Deputy Stephen Donnelly:

I thank Mr. Carrigan. If he would also check what Oireachtas input there is to that, it would be very useful.

May I have some context with regard to what is being looked at? Part of my concern is to do with the fact that the IMF has a 50-odd year history of getting some things right and some things very badly wrong. It will admit that the reason it has got many things badly wrong, such as privatising education in Africa, is because a bunch of very smart theorists who sit in Washington fly out on planes to visit countries and, without living in the country in question for a while or without understanding the idiosyncrasies of the country, apply Chicago school of economics principles. Sometimes this worked, but much of the time it did not. The IMF would admit that one of its greatest weaknesses has been that it did not really understand the countries it was redesigning. My concern is that we will have a bunch of people sitting in Brussels who do not have the kind of understanding Department of Finance officials have of this country and that we will get some cookie cutter country-specific recommendations that may have sanctions attached to them, but on which there will not have been sufficient input from us and the Department of Finance team.

I have one other question, which is again slightly unfair. Mr. Carrigan has highlighted very well what has gone well in the Irish Presidency in terms of the various directives. What has not happened? I know the Presidency is ongoing, but within the remit of what the Department is reporting on, what would it have liked to and what did it intend to achieve that did not happen?