The conversation about the legacy of Deputy Enda Kenny has begun. The conversation to date has been somewhat one-sided. The official version is out there. Stephen Collins in The Irish Times this morning summed it up. He said:

By any yardstick Enda Kenny has been one of the most successful political leaders in the history of the State ... His crowning achievement was to lead the country of the financial crisis that brought it to the brink in 2010, and preside over a government that transformed it into the fastest growing EU economy for the past three years.

Fair play to you, Mick.

The vantage point from an editorial chair in Tara Street, a CEO's office in a bailed-out bank or from the backbenches of the Fine Gael Party is somewhat different from the vantage point of working class people in my constituency of Cork North-Central or from the vantage point of a homeless person in a doorway or a young mother trying to make the rent. Such commentators will be far more likely to point to the shocking social inequality the Taoiseach is bequeathing. It is an Ireland where the wealthiest 20% own 73% of the wealth and the poorest 20% own 0.2%, a differential of an incredible 365 to one. It is an Ireland where workers have had the stick taken to them. One in five are low paid, there is a gender pay gap of 14% and a two-tier pay is Government policy. It is an Ireland where a job is no longer a guarantee of a life free from poverty or even of a roof over one's head. This is the Ireland Deputy Enda Kenny has helped to shape. Every one of his six budgets were regressive and every one widened the gap between the rich and the rest. Did the Taoiseach fashion this island on his own? Of course not. He had many helpers along the line. Among them is the Minister, Deputy Donohoe; the two young princes waiting in the wings; and a sorry and now deservedly depleted Labour Party.

That is rubbish.

Social inequality on a scale never before seen in this State was achieved by them all, building on the legacy of the previous Fianna Fáil administrations. On the legacy issue, who was right - the hundreds of thousands of people alienated from the political establishment or the editorial writers? Perhaps both are right in their own ways, coming from completely different, opposing and antagonistic class viewpoints. Ultimately, however, history decides the question. If the backlash against social inequality grows in the years ahead, if the strikes and magnificent anti-water charges movement come to be seen not as a blip but as the forerunners of even bigger challenges to inequality and injustice, then I strongly suspect the honest historian will say the legacy of this Taoiseach was the social inequality which fed that backlash and which can change the political direction taken by the nation.

Let me reassure Deputy Barry the backbenches behind me, my party and colleagues such as the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, beside me, understand the social circumstances and social needs that are out there every bit as vividly as Deputy Barry.

I doubt it.

Deputy Barry has no monopoly on compassion. He has no monopoly on representation. The creed he outlines is the creed, to quote the Deputy, of antagonism. It is the creed of perpetual strife.

The Deputy talks about the view of historians. Historians and commentators will make their own minds up and we will respect and acknowledge their right to do that. As the balance sheet is being drawn up on the Taoiseach and the contribution of the last Government, what will be on the balance sheet are the many factors the Deputy refuses to acknowledge in his contribution. We have seen economic growth translate into job growth, social circumstances begin to improve, increased investment in services, schools and hospitals and we have seen our country begin to make a degree of progress the Deputy has always argued is impossible.

Why is he going then?

There are no princes or princesses in our party. We are a party that represents all levels of society, those with and those without. What we see from Deputy Barry and his party, day after day, is an attempt to advocate an agenda that does not represent or acknowledge the progress that has been made. I find it so ironic that the latest incarnation for Deputy Barry's movement is Solidarity.

The Deputy would not know much about that.

The last time I checked, Solidarity was a movement originating in Europe that sought to defeat communism but what we have from the Deputy is a movement and a party that is seeking to enforce some form of communism on people who deserve better. We are as aware of peoples' needs as the Deputy's party. We are aware of all of the challenges that still exist but we are also aware of what has been achieved, which Deputy Barry refuses to acknowledge. We are aware of what has already been secured and know that the best way to build on that is by trying to bring people together, not to continually divide them.