Aideen Hayden (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank all of the presenters for being here today. It is a very interesting and important subject and one that breaks some of the historical barriers with regard to what Europe is about and where Europe stands. We all know that there are different welfare systems within the European Union. On a basic level, we have the Scandinavian model to which Dr. Rigney referred. There is the more Anglo-based model, of which Ireland is a part, and then there is the social European model, which is a more family-based model of welfare. It is very important to recognise that there are significant differences in the way different European countries do business when dealing with issues such as welfare and unemployment. That is part of the reason this debate is so important.

I do not agree with Dr. Rigney's assertion that these indicators may be a useful tool but have no teeth. From my own personal experience at a European level, I have found that the difference is one of language. For example, a French person might say "J'insiste" and what he or she means is "I am asking you". There is a difference of language here. The fact that as European nations we are sitting around and talking about these indicators in itself has a moral persuasion which in European terms means an awful lot more than the same language when used on the floor of the House or Senate of the United States. That needs to be acknowledged.

I must agree with my colleagues on some of the points made, and I welcome the comment of Deputy Kyne on the OECD report, which has identified Ireland as a country that has, in spite of the daily rhetoric, hit better off people a lot more than it has hit poorer people. That needs to be acknowledged. In response to Dr. Rigney's comments on why Irish people do not choose Bavaria but go to Sydney, Alberta and so on, that is a lack of recognition of the history of Irish people and their patterns of emigration, which have absolutely nothing to do with the current crisis, and the pattern is also due to the fact that we never really got on top of learning languages. Like our nearest neighbours, that has prevented us from accessing some of the European opportunities.

I completely disagree with Dr. Seán Healy on the point that somewhere along the line, following what he called the 2008 crisis, we suddenly had reductions in social expenditure and social services. I am not talking simply in an Irish context, but in a Europe-wide context. It is important to take our heads out of Ireland alone and look more generally at what was actually happening on a global basis in 2007 and 2008. Globalisation was a significant factor in explaining why we arrived where we are today. I am sure the witnesses are all aware of the concept of asset-based welfare. The reality is that all countries, including Scandinavian countries, were looking at aging populations and increased costs of welfare provision and were moving towards asset-based welfare, which is the concept of enabling people, through the acquisition of assets, to look after themselves into their old age. I could cite a pension report in this country going back a few years - I cannot remember the exact date, although I am sure Dr. Rigney would know better than me - in which serious concerns were raised about that exact issue in Ireland: how are we going to fund the ageing population?

A similar debate took place all over the developed world. If we want to talk about the global crisis and why we ended up where we did, it is wrong to say that the cause of the 2008 crisis was entirely a profligate drift in public finances. It was the same drift in public finances, if the delegation does not mind my saying so, that happened on a global basis.