for your considerations. first, public service commissioners must break the rules when setting the remunerations packages for skilled and talented professionals or employees that the public service must employ to deliver the services needed by the community. the public service commissioners and their respective governments must remunerate those with needed talent and skills equal to the market remuneration package others are prepared to pay for the same skills. in other words, the pay structure for talent and skills identified as essential for effective delivery of government services and policy goals must be different from the general public servant pay structure. ( may be a good “ break the rule ” option is to apply george orwell ’ s famous line in his book animal farm … “ all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others. ” so that we can restate it as “ all public servants are equal, but some public servants are more equal than others ”. ). whilst all this sounds possible, i must warn that it is not an easy option to take in an environment where there are strong unions representing the interests of their members and where affordability is not easy to come by. but social service delivery to the public suffers if those specialized skills are not available because the country cannot afford to pay for them. the second consideration is for the public service commissioners to be more creative in creating an employment environment that would attract skilled and talented people to want to work for the public service. i call these the non monetary factors, although funds must be spent to make them happen. public service commissioners must provide clean and attractive office environment for the officers to work in. this includes the provisions of proper equipments that can enhance productivity. shorten the length of time it takes to hire successful candidates : skilled and talented people cannot wait for months to receive their letter of acceptances. they will find employment somewhere else if we are slow to process their engagement. ensure that your newly recruited workers do not have to wait for months before they are put on the payroll and paid for their services. it is demeaning for a professional with family members waiting months for his pay to be processed. talented and skilled workers just cannot tolerate inefficiency that our bureaucratic procedures unfortunately require to be adhered to. public service commissioners and their supporting technical teams must continuously scan the market to ensure that the remuneration of those with talents that are required is within the market price for the skills and talents. this means actively involved in communicating with the professional bodies that represent the interests of

%, now one of the lowest in the eu. and over the same period ireland has had an average growth rate of around 7 %, by far the highest in europe. a government that pursues a sound fiscal policy will ultimately be rewarded. a government that does not do so will ultimately be punished. in the past, this punishment used to be imposed fairly promptly by markets : primarily the foreign exchange market, but also money and financial markets. this is no longer true for a euro area country. member states are now largely shielded from this discipline. but this does not mean that they are shielded from the effects of inappropriate fiscal policies. instead, the effects will now appear in terms of lost competitiveness, reduced confidence and, as a consequence, slower growth and higher unemployment. the problem is that these mechanisms operate slowly. so the symptoms of an inappropriate fiscal policy may only show up when the disease has already spread far and wide. and then the required medicine is likely to be more drastic and painful. in a monetary union there is no automatic wake - up call to alert a member state to its deteriorating state of fiscal health. there is no early warning system ; unless, that is, we create one in the form of a fiscal rule. a sound fiscal policy, and a good fiscal rule, is in a country ’ s own interest. in a monetary union such as the euro area it is also a truly common interest. an inappropriate fiscal policy in one country directly affects the other countries as the impact on interest rates will no longer be confined to one country but will spread across the euro area. the countries of the euro area now live in the same monetary house. when you live in the same house, you need to have some rules to ensure that the house is kept in order. and once you have agreed on the rules, you have to apply them consistently and in the same way to all. otherwise the members of the household will feel that they are not treated equally. each member will have his own reason for not obeying the rules. and in the end, you may not have viable rules at all. so my colleagues in the governing council and i are concerned, because we believe that fiscal rules such as those of the stability and growth pact are necessary in a monetary union ; and recent fiscal developments raise doubts about member states ’ commitment to these rules. how concerned should we be? how concerned should we be? how concerned should i be as a member of the governing council charged with the task