Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

The French electorate, which appears to intend to vote against the EU constitution, is concerned about the notorious services directive with its negative implications for public services and workers' rights. We have not fully debated that directive in this House. The Government supports it but my party opposes it and seeks a debate and a vote on it. The so-called compromise wording reached at the summit is not acceptable because it is internally contradictory. One cannot impose deregulation of the services market and maintain essential social protections. This is no more than a big lie.

There is speculation that the price of French consent to the constitution may be the introduction of tax harmonisation in the EU. Tax sovereignty is said to be one of the Government's red line issues. Commentators have observed that this presents the Government with a Sophie's choice. I anticipate that it will cave in on this as it has on other issues, for example, its supposed cornerstones of independence, foreign policy and matters of criminal justice. Will the Minister address the Government's position on the services directive in his closing remarks?

Sinn Féin has long called for Stability and Growth Pact reform because the existing rules have had negative consequences for Ireland by preventing public investment for social and infrastructural development. The reform package endorsed by the summit is an admission of this. Unfortunately, the new reform proposals are not acceptable because they will encourage member states to dismantle social security and the welfare state to obtain a lower rating in connection with the deficit procedure. Ireland may be better off withdrawing from the Stability and Growth Pact or, in any event, developing a credible and workable alternative for dealing with the issues of inflation, budget deficits and public debt.

At the summit meeting, the EU leaders agreed to adopt an EU Common Position on UN reform. At this occasion, I congratulate the Minister on his role in reporting to Kofi Annan on the UN reform proposals from different countries. However, it is unacceptable that there is an EU Common Position on UN reform. We must examine the position of many countries within the EU in recent years, and the Vilnius 13 who supported the termination of UN weapons inspections to make way for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. We should not be required to converge our policies with countries who have treated the UN and the will of the international community so contemptuously.

If the Government insists on adopting a Common Position, it is crucial that there is a substantial debate on UN reform in this House in advance. The Minister should give an assurance that he will consult the people and public representatives and that there will be a substantial debate in this House prior to deciding the future of the UN.

See this speech in context