Joe O'Reilly (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and welcome our three guests. I apologise for my late arrival, having got delayed on the way, as I would like to have heard the presentations. In am very interested in the question posed by the Chairman. It is relevant and probably the most pertinent, and one that is on all our minds, that is, the question of the recapitalisation of the banks and how we are likely to fare. At the top of our agenda here is the whole issue of job creation. Nobody in the room needs any supporting arguments around that issue. It is a no brainer, it is what we have to be about. In that context, is the support for the youth guarantee scheme adequate, is more forthcoming and are we in a position to get it up and running? Can Europe do more to get job creation programmes in place? Is there more potential within ECB-ESM funding than we are fully exploiting from that perspective? In other words, are we doing enough on the domestic front, is enough being done in Europe and can more be done? There is nothing to bridge the democratic deficit, which is Dr. O'Brennan's area based on Senator Kathryn Reilly's question. He referred to a disconnect and that the best way to address it would be the creation of the perception in this country that Europe was proactive in the jobs area and could be relevant in the regard.
I would welcome a comment on the possibility of a UK exit. It would appear that momentum is gathering. Is Dr. O'Brennan optimistic that it can be halted? I would like to believe we will be fit to prevent the UK's exit and that ultimately it will not happen. Can we prevent it and, if not, what then, given that we have 50% of our trade with the UK and given the position of Northern Ireland? My constituency and that of Senator Kathryn Reilly staddle the Border. It would have enormous implications and would set the clock back were it to happen.
We are all aware from our televisions of what was happening in the Ukraine recently. There was an inevitability that as we push east and close to the Russian borders, Russia would react. It was hardly going to let us push in as far as Moscow in terms of western influence, trade links and so on without reacting and it is reacting in the Ukraine case. Could it be argued that we over-did it, that we pushed too tight or that we did not proceed by process, that we did it to the detriment of the lives of the people in the Ukraine and as a result, caused a combustion and anarchy almost, with no alternative government? That is a very serious question for the people who have to live there.
I know I am straying off to another issue but I will finish on this. I read a very interesting article by Tom McGurk in the Sunday Business Post last Sunday suggesting that energy needs and energy strategies are changing all the time and questioning our hypothesis that all or much of our energy policy is currently predicated on the premise that we will be exporting energy to a UK market. He questions that premise and said that because it is likely to get involved in the same strategies as the US in regard to shale and fracking, etc., we are unlikely to have an export market in the UK. Have the witnesses any thoughts on that issue? Is there a cohesive energy policy or strategy evolving in Europe as nuclear power changes? Is there a need to look at energy policy at a European level?