Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Absolutely. That is the context of my remarks. By any objective measure last week’s summit was a mess. At a time when the citizens of Europe are demanding a plan to reform and renew the European Union the Heads of State and Government did little more than argue about jobs for themselves. The debate was about personalities with vague platitudes being offered on substance.

With much of Europe threatened with deflation and already experiencing a weak or non-existent recovery, leaders discussed nothing which would change the direction of policy. Incredibly, a new President of the Commission has been nominated without any discussion of what he proposes to do in the job. Jean-Claude Junker has a well-earned reputation for being able to get deals done. In his years in the Council he repeatedly helped to offer ways of nudging disputes towards a resolution. That is important for one aspect of the Commission President’s role; what it is not, is a qualification for the job. The Commission President is supposed to be a leader with a clear vision of the future, and with a deep commitment to making the Union work for its citizens, not just for the political elite. As I said last week, Mr Junker was an active enforcer of failed policies which did Ireland real harm when he was chairperson of the Eurogroup. The orthodox policies which he supported are directly linked to the scale of the bank debts being carried by Ireland - large parts of which were converted into sovereign bonds last year by the Government.

It is amazing that the Taoiseach and Tánaiste supported Mr Junker’s nomination without asking him to at least acknowledge how the policies he supported had impacted on Ireland. Indeed, a clear statement of support for Ireland’s case for significant relief on bank-related debt is something which could and should have been sought. Mr Junker may well turn out to be a good Commission President. He may be a visionary. He may show leadership and a real connection with citizens. He may even be a forceful advocate for Ireland’s case. If he is any of those things it will have had nothing to do with anything he said before the Taoiseach signed up to supporting him. Neither is he the choice of the people of Europe. We should put an end to that nonsense. To claim that he is would turn the basic concepts of democracy on their head. I do not know the reason the Taoiseach did not raise debt relief in the context of the appointment of such a significant figure across Europe.

This was a major omission on the part of the Taoiseach. Mr. Junker was a legitimate candidate for the job and his record makes him a credible choice. However, to present him as inevitable and to refuse to discuss the substance of his programme as Commission President should not have been acceptable. The lead candidate system has no legitimacy and it did not lead to a pan-European debate and campaign.

It is a sad fact that in the sixth year of a pan-European crisis, with many of the foundations of the European Union badly damaged, there has been no substantive discussion about reforming the Union. The only matter which any member of our Government has talked about publicly is what job they might get for our next Commissioner.  The Tánaiste and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, are now in an open fight through the media for who will get the job. Each is pretending that he can deliver more for Ireland and each is targeting elements of the media to push his case. Of course not one word has been uttered about wanting to reform the European Commission, change its policy direction or do anything else of substance.

The media briefings of the Minister, Deputy Hogan, have said that he is has a promise of the agriculture portfolio and that this will mean big things for Ireland.  That portfolio is indeed worth having, but only if the holder of it has a commitment to fighting the non-stop effort to move Europe away from supporting farm families and rural communities. The Minister is the chief political enforcer of a Government that has targeted cut after cut at rural Ireland.  The basic educational, security and commercial services on which our rural communities depend have been singled out for cuts. Three years ago the Minister grabbed control of community development programmes and has since then used them as areas for easy cutbacks. This has gone so far that, as my colleague Deputy Ó Cuív has exposed, even a committee appointed by this Government has called for a reintroduction of many of the programmes that have been shut down. We can only hope that the Minister, Deputy Hogan, has a different set of priorities to bring to the Commission because the communities of rural Ireland cannot take any more of this. These communities scored very highly on European benchmarks in some programmes but the Minister proceeded to emasculate them.

The only argument pushed in favour of the Tánaiste being appointed to the European Commission is that it gives him a decent exit from the Government and it is claimed that he is so prominent among socialist parties that he will get a big job. Once again no one, either on the record or off the record, has said a word about how his appointment would be good for Ireland or for Europe. This is the logical extension of a situation where the Government has consistently refused to lay out any European policy. When something is agreed the Taoiseach tells us why it was a great decision but he has never set out what we want from Europe or what reforms we are looking for. This has now become critical because of the scheduled British referendum.

It has always been the case that British Euros-cepticism has been based on slogans and prejudice rather than a fair response to the European Union's activities. It is a simple fact that the UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, launched a campaign for renegotiating membership without deciding what he wanted to renegotiate.  Some 18 months ago he launched a review of competencies to study the facts of membership of the European Union and to set out areas where competencies should be repatriated to member states.  So far this review is behind time because in area after area the facts are proving to be stubborn barriers to the grand renegotiation the Tory Party has announced. Following public consultations and detailed studies, the bulk of the review has said that the British economy and society are benefitting from membership and would suffer if every country were to do their own thing. I understand the difficulties that were faced last week in finding a face-saving formula after the Prime Minister's grandstanding on the presidency of the Commission failed but it would be completely unacceptable if the European Council were to actually agree to the Tory Party agenda. Its vision of a simple free-trade zone is absolutely against our interests.  It would destroy the basis for large numbers of basic social protections and threaten real market access for our companies. Everyone is in favour of reducing bureaucracy and removing unnecessary regulations.  However, if the intention is now to begin the full-scale rollback of core protections, and this is unequivocally the Tory Party agenda, there will be massive public resistance.

It is one of the great failures of the European Union that it has allowed a false choice to develop that claims that a person can either be a sceptic or a federalist.  This is a superficial and damaging choice that misses the fact that the significant majority of people, even during this crisis, want the European Union to work better.  Over two thirds of citizens voted for broadly pro-European Union parties in the recent elections, here and throughout Europe. At a time of unprecedented crisis, of a challenge to the European Union's basic principles and the resurgence of extreme ideologies Ireland has to stop standing on the sidelines waiting for everyone else to sort things out. Where does Ireland stand in the debate on the future of Europe? What are our plans if Britain votes to leave the Union in three years' time? What are we going to do about the glaring holes in the response to the euro crisis? At a very minimum it is long past time for a formal statement of Ireland's European policy.  The last time this was done was before the Lisbon Treaty was ratified and events have changed radically since then.

The summit also discussed the situation in Ukraine and the continued efforts of elements supporting Russia to further partition the country. The decision that the leaders made on a new round of sanctions is fully justified by the facts. The signing of association agreements with Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova was an important and welcome conclusion to a process where their former imperial power did everything it could to undermine their sovereign choices to enter these agreements. The argument pushed by some, including Members of this House, that Europe is partly to blame for the situation in Ukraine because of these agreements is ridiculous.  The effort to imply a moral equivalence between the behaviour of Europe and Russia is offensive. These association agreements are freely entered into by the democratically elected governments of sovereign states.  They are about neighbours agreeing ways of helping each other and achieving sustained development.  In contrast, Russia's behaviour has been purely about an imperial power demanding its right to control the destiny of neighbouring states. Each of the three states has territory under the control of Russian troops and has been effectively threatened with permanent partition and part-occupation because of a refusal to follow Moscow's orders.  In each of the occupied territories there has been a clampdown on many civil rights.

As a small nation that has suffered the long-term impact of partition, we should reject the false relativism of those who try to avoid pointing out Russia's aggressive and unacceptable behaviour.  In an irony that must be commented on, Russia is currently demanding regional autonomy within Ukraine even though similar autonomy was abolished within Russia itself. The member states of the European Union are entitled to form close and peaceful relations with neighbouring states.  We must remain committed to this and follow up the many promises that have been made to these democratically elected governments. They have been attacked by an increasingly irredentist neighbour that appears to be operating an ideology which combines Cold War and Tsarist themes.

The conclusions of the summit on energy security are welcome because it is the first time in a number of years that a sense of urgency has been seen on this agenda.  It was mostly about taking stock, and the bigger decisions remain to be taken.  A good move by our Government would be to show its commitment by reversing its downgrading actions on climate change and sustainable energy.

It is very likely that Mr. Juncker will be confirmed by the European Parliament.  Once this is done leaders will meet again to sign off on other appointments.  The role of President of the European Council requires someone who has shown both leadership capacity and a willingness to respect all member states equally. The drift towards exclusive clubs of larger countries and the marginalising of the full Council has to end as it is eroding the legitimacy of the Union and is leading to bad decisions.  The failure to properly respond to Ireland's situation in 2009 was directly linked to a European Council that was too dominated by a small number of voices.

The Taoiseach has cited the European semester agreements as an important contribution to growth and jobs.  This does not pass even basic scrutiny as the recommendations agreed by the Council involve a further doubling down on the principle of austerity for all and growth through competition.  This is the same strategy that we have had for five years and it does not work.  Countries that could be helping stimulate growth are instead being pushed into being more restrictive. As was confirmed yet again at the weekend, there is a two-tier recovery under way that is seeing a huge number of people left behind.  The economy in Ireland and in many other countries needs a stimulus and the Taoiseach has signed off on recommendations that actually oppose this.

The Taoiseach has once again given us little more than a reading of the final communique from the summit.

He has continued his policy of not taking a position on any contentious matter and saying absolutely nothing on major issues of concern to Ireland. This strategy has to end. Ireland needs a reformed and renewed European Union to lead real growth. Nothing the Taoiseach has said, and nothing which was discussed last week, brings us any closer to this.

See this speech in context