Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

I will respond to two points. Mr. Dombrovskis said the rationale for the fiscal rules was the idea that the crisis resulted from irresponsible public spending and rising debt, etc. That is not the reality across the world or, in general, across the European Union. It certainly was not the reality in Ireland. In Ireland, pre-crisis, we had a debt-to-GDP ratio of 25%, which was as low as Germany's. The reason it exploded was because of a private sector banking collapse that was then taken onto the shoulders of the public. None of the fiscal rules that existed, if they had existed pre-crisis, would have made a difference to the crisis. The idea that it is a response to the crisis does not hold water.

In defending the democratic legitimacy of the process, Mr. Dombrovskis put significant weight on the fact that the Commission proposes and goes to the European Council and that the governments are at the European Council. What he did not say is that the voting process at the European Council is turned on its head. Instead of needing a majority or a qualified majority to pass the Commission proposal, is it not the case that when it comes to economic governance proposals, a reverse qualified majority is required? In other words, to reject something, there has to be a substantial majority of member states. How is it democratic to reverse either a simple majority process or, even worse, to have a reverse qualified majority process? How can it be claimed that there is endorsement by the Council for proposals when that process has been reversed in that way?