FF leader critical of FG failure to reduce Ministers of State

FINE GAEL was criticised by Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin for reversing its commitment to further reduce the number of Ministers of State.

He said the need for compromise in a programme for government was accepted, but it could not be used as the all-purpose excuse for breaking promises.

“A particularly striking example of this is the issue of how many Ministers of State there should be,” he added. “Fine Gael not only promised to limit them to 12, it even published a Bill to give effect to this.”

Mr Martin said that when 15 were appointed last week, Fine Gael briefed that it was a condition it had to meet in negotiations.

“Unfortunately for it, the Labour Party confirmed that it had not asked for the higher number,” he added. “Unless it was a negotiation between Fine Gael and some as yet unidentified partner, the simple fact is that the promise was unilaterally abandoned.”

Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams said that instead of agreeing a programme for government and then going into coalition on that basis, Fine Gael and Labour had cobbled “this piece of work to facilitate their ministerial ambitions”.

Mr Adams said there was no excuse for the Taoiseach to describe it as a democratic revolution. “Taoiseach, please call it something else, but do not call it a democratic revolution,” he added. “That has yet to come.”

John Halligan (Ind) said the introduction of water meters would represent a sharp U-turn by the Labour Party in particular.

“Even subsequent to the election, that party stated the money spent on installing meters would be better invested in water infrastructure,” he added. “Once again, this extra tax will become a burden on PAYE workers.”

Shane Ross (Ind) said there was an alarming similarity between the policies in the programme for government and those pursued by the previous government.

Maureen O’Sullivan (Ind) said she welcomed proposals for constitutional reform.

“There is much that is aspirational, particularly when it comes to health, but there are parts I do welcome – particularly the ringfencing of funding for additional psychologists and counsellors for community mental health teams,” she added.

Clare Daly (SP) said that far from being a programme for recovery, it was a programme for national austerity. Undoubtedly, she said, it would have a devastating impact on the living standards of ordinary people.

Sandra McLellan (SF) said she intended to put forward proposals that were credible and fair.

“As a woman with a family I am acutely aware . . . that not only are women totally under-represented in politics but also that we have borne the brunt of cutbacks . . . foisted upon use by the previous government,” she added.