The Minister need have no fear that anything I say on the subject of Northern Ireland would cause difficulty. I will refer to two matters which the Minister raised relating to Northern Ireland. I welcome the balance which he has put on recent emphasis in Britain on the Unionist dimension to the Northern Ireland problem. I hope and believe he has made it clear that the Irish dimension is equally important and equally valid. I suspect that some of the soundings are for the purpose of horse trading in the event of certain things happening in the next British election.
The Minister did not refer to what I described yesterday as the horrible, incipient sectarian civil war on the streets of Belfast. I hope he stressed the importance of taking urgent action to nip this in the bud. Belfast is bad enough but experience in the mid-seventies indicates that when it spreads out to the rural areas it is much worse and much more brutal. I say this from personal experience having lived in the middle of the notorious murder triangle. I hope he emphasised to the British authorities that as an initial move, the organisation called the UDA, masquerading as the UFF, are responsible for so many of these murders, should be banned. I hope the Minister made that point strongly.
Deputy McCreevy was kind enough to quote me with approval last Monday night. He reminded his television audience of comments I had made during the last general election campaign when I said how appalled I was at the cynicism I [989] had experienced on the canvass. I made the following observation:
In the North we know the enemy of democracy and democratic institutions. It is those who use the gun and the bullet. But here, the greatest enemy of our democratic institutions is more insidious. The cynicism I have found about politics and politicians is an even greater threat to our democratic institutions than the murderous activity of the men of violence.
The Taoiseach in the course of this debate referred to allegations being made for the purpose of subverting the Government - that was his phrase. It is not the allegations but the reality which has been exposed that is the problem. The way in which many Members have conducted themselves in this House during this debate has not helped. We are playing into the hands of those who are practitioners of the art of the politics of envy, cynicism, distrust and suspicion. I do not agree with D'Alembert, who made a certain contribution to history by remarking that political office is like a high mountain - only eagles and reptiles reach the top. Unfortunately on too many occasions in recent times the public perception of those in high office in the political and business world has been that the eagle is fast becoming an endangered species.
Most of the scandals now exposed would not have occurred if we had a system of Government properly accountable to Dil ireann. In this House we took over practices and procedures from the British and we have persisted with some of their worst practices, even when the British themselves have changed or modified them. This House is supposed to be the focal point of our nation. This is where our nation's affairs are supposed to be discussed, yet this Government and other Governments have on many occasions given the impression that they would prefer to do without this House, that this House is a nuisance, that it is a diversion and that it is too much trouble to come in here to explain to Members what they are trying to do.
[990] Time and again important announcements are made outside this House, usually on a Friday when the House is not sitting. That used to be the British practice but they have modified it. Most Members prefer to watch their monitors in their rooms. I understand why that is the case. There is too much reliance on scripts and I even have one myself. I used not use a script. We rely on the scripts so that we make it easier for the press. We do not make speeches any longer; we read. That is not good enough. We require a "give way" procedure. When the former Taoiseach wished to intervene yesterday on what turned out to be a very valuable point while a Minister was speaking, he was ruled out of order.
There is no debate in this House. Ministers can get away with anything and it is not surprising that they make every effort to do so. Topical events cannot be raised, even when the whole country is talking about them. The Dil is becoming a cipher. We do not hold Ministers to account and in these circumstances Ministers have become accustomed to getting off the hook with little or no difficulty. It is part of our problem that Ministers are not truly accountable to this House and we should make the changes which will ensure that they are.
Northerners have a reputation for saying what they mean and meaning what they say. That is not always a desirable attribute. Even when it is, it is often not merited. Mary Holland once publicly explained to me the difference between this so-called Northern attribute and the `nod and wink" so prevalent here. The Taoiseach has become for me, and I believe a large number of others, the very personification of "nod and wink". He has contributed very substantially to creating an environment, a way of thinking, a value system which others not only in politics but in business and other walks of life have shared. This is part of the reason we now have forced upon us the necessity for a code of ethics for Members of this House and in particular for members of the Government.
[991] Over a year ago Fine Gael proposed a parliamentary ethics commission composed of the Ombudsman, the Comptroller and Auditor General and a High Court Judge before whom declarations of interest would be made during the lifetime of the Government and for five years after leaving Government. The public disclosure of financial backing to political parties is also a necessity. This is the price we have to pay for the honour and privilege of serving in this House. The public funding of political parties and the rigorous control of election spending has reached the stage where, if it is allowed to continue, one would need to be a millionaire to stand for election to this House. It is an absolute scandal that at election time political party candidates can spend as much as they can get. In the interest of our democratic system there ought to be rigorous control in that respect. The Taoiseach in opening this debate told us of his pride in his contribution to the wellbeing of this country and unbelievably made reference to the health services, small farmers, the old, the infirm and the homeless. The real symbol of Charlie Haughey's Ireland is the queue, the queue of those looking for jobs, the longest in the history of the State: the queue of those looking for houses: the queue of farmers being forced off the land; and the queue to get into schools and colleges.
Most symbolic of all, is the queue of young people at the GPO for Morrison visas, our brightest and our best, queuing up in their thousands and in doing so giving their own verdict on Charlie Haughey's Ireland.
We join with those young people today in expressing our lack of confidence in his Government.


