Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

Like many recent gatherings of senior Ministers from EU member states, last weekend's meeting of the EU Council was marked by the distance between its rhetoric and its impact, as well as by an increasingly apparent disregard for the well-being of the citizens of Europe. My party believes that the endorsement by the European Council of the controversial EU services directive, subject to a revised proposal from the European Commission, is a bad deal for Irish workers. That point was made by Sinn Féin last February, when the European Parliament discussed the directive and gave its verdict on it. I am saying it again today. Despite the decision taken by the European Council last weekend, I believe we need a greater mobilisation against the directive. We need to intensify that mobilisation in advance of the final vote on the directive in the European Parliament.

Sinn Féin repeats its opposition to the EU services directive. It has argued vociferously that the directive will, in effect, commercialise almost all the services in the EU and deny millions of people the quality public services they deserve. It represents a blow against workers' rights and social protections. It gives me no pleasure to state that Sinn Féin's analysis of this matter has been proven right so far. In recent years, there has been a steady drive to promote a right wing agenda in Europe. The effect of that has been to prioritise profit at the expense of workers' rights and public services. The services directive is another consequence of the thirst for private monopolies.

I note the Taoiseach's comment:

At last year's spring Council we relaunched the Lisbon Agenda, with a renewed emphasis on jobs and growth. We also agreed that the agenda needed to be more strongly rooted in national civil and social partnership processes.

When the Taoiseach spoke about the conclusions which were reached by the European Council, however, he did not mention that aspect of the Lisbon Agenda. It usually becomes an afterthought when the Lisbon Agenda is raised, even though that should not be the case. If the Lisbon Agenda is to have the impact it is supposed to have, this aspect of the matter should be to the fore during our discussions on the agenda. I urge the Government to ensure that this element is prioritised when future discussions on the Lisbon Agenda take place.

I ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs to explain to the House why Ireland is not an active persuader against nuclear power. Why did Ireland not join Germany and Austria in rejecting the nuclear option at the Council meeting? How can the Government justify the EU's ongoing pursuit of a flawed and economically inefficient option that will cause substantial problems for future generations over many centuries? No society in the world has found a successful means of addressing the issue of nuclear waste. We are leaving a legacy for future generations. I remind the Minister that the Commissioner for Energy, Mr. Andris Piebalgs, said:

Countries with expertise are well placed to replace existing plants or build new stations but we should not say that nuclear energy will meet all three objectives cheaply and efficiently. It has huge costs and lots of complications, including the issue of waste and final storage.

The three objectives to which Mr. Piebalgs referred were security of supply, sustainable development and competitiveness. I urge the Minister to join those who are making the case for sustainable and renewable energies, rather than supporting the European Council's call for new generation of nuclear power. Ireland should act as a persuader against nuclear power.

See this speech in context