Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Tánaiste and congratulate him and his colleagues on their work during the Irish Presidency, particularly on the level of activity generated among his colleagues in the European Union in focusing on the issues affecting us all directly. Will he elaborate on the issue of youth unemployment and the extent to which satisfactory targets have been agreed to, are attainable and being attained? When can it be expected that we will see a manifestation of the success of the programme?

The Tánaiste referred to technology, the digital agenda and the EU-US and EU-Japan trade agreements which are of considerable importance to the markets in Europe, the United States and Japan. We discussed this issue with Mr. Lidington this morning. To what extent is the European Union prepared to capitalise on its significant consumer market of 450 million people? Specifically, to what extent can we expect to benefit from the agreements?

The Tánaiste made a passing reference to the banks' mistakes. Can we assume that it might be no harm if the banking system, here and throughout Europe, recognised that one does not repair the mistakes of the past by going in the opposite direction to such an extent as to potentially cause future damage? To what extent are the ECB, the Tánaiste and his colleagues in the European Union cognisant of the damage that has been done? In the past an economic downturn tended to affect individual countries, regions and sectors of industry. In current circumstances the problem features right across the board. It affects each country, to a greater or lesser extent, as well as the community at large. It is not a case of correcting particular mistakes overnight; consequently, there is a need for a more co-ordinated approach.

Deputy Eric Byrne raised two issues this morning with Mr. Lidington. One concerns an invasive and insidious problem that is damaging the concept of the European Union and the European project. This has been happening for a long time. Euroscepticism is developing and growing to a significant extent in some member states, some within the eurozone and some without. It is not fair to say it is entirely a eurozone problem because it extends beyond it.

Social unrest and upheaval were referred to this morning, as were the development of the hard right and hard left in unison and the consequences for all those who were likely to be affected. This is not a new trend either, as the Tánaiste, as a good historian, knows well. It was prevalent in Europe in the 1930s during a very similar set of economic circumstances. Unfortunately, Europe did not respond well at the time. It turned on itself and attempted to devour itself, with catastrophic consequences. The United States which had the same social and economic problems at the time dealt with the matter in a different fashion. It was led by a leader who spoke for the people, brought them together and coerced and cajoled them into recognising that there was strength in unity and cohesiveness. He led them, in very difficult times, away from the path that Europe took. To what extent do our current European leaders, both within the eurozone and without, recognise the similarity between the two sets of circumstances and the need to respond, not in the manner Europe responded in the past but in the way the United States responded?