Last year the Taoiseach told the IMI: "We will keep down personal and business taxes in order to strengthen and maintain the competitive position of the Irish economy." We were told that the Government intended to launch an onslaught and a flood of announcements by Ministers about their plans to tackle inflation. The Taoiseach will be aware that the recent report by the National Competitiveness Council was a savage indictment of the efforts of the Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government to control inflation and implement policies which would maintain business and consumer costs. Ireland is now Europe's most expensive country. According to the National Competitiveness Council, decisions by Government, its agencies and regulators have contributed adversely to inflation. In other words, far from being a solution to the problem, Government is part of the problem.

The Taoiseach will be aware that for business, competitiveness is not just a buzzword. Costs have increased, cheques must still be paid, price increases cannot be passed on, contracts are lost and jobs are placed in danger. The Taoiseach will be aware of the 27 stealth charges imposed on the Irish business and consumer sector since 2002. VAT has risen by 8%, ESB charges soared by 13%, parking fees are up 25%, accident and emergency charges have increased to €45, the drugs refund threshold level has been raised to €78 and leaving certificate examination fees have gone up to €86. In the Estimates last week, the drugs refund threshold level went up again, to €85, accident and emergency visit charges increased by €10 to €55 and inpatient stay charges went up €10 to €55.

We seem to have a unique regulation where, for instance, price increases in gas and electricity are allowed by the regulator on the basis that this will encourage competition. There have been 34 new stealth charges. Last week's Estimates saw €50 million being collected by means of increased health charges. Fine Gael has been highlighting rip-offs in Irish society over recent years and thousands of ordinary people have sent in their stories to the relevant website. Will the Taoiseach tell the House of three tangible initiatives taken by the Government that have helped to increase Ireland's competitiveness, which is so important for our future?

In recent years the economy has annually turned in one of the best economic performances in the world. From 1997 to 2003 the economy has grown by more than 8% per annum in real terms. These are genuine increases for the economy and for business. For the current year we expect Ireland to maintain its global economic position. The mid-term review of the economic outlook forecast a growth of 4.7% and we might even beat that. Irish GNP growth is predicted to rise by 4.2%, while euro area growth is predicted at 1.7%. We remain one of the strongest economies in terms of profitability. Deputy Kenny knows profitability among Irish companies, both indigenous and international, is extremely strong. That is what enables us to create the current level of jobs. Again this year, over 1,000 jobs are being created per week. The number at work has increased by almost 400,000 over recent years. Unemployment is at an historic low and employment creation is at an historic high. EU and Irish inflation are at the closest point in three or four years. I would have thought the convergence of the two would have been the source of some satisfaction. We have seen all the international areas in which we have moved to make successful productive investment.

The Competition Authority report is to keep people on their guard so that we examine areas in which we can try to do better. That is the purpose of the Competition Authority. It is not to tell us we are doing well and that we should do no more. Regulators do not apply stealth taxes. A stealth tax is a secret tax. The purpose of regulators is to create a transparent position so that people can make their submissions.

I was asked to give three examples. Our taxes policies actively drive our ability to create jobs and wealth. We have moved on insurance and on infrastructure on which we are spending 5% of gross domestic product, GDP, which is much higher than that being spent by any other country. We have moved on education and on Science Foundation Ireland. Those are four or five examples and I could go through each of them. In education, infrastructure, Science Foundation Ireland and in other areas, we are trying to get the productive sector of the economy up and running. I do not have to remind Deputy Kenny where we are in a global context in that few countries are ahead of us.

That is all very well but actions speak louder than words and the reality is not what the Taoiseach outlined. For instance, the Government's tax policies have driven 50% of taxpayers into the 42% tax rate. The Forfás report of 2003 refers to the cutting edge of competitiveness. In organisations sponsored by the IDA and Enterprise Ireland, there were 4,000 job losses in 2001, 8,000 in 2002 and 7,500 in 2003. These figures have not been plucked from the air but are identified in that Forfás report. The Taoiseach also said — it seems to be a hallmark of his Government — that there is a policy of containment by spending rather than by reform allied to spending. In other words, while the country has done very well from a number of points of view, it could have done so much better had the Taoiseach implemented a real policy of reform allied to good spending.

The Taoiseach made the point about tackling the professions and the uncompetitive practices which exist in that regard. When will a person be able to go directly to a barrister or a consultant without being charged through the nose for a letter of introduction? Does the Taoiseach hold out any hope that there will be an end to the rapid spiral of Government inspired costs? Will we see a situation where prices charged by Government bodies will not rise more than the rate of inflation unless there are compelling public interest reasons?

On the professions, we know this is an area of high cost. The Competition Authority, as Deputy Kenny knows, has produced its interim reports for each profession and will produce the final reports. On regulatory reform and the concept of regulatory impact analysis on legislation and other areas, we published a White Paper last January in which we are committed to having a thorough regulatory impact analysis on each area to ensure there are no costs or inbuilt costs and that we are not doing something to add regulation, red tape and bureaucracy to our systems. That is good. In terms of legal fees, what the Tánaiste has done in insurance and what we have done in PRBI and in other areas to bring down costs is working and will continue to work. On income tax and taxes generally, I could go into each area, whether it be corporation tax, personal tax and so on, but in terms of creating employment, all are quite attractive.

On the argument we could always do better, I will not argue with that because I always try to do better in terms of employment, growth and what this country is achieving. We should not always get ourselves caught up in expenditure. We are spending on the productive areas of the economy which we were not able to do for years. The reason we are spending 5% of GDP on productive investment is that, for generations, we were not able to spend anything on capital programmes. On many occasions, capital programmes were squeezed and reduced. We are now able to spend on capital programmes, and that increases expenditure because one is talking about a great deal of money. In the past six years we have spent €5 billion on roads. These are substantial increases. We have done the same in respect of water services, including the work done in Dublin Bay and in the west. All these works are costly but they are good and help the productive side of investment. We should not only look at them as a cost on public expenditure.

Regarding our debt-GDP ratio, I remember and I know Deputy Kenny would acknowledge that, when the Maastricht figures came out in 1992, we were on 120% or not far off it and were reducing it at that stage. The European model was to get to 60%. It seemed that it would be impossible for us, as part of the conditions for our entry into monetary union, to reach the 60% target. We are now under 30%. We should not become fixated on the fact we are spending money when we are reducing our debt and when the general Government deficit and the current budget deficit, EBR, are very low. We must be prudent and follow fiscal controls, and the Government is doing that. To criticise us in some way for spending, especially on productive areas, is not a reasonable argument.