Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Yes. Everyone who attends the Council meeting tends to view it from his or her own perspective. We would see the need for greater interconnection and the need for us, as an isolated energy player, to get more integrated, diversified energy sources. The approach taken is probably different for different countries. A new 2030 energy climate framework has just been published by the EU. That would probably be a backdrop to the discussion. It is probably fair to say that Ireland is still absorbing what has been set out, and I believe the European Parliament will comment on it. There are binding targets up to 2020, one being that 20% of energy is to be produced from renewable resources. It is now setting the targets for the next period, which include a 40% reduction in carbon emissions up to 2030 and that 27% of energy be produced from renewables. That will be a topic of debate, but I cannot say how the debate will go. We are still assessing that. We are very much dependent on other countries as to how they adopt these targets. Much of the interest in Ireland being a centre for the export of renewables is entirely dependent on what the UK might do. The debate on this will probably not reach many conclusions. The reports point to areas in which there is potential for efficiencies, better integration, better use of conservation methods and better examination of the transmission and distribution networks. They point to things we could be doing and they will probably arise in the debate.
Deputy Conaghan asked if the discussion about manufacturing jars with the new trends. It does not really, because with smarter, more intelligent mechanisation, Europe is becoming competitive again. We have more customised production that is closer to identifying what the customer needs and meeting it exactly in smaller runs, and that is where Europe feels it is getting back into the game. The application of ICT and smart infrastructure to the manufacturing process is where we are getting back in the game, but having the right conditions for that to emerge is crucial. I do not think our economy is lopsided. It is true that manufacturing has lost 20% to 25% of its employment base in the past ten or 15 years in Ireland and elsewhere generally. We have taken a big hit in our manufacturing base and we have expanded the services sector generally. This will be the first year that our service exports exceed our goods exports, which is hard to believe. We are unique in Europe in that sense. We have adapted well to the services opportunities and many of our exports are in business services. We are not lopsided in that sense in that we are ahead of the curve. There has been more rapid growth in trade in the sectors the Deputy mentioned and we have done well in them. It would be foolish to forget about manufacturing. As to how are we are fixed in terms of manufacturing, we have some strong sectors, food being one of them, which is on the verge of a very strong resurgence. We are very well fixed in some sectors. We continue to be very competitive in the pharmaceutical sector. As the patent cliff has hit some products, we have successfully moved in the bio-pharmaceutical sector and we are diversifying and staying relatively ahead of the curve. Our employment in the overall pharmaceutical sector is steady despite the convulsions that are happening within the sector. We are pretty well placed.
Where Europe can be competitive is in niches in the value chain, as opposed to the whole process. Companies are increasingly looking at a global supply chain. Parts of it can be done in one country with a competitive edge, and that is the way we are seeing this develop. There are some sectors we could not support and in which we could no longer be competitive but there are other areas of manufacturing in which we can be. That is where we can fit in. We published a document on manufacturing last year, the recommendations of which we will start to implement this year. This involves getting companies to look at where they can build their competitive opportunity.
On the Deputy Collins's point on food labelling, I know the Italians are worried about a voluntary system where there may be multiple ways of presenting contents, which could represent an indirect barrier to competition. It is not so much the principle of it; the concern is about barriers to trade as opposed to why there is labelling of the sugar content in the first place. That is the issue that will be raised in this context.
The Deputy made a fair point in highlighting that all our research spending is channelled through the higher education institutions, and she also raised this issue during the debate on the Estimates. To be fair, we require 30% funding for any of the significant budgets. They have to be able to open up to industry, but there is no doubt that there are some exemplars of good practice. Many people look to Germany, whose models are more diverse. It has technology centres that have nothing to do with institutes of higher education. We certainly need to be open to those opportunities. We are learning in this sphere. We are trying to make sure our spend, which is small in international terms, is effective. We are rated as having a good bang for our buck. We are feeling our way to make sure we spend money most effectively. It is an area that is certainly worth examining in terms of how can we open up that possibility
Tommy Murray has told me there is an Erasmus for entrepreneurships. That does not quite fit in with the Deputy's suggestion of a trans-European mentoring network. That is the sort of thing that Commissioner Tajani is very keen on and he is very much pushing the idea that there ought to be European networks for trade missions. It is something we can certainly pursue with the Commission.
The Deputy raised the issue of services. I fully agree with her that the services sector - as was the case some years ago and as we see in other countries - is one that offers very solid employment with a career structure, but that is not the case in Ireland.

There must be a way of reinventing career structures in some of these service areas.

Deputy Tóibín asked whether returns on manufacturing are sufficiently high to attract capital. Capital is attracted by asset plays. This has certainly been the case here, where some of the decline in our manufacturing and exports can be traced to the high speculative gains that were available in other plays. I refer to areas in which people could invest money and make shorter and more speculative gains. That is a genuine issue, which brings us back to the question of how one secures access to capital for sectors that offer a long-term and sustainable competitive edge. I do not disagree with the Deputy in that regard. What we are trying to do is to place new sources of capital in the marketplace through the National Pensions Reserve Fund, Enterprise Ireland and so forth. We have yet to see the impact of these measures. The only response we can have to this issue is to create access to capital for long-term, sustainable enterprises and enable more small companies to raise capital from capital markets. This is currently very limited in our case. I acknowledge that I have not given a full answer.