the negotiations still lie ahead on such essential matters as foreign policy and security, voting, the role of the European Parliament, and in particular and of very great interest to us, economic and social cohesion. Ireland's position on several of these issues has been recognised at successive European Councils and incorporated in their conclusions. There is agreement that the definition of a defence policy is something for the future, and the recognition that any defence identity for the union must take account of our traditional position. The task now will be to translate these political agreements into concrete measures in the negotiations ahead.
Recently, we successfully opposed attempts to create a two tier approach with regard to the move of the final stage of EMU. This is a matter of fundamental importance for the Community and for Ireland. The strength of the Community lies in its ideals of unity and coherence; a two tier approach to either Economic and Monetary Union or to Political Union would be the antithesis of everything [34] the Community stands for and is simply unacceptable.
All these negotiations will reach their crucial stages in the coming months. They will require the most careful and expert handling if we are to achieve our dual aims of advancing the process of European integration and protecting and promoting Ireland's best interests in all areas. This Government have the political skills, experience, the confidence based on past successes and the respect of our partners, to enable us to handle these crucially important negotiations in the period immediately ahead in Ireland's very best long-term interests.
Can anyone seriously contemplate entrusting such a task to a disparate collection of Deputies opposite with their fundamental diagreements on practically every aspect of Community affairs?

Irish political life is going through a traumatic period with many disturbing features. The fall-out from what has been happening can only be damaging to the best interests of our country. First, we had the disclosure of the reprehensible behaviour of a small number of individuals in the business and financial sector. That by itself was deeply disturbing and seriously detrimental to the good name of this country, but it was added to, hyped up and exaggerated by [35] a massive campaign of vilification and character assassination of unprecedented intensity without regard to evidence, proof of justification.

A totally unjustified attempt was made to put the blame for business scandals on to the Government when clearly there was no ministerial involvement of any kind. The business and financial scandals in the semi-State sector in which the Government were in no way involved were seized upon, embellished and twisted in a totally dishonest manner to smear those who had no connection of any kind with them. Normal legitimate political debate was discarded and in its place we have had a campaign of personalised attacks by way of unfounded allegations, innuendo, accusations of guilt by association and all the other traditional, despicable weapons of such a campaign.

The object of the campaign was nothing less than to undermine and destabilise this Government and to damage the credibility of individual members, particularly myself. Each time there is some new so-called sensational revelation, members of the public could well ask themselves the simple question: where is there any evidence of wrong doing by any member of this Government?

In the nature of things it is always easy to raise doubts, questions and suspicions about the motives for even the most laudable actions. I believe all fair minded responsible citizens should ask why such a campaign was undertaken at this stage and what can be the real motives of those who have participated in this truly extraordinary campaign, this [36] concentrated barrage, covering the entire media, as one sided as it was unremitting.

I stated at the outset of these events that these were business and financial scandals not political, and that there was no ministerial or political involvement, and I repeat that.

I now wish firmly to reiterate that statement. Nothing has emerged or been revealed since to affect in any way the truth of that statement.
I warmly welcome this debate and the opportunity it gives me to state categorically that neither I nor any of the Ministers of this Government had any connection of even the remotest kind with any of the events and transactions now being investigated in regard to Irish Sugar and Telecom ireann. I and my colleagues eagerly await the outcome of all the investigations now under way so that the truth can be fully established and revealed and our position vindicated. It will then be shown that neither I nor any Minister of this Government was in any way involved in or connected with these events or transactions.
The House is well used to false allegations by a number of Deputies from what is called the Left, but on this occasion the new peddler of this kind of stuff, the Leader of the Fine Gael Party, Deputy John Bruton, decided apparently to take his ignoble part. He threw himself into the disreputable campaign with a kind of erratic frenzy, popping up all over the place, making unfounded allegations and demanding contradictory courses of action. Perhaps this is not as surprising as it might seem when we recall that it was the new Leader of Fine Gael who devoted the main thrust of his vaudeville Ard Fheis to a vulgar coarse attack on one single Fianna Fil Deputy.

Deputy Bruton is largely responsible for bringing the practice of politics in this country to a new low. He seems to be running Fine Gael as some sort of private detective agency, hunting every latest rumour, phoning around, inquiring about Ministers' activities, their families and friends. It might be Deputy Bruton's style but it is not the Fine Gael tradition.

The Deputies opposite have had unrestrained access to all the media for three weeks to a month to make all these allegations but now they are not prepared to give me one hour to reply.

The present campaign has brought business and professional life to a state of hysteria. There now exists an unhealthy aura of suspicion and distrust bordering on paranoia.
Because it was clear beyond doubt that I was not in even the remotest way personally involved in any of the events or transactions under investigation, nor connected with them in any way, the tactic was resorted to of attempting to attribute to me some kind of guilt by association. I would like to remind this House and all those involved in this attempt that civilized societies have always rejected the concept of guilt by association. The McCarthy era in the US should be a clear and salutary warning to them that society ultimately rejects those who engage in this ignominious trade.
I would, nevertheless, like to deal with the attempts which have been made in this area.
With regard to Dr. Michael Smurfit and Bernard Cahill, Chairman of Greencore, my relationship with them was almost exclusively of an official nature.

Yes, almost; I did meet them otherwise but my relationship with them was almost exclusively of an official nature. With regard to Mr. Comerford, Mr. Tully, Mr. Garavan, Mr. Keleghan and Mr. Lyons, I had no association of any kind with them. The political allegiances of the first two in particular are far removed from mine.
I have known Dermot Desmond personally for a number of years. I first came in contact with him when he put forward the idea of the establishment of an international financial services centre in Dublin. Fianna Fil were in Opposition at that time; we adopted the idea and on return to Government set about establishing it.

It has since been developed successfully to the point where [41] 180 projects are setting up there with employment already in excess of 2,800. Later I was in contact with Mr. Desmond about the "Sail Ireland" project which involved entering an Irish boat for the Whitbread Round the World Yacht race. That brave venture which involved building a yacht of international status in Ballyfermot had widespread support throughout the business community and among the general public. I make no apologies for fully supporting it. It was a great national enterprise involving thousands of fine people and was up-front, open and above board. I had no relationship or association with Dermot Desmond in regard to any other matter in either the area of public administration or the private sector.
In the last few days, we have much play being made of what was on the face of it an extraordinary letter written by Mr. Desmond to the Chairman of Pernod-Ricard. The claims it seemed to make were patently absurd. The Government were careful to remain totally objective and maintain complete neutrality in the rival bidding for control of Irish Distillers. The whole take-over transaction and its implications, has already been fully dealt with and examined by the courts. There was no impropriety or irregularity. If there had been, this would have become evident in the court proceedings. The Revenue Commissioners simply made a statement, helpful to all the parties, clarifying the tax implications in question, provided - and only provided - the statutory requirements were observed. Such a statement is normal practice in taxation matters when it is desired to clarify tax liabilities.
I regard the purchase of Carysfort by UCD to provide a premises for a graduate business school as an entirely praiseworthy and progressive step.

The transaction was carried out in a perfectly straightforward manner and I was not involved in it. I gave it my full support because it fitted [42] in perfectly with our commitment to the universities and in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress to facilitate the provision of a large number of extra places for those seeking admission to third level education.

I gave it my full support, because it fitted in perfectly with our commitment to the universities and in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress to facilitate the provision of a large number of extra places for those seeking admission to third level education.
I have already made clear, and I repeat here again categorically, that no person or company ever received any favourable [43] treatment or consideration in their dealings with Government because of personal friendships or associations. In fact, they could not. The position with regard to the awarding of Government contracts for consultancies and services of that nature has already been clearly outlined. In the Civil Service the principle of competitive tendering and of seeking a minimum of three tenders is required under current Government contract procedures, contained in a code of practice laid down by the Department of Finance. Firm procedures will be put in place to ensure that the same principle applies in State companies.
This is a Government of absolute integrity. I reject totally any allegations to the contrary, and, when all the investigations have been completed, it will be established that there was no Government or ministerial involvement of any kind in any of the transactions or events being investigated. Those who have engaged in this disreputable campaign of rumours, allegations and innuendoes have done a grievous disservice to our parliamentary democracy. They should be thoroughly ashamed of their efforts because despite what has happened, taking it all fully into account I assert that the standards of Government and public administration in this country are as high as those prevailing anywhere in the world.
Furthermore, I think it is equally important that I should at this stage make clear my belief that while these totally unacceptable events have undoubtedly occurred their extent has been hyped up and exaggerated out of all proportion, because it is my belief that the overwhelming majority of business and professional people in this country are people of integrity whose standards of conduct are above reproach.
I have now been under personal character attack for 12 years, from the very day I first became Taoiseach. I have endured these personal attacks in the knowledge that I had nothing to fear or conceal. In all those 12 years, my detractors have failed to substantiate one single accusation against me, but this has [44] not deterred them. These attacks on me personally have had the basic objective also of damaging the Fianna Fil Party. But they have failed in their principal aim, to deter me from applying myself to the best of my ability to the better welfare of my fellow citizens, which should be the aim of everyone in political life.
My party and I are proud of what we have contributed to the well-being of this country. We have not succeeded in all we would like to do but all over Ireland, there are people who have benefited from ideas and policies of ours whether they be the old and infirm; those on social welfare; the lower-paid, those in need of better health services; small farmers; those in need of housing, and many others.
In this Government and in Fianna Fil we have no concern, we hold no brief, for that comparatively small group of persons in our society who behave dishonourably, who break the rules, who abuse the trust and confidence placed in them by the rest of us. Any illegalities, malpractice or unprofessional behaviour will be uncovered and disclosed, and all appropriate action will be taken. Nobody will be protected from the consequences of their actions. It is only in this way that public trust and confidence in our financial and business systems can be fully restored.
This Government and Fianna Fil's concern is not for the dishonest few but for the decent majority. It is our responsibility to protect the interests of the taxpayers, the poorer, weaker sections of our community, the good name of our Irish business financial and professional sectors, to work constantly with legitimate business interests for economic progress and to promote projects which will provide jobs, to establish and maintain standards and safeguards in Government administration in the semi-State sector and in business and financial affairs. We will discharge that responsibility, and we will not be deterred by this current massive, unscrupulous campaign of vilification.
It is very detrimental to the legitimate work and purpose of Government that [45] either politicians or the media should seek without any justification whatever to misconstrue and misrepresent the normal activities of Government Ministers in a way that has been attempted in recent weeks. It is both legitimate and necessary for industrialists and commercial leaders to have access to Ministers in matters of common concern in economic and social policy areas.
Ministers must not disregard any opportunity to secure investment and advance valuable economic projects. Similarly, leaders of professional bodies and trade unions, community leaders and representatives of all kinds of organisations frequently meet with Ministers on matters of concern to them. To suggest, as has now become the practice with a number of Deputies in this House, that there is something wrong with such contacts or something improper about them is completely irresponsible. It is an entirely new malicious practice in our political life largely orchestrated by The Workers' Party for their own sinister reasons, which seeks by innuendo to cast some sort of suspicion over meetings which are in themselves entirely appropriate and legitimate. For the first time also members of the Government have been personally attacked as being responsible for decisions and events within semi-State bodies.
Deputy Rabbitte has played a leading role in the more pernicious aspects of the campaign. He has been the RTE anchorman appearing daily with some new false allegation or innuendo 

to pursue and uncover every aspect of the truth and to take whatever remedial action is appropriate. There has been no favouritism, [47] no protection afforded to anyone from the legitimate pursuit of these inquiries.
There is one matter of public policy, which I would like to place on record. The normal practice, as regards the relations between a commercial State-sponsored body and the relevant Minister is that the Government appoint boards of directors, who are then given a large measure of commercial freedom in the management of the company. The level of autonomy enjoyed has been consistent with the legislation and considered appropriate for the job to be done. This practice has been followed by successive Governments in relation to the commercial affairs of State companies. State-sponsored bodies, therefore, would not normally consult with or obtain the approval of Government Departments for individual commercial decisions, unless there were specific Exchequer or major strategic implications.
I wish to make it clear to this House and to the country that the current attempts to destabilise and undermine this Government have not succeeded and will not succeed. This Government are fully in charge of the nation's affairs. We are clear about the nature and extent of the problems which confront the Government and the country. We are equally clear about what must be done to see the country safely through these difficulties and resume the pattern of progress which this Government and their Fianna Fil predecessor have so firmly established. I assure this House and the country that we have the capacity and determination to guide this nation safely through this difficult period as we have done on so many occasions in the past.
The Opposition parties may think that policies do not matter any more, that they are better employed searching for new scandals or attending tribunals, but this Government intend to concentrate on the real problems facing the country. This Government have formulated and are implementing a comprehensive complement of policies covering every area of administration. Our contribution [48] to the debate in the European Community on political, economic and monetary union is strong and coherent and in the best interests of the Community and of Ireland.
The implementation of the National Development Plan, using 3 billion of Structural Funds aid, is steadily improving the national infrastructure, roads, harbours, airports and transport. The Programme for Economic and Social Progress has both created the climate for progress and outlined a major programme of specific measures for economic and social advance. In my Ard-Fheis speech this year I outlined a major programme of social reform and advance. Our careful control of the public finances and our clear intention of pursuing the objectives set out in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress of reductions in borrowing and achieving a broad balance on current account, are an essential part of our strategy for good Government.
The newly revised programme for government between the two Government parties will update our range of policies and take our plans forward a further stage.

We intend to implement our programme over the next two-and-a-half years and then go before the people for their decision. We have an important job to do. We must provide the Irish people with an effective, capable Government for the next two-and-a-half years. We know from our own experience since 1987 that maintaining a level of popularity at any particular stage is not what is important. Providing good [49] government is our task; we will provide it, and public support will follow.

I am seeking the support of this House for the Government on the basis of our programme for government and on the certainty that this Government are infinitely better than any other combination of parties in this House; that we are capable of maintaining the progress of recent years, of tackling the difficulties and bringing the country safely through the present difficulties and on to a better future.

