If we examine the Taoiseach's speech we find that it falls in to three sections, first, a review of the [1007] economy, second, a report on the European Community and the third deals with the many scandals which have beset the Government. What do we find on the environment? Only six words: "Our environment policies are working well". What policies I could ask. The scandalous delay in setting up the Environmental Protection Agency which was promised nearly two years ago is a terrible indictment both of the Government and the way business is dealt with in the House. This Bill is a vital component in our fight against pollution. There was not one word about Sellafield, surely the most dangerous threat overhanging the country. The Taoiseach must realise that in the event of a major leak at Sellafield, which is by no means impossible, it would require the evacuation of the entire country. To where? Perhaps to the island of Atlantis, if it can be found.
I now come to another major problem - the continuing violence in Northern Ireland. There was not one single word about that matter in his speech nor is there any mention of any clear vision of the Ireland the Taoiseach sees in the future. I suspect he does not have any vision. During the past few years - and this applies to all the political parties in the House - the entire emphasis has been on the attainment of narrow economic achievements, the worship of GNP; it has not always been so. I suggest that there are other considerations, such as quality of life, which cannot be defined in purely monetary terms.
If we look at the economy we find that the Government have made no progress in solving the unemployment problem, which now stands at over 260,000 unemployed, the highest on record and much higher than when they took office in 1989. It is fair to say that none of the Opposition parties have any viable propositions to put forward either. I suggest that the Green Party, Comhaontas Glas, are the only party who have a practical and viable solution to the unemployment problem. The main plank in this programme would be a solemn commitment by the Government to provide paid work [1008] for all who require it. This can be achieved by sharing the available work, by reduced working hours, job sharing, career breaks and early retirement. Such a system would be greatly facilitated by the simultaneous introduction of a guaranteed basic income for all our citizens in substitution for existing social welfare and pension payments. I challenge the Government, or indeed the Opposition parties, to say where the 260,000 jobs are going to come from.
It is absolute nonsense for the Government parties and Fine Gael to state that if we get the taxation system and the business environment right the jobs will follow. This is arrant nonsense. It is equally facile for the parties of the Left to talk about more State interference and State boards to create jobs. This is manifestly untrue. This is not to say that the present tax system is not in need of reform to create more jobs. Certainly radical tax reform, while it would not solve the unemployment crisis totally, would go some way towards this objective.

The Green Party propose a land tax and a resource tax mostly on non-renewable energy in substitution for income tax, PRSI and most indirect taxes. Such a change in the tax system would undoubtedly create a vast number of extra jobs. This would be real tax reform, not the miserable half measures which the Progressive Democrats pretentiously call tax reform. Their supposed radical proposals only tinker with the system which clearly does not work.
I would like to refer briefly to our party's proposal for an energy tax on fossil fuels. This is a key proposal in our economic policy but it has ramifications far beyond economics. An energy tax at a sufficiently high rate would solve a number of problems simultaneously. By substantially increasing energy costs to industry it would inhibit over-mechanisation and encourage job creation. By increasing transport costs it would [1009] encourage local production for local needs. It would also encourage the immediate development of our renewable energy resources. A major shift from non-renewable to renewable energy would improve the environment immensely by reducing acid rain and in addition halting the build-up of greenhouse gases. It would also stretch the life of our fossil fuel reserves by decades, or perhaps centuries. It is incredible that, when independent experts foretell the virtual exhaustion of our fossil fuel resources within the lifetime of many of us here, virtually no thought has been given to this major problem by successive Governments. At present there is before the EC Commission a proposal to impose an energy tax on fossil fuels. This is another example of the Green Party being ahead of their time.
To turn to Sellafield I must once again put on record my complete dissatisfaction with the performance of the Minister for Energy, Deputy Molloy, who has failed to initiate legal action against Britain to shut down Sellafield. His continued failure to do so in the face of considerable evidence produced by Greenpeace and other environmental organisations that a case before the International Court of Justice or the European Court would stand a reasonable chance of success, is quite incredible. I call on the Minister to state whether it is his decision or a Cabinet decision, and if it is a Cabinet decision, if he agrees with it. I suspect there is a hidden agenda here. I suspect the Government are afraid to move lest they interfere with the trading relations with the United Kingdom. I ask the Minister or the Taoiseach to categorically state that this is not a factor; or was there a secret deal done by the FitzGerald Administration in return for setting up the Anglo-Irish Conference? This is also a credible scenario.

I call on Fine Gael and the Labour Party to comment on this. The Northern Ireland problem must [1010] never take precedence over Sellafield. Of course, it is possible that the Progressive Democrats are still somewhat enamoured of nuclear power. It should not be forgotten that the previous speaker, the Leader of the Progressive Democrats, Deputy O'Malley, was the instigator of the proposed Carnsore Point nuclear plant.
Let me now turn to deal with the national toxic waste incinerator. The Government are committed to providing this facility but are having considerable difficulty in finding a community willing to accept this lethal method of disposal. What do we find? The Minister for the Environment, Deputy Flynn, has made secret visits to Northern Ireland, to DuPont, dealing in taxpayers' money, to provide a so-called national toxic waste incinerator in Northern Ireland. This is unprecedented behaviour. What right does Deputy Flynn have to ship our toxic waste problem across the Border to Northern Ireland? What right does Deputy Flynn have to spend taxpayers' money in this way?

I beg your pardon. What right does the Minister for the Environment have to ignore the wishes of the people of Donegal?
Let me now turn to the financial scandals which have beset the Government recently. We are constrained by the sub judice rule but nevertheless I feel some conclusions can be drawn from the overall picture that has emerged. The first is that there is extensive use of offshore companies in tax avoidance. It would be quite simple to enact legislation to prohibit, under pain of imprisonment, the holding of shares in offshore companies by Irish nationals. I suspect that the Minister for Finance would not do this because such stringent regulations would hinder the machinations of his friends in big business.
A small number of our citizens during the past 40 years have become extremely [1011] wealthy. Apart from the scandal of enormous wealth existing alongside poverty both in this country and in the Third World, there is the question of the immense power which such income and wealth undoubtedly draws. Of course contributions are made to the funds of some political parties. As well as minimum living standards for each person, there is a good case to be made against maximum possession of wealth given that the existence of very rich individuals is clearly a danger to democracy. We are a long way--

I am about to conclude. I would like to make the point that we are a long way from what a former Fianna Fil Taoiseach, amon de Valera, said, "no man is worth more than 1,000 a year".


