Is the Taoiseach satisfied that the quality, coherence and efficiency of Government will not be impacted upon as a result of the announcement on decentralisation in the budget? Does he not think it is fair to say that the announcement was to steer attention away from the fact that 52% of all taxpayers will now pay at the highest rate of tax and that it will cost them €600 on average?

I ask the Taoiseach if he recognises the following quote by the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, from a reply to a parliamentary question dated 12 November 2002:

As I have said on many occasions of late, there is a wide range of important issues that must be taken into consideration before a final decision is taken on the matter. It is vital that all involved are consulted, be they staff concerned about their futures or departmental managements concerned about the delivery of the public services for which they have responsibility.

Why was there no consultation in line with the Minister for Finance's commitment to the Dáil in this reply to a parliamentary question?

Can the Taoiseach help me reconcile the Tánaiste's statement of 2 January 2002 on previous decentralisation by three Ministers? She insisted that the exercise should not generate a repeat of the earlier behaviour of three Fianna Fáil Ministers who had transferred sections of their Departments to their constituencies. Adding to the tensions between the coalition partners, the Progressive Democrats Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, criticised it as "the worst kind of bogman politics".

Allow Deputy Rabbitte without interruption, please.

The Tánaiste insisted that decentralisation would have to be achieved in a meaningful and efficient way rather than by using a scatter-gun approach around the country. Does the Taoiseach agree with her? Does he recall when she objected to the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, inviting his colleagues to bid for the civil servants for their constituencies? What does the Taoiseach think of the Progressive Democrats Minister, Deputy Parlon, the first at the hireling fair who gives the impression he will drive the tractor up to Dublin and help the civil servants with the removals himself? If this is the role of the Progressive Democrats, why does it not decentralise to Mount Street and be done with it?

Ours is not a redundant party, unlike the Labour Party.

We are not like Deputy Rabbitte, who has already done that.

Deputy Rabbitte should note that part of our remit is to try to decentralise to large and appropriate towns in 53 locations.

Thomastown.

The plan was carefully balanced on the basis that there would be a cluster of decentralised bodies within regions, each in close proximity to each other.

On Deputy Rabbitte's question, I do not believe the efficiency of Government will suffer. I remember the arguments made when the then Department of Social Welfare was to move to Sligo and the Revenue Commissioners to Tipperary. There are many arguments to show that these moves have been effective. Given that multinational companies in the west can deal with their parent companies in various continents, we should have no difficulty if the decentralised bodies are in close proximity. My experience indicates that people who are stuck in offices in the city centre – some of which are not very appropriate – and who are on top of each other all the time might be much better off and much better tempered if they were based in regional locations.

Set me free.

I see no difficulty with this. I assure Deputy Rabbitte that there is nothing to be read into the fact that decentralisation was part of the budget. The one unfortunate issue that has arisen in the past week regarding decentralisation is that it has in some ways concealed the fact that the budget—

The Taoiseach can say that again.

If the Labour Party were really interested in the marginalised, it would note that 30% of the less well-off have enjoyed increases from almost 5.7% to 7%.

Ray Burke—

Deputy Michael D. Higgins should be proud about this. I know he is annoyed about it. The top 30%—

I am not. I know language when I hear it.

—receive increases of only 0.04% to 0.07%. Moreover, the welfare increases in this budget and even in those of more difficult times have been very helpful. Instead of people barely getting what they needed to maintain their standard of living, 400,000 people will get three times the rate of inflation.

It is 21 cent a day.

These are the kinds of measures for which Members should have applauded the Minister for Finance, but unfortunately they did not get enough coverage. I know Deputy Higgins is pleased about that—

I am not.

—but these are real and socially progressive policies.

If children had four legs they could be—

Sorry, Deputy Higgins. These are Leaders' Questions. I have called the leader of your party to ask a supplementary question and out of courtesy to him I would ask you to allow him to ask it without interruption.

I am not sure what the Taoiseach means by all those civil servants on top of each other. Clearly more fun goes on in the Civil Service than I was aware of.

Is the Taoiseach satisfied that the quality of governance will not be affected? Does he genuinely believe the business of Government can be done by e-mail? Is it the case, as has been suggested by a former Taoiseach, that, for example, civil servants participate in no less than 300 interdepartmental committees on behalf of their Ministers? Is the Taoiseach saying he intends to stick with the budget day commitment to the implementation of this package, as it has been rolled out, within three years? Would it not have been more rational and reasonable to have truly engaged in the consultation promised by the Minister for Finance and to have compiled a league table of locations in the country consistent with the national spatial strategy? That table could have been consistent with a range of socio-economic factors, such as the availability of infrastructure, and self-contained, autonomous units of Government might be transferred to those areas.

This is the scatter-gun approach the Tánaiste claimed to fear and the hireling fair which repulsed her before the election. Is the Taoiseach saying now, on mature reflection and having got what he can to deflect from what was otherwise a very bad budget, that he will persist in implementing this against the public interest?

The efficiency of governance will not be affected in any way. Moving a large core of Departments out to regional locations is good for them and it will be better for the staff in terms of quality of life and opportunities. It will make for better balanced development in the country. With modern technology I do not see problems arising – we are not just talking about e-mails. Meetings can take place in locations all over the world without everyone having to be in the one room. If those days were ever relevant they are long out of date. There are no difficulties with these issues.

The consultation and examination carried out by the Minister and the committee which dealt with this were long enough. As Deputy Rabbitte knows, people will go on forever about these issues. Everyone wanted decentralisation in their areas, but it is not possible to cover all 130 or 140 locations seeking decentralisation. That would be a scatter-gun approach. Only one third of those locations will be involved but they will be good locations.

I agree with Deputy Rabbitte on some of the better issues in the budget were overlooked but perhaps they will be brought to light. The entry point to taxation for a single PAYE worker was €97 per week a few years ago but after this budget it is now €247 per week, an increase of over 150%. Unfortunately, some of these matters have been hidden. The proportion of income tax yield from those with earnings at and under the average industrial wage is projected to be about 6%. The equivalent figure was only 14%. Some of these matters should be in the public domain.

Even when the Taoiseach is not asked a question he reads the note.