Mr. Mark O'Mahoney:

I will respond to the question on jobs. We are not saying we should advocate completely free trade for the sake of free trade. We are adopting this in terms of a strategic trade policy. It is somewhat trite, but we have to say that Ireland is a small open economy. We cannot rely on protectionist or isolationist measures. Our policy has to be to look to new markets and to open new markets. The reality is that the vast majority of growth will come from outside the EU in the next ten to 15 years. Therefore, we need to be looking for those markets and opening those markets for our companies. We cannot stay insular. There will be vulnerable sectors but it is important to remember that this trade deal will not be an overnight game changer as such. There will be a period of years in negotiation and a period of years on implementation, which should give the economy time to adjust.

In terms of ISDS, we have a very simple view on it. We believe that the Commission has been unequivocal in terms of its protection of the right to regulate in the public interest. Where we see the opportunity and the necessity for ISDS is when a company invests its resources overseas and, either through appropriation or change of policy, or whatever is the case, the contract terms are breached. It is a method of seeking recourse in the event of a breach of contract. The point is somewhat lost when talking about two developed economies such as the EU and the US. If we move to the next phase of investment in Asia or wherever else it might be, an ISDS provision will be needed in that contract to protect intellectual property and trade interests. This needs to be the standard set now for all future trade agreements. Similarly, we need to look below the federal level, the level of the State. Quinn Energy is a terrific opportunity for Irish companies. If an Irish company invests in any state and if in a couple of years there is a change in policy or there is a local election and suddenly the idea of keeping it local raises it head again, a large company may be able to go through the courts whereas a small company cannot. We think that an impartial arbitration mechanism has to be contained within the agreement. This relates to our concerns. Our concern is that we will get a TTIP-lite, that in another year people will get tired of it, political capital will be expended and it will be the larger companies which will benefit from a halfway-house measure. There has been so much invested in this that in order for it to benefit SMEs and smaller companies and to open markets, we have to go the whole way. We would also echo the sentiment that we need to take our time on it.

We should not rush it through for the sake of passing it because the decision would be regretted for years afterwards. A monitoring system should be put in place to ensure the provisions benefit SMEs. Transparency is always good and the transparency register at European level is a positive initiative in this regard. It suits policy makers, companies and small businesses to know who is lobbying on what issues.