Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

I will speak about an area where the Opposition has played an important role, that of Ireland's role in Europe and how critical it is to our current position. Modern states were created on the social market economy model, with freedom for private enterprise balanced by the safety net of the welfare state. That model has served the world, particularly Europe, successfully in the period since the Second World War, but it has failed to keep pace with the changing world around it. That is the current reality. The most profound change in the world has been brought about by globalisation and we see that in the financial crisis. A bank collapses in Washington and its impact is felt in Waterford. We live in a global village. The problem is bigger than any one country. It is systemic and global.

The under-regulated use of the so-called innovative financial instruments, poor risk management and poor national financial regulations at the heart of the financial system have exposed the international economy to real damage. All over the world lenders are unwinding credit, causing massive pain to businesses and households. Consumer spending is shrinking across the developed world. We see that on every street in Ireland in the destabilising impact of falling liquidity. Investment cannot be sustained by the private sector in the face of shrinking lending to businesses. Jobs are being lost across the developed world as credit is being withheld. We know that this is the case not only in Ireland but elsewhere. In this regard I would not necessarily include Australia as a model we should be following.

A small open economy such as Ireland is particularly vulnerable. The instability which is disrupting the world's largest economies cannot be avoided on this island. I want to make a simple point. EU membership represents for Ireland a vital support system at a time of economic turbulence. We are undoubtedly in a very difficult economic position but our situation would be immensely more difficult if we did not possess the range of advantages that EU membership confers. Most of the parties in this House have seen that as a fundamental truth. Most of the parties, Opposition and Government, have worked on that reality. That is why it is so vital now that we do not allow a shadow of a doubt arise as to our commitment to being at the heart of the European Union. It is why it is imperative that we dispel the undoubted uncertainty that our rejection last year of the Lisbon treaty has created and why the Government must finalise legal guarantees that last month's European Council agreed to offer to Ireland on taxation, defence and ethical issues and give the people of Ireland the opportunity to ensure that we will retain our position in Europe. It is why there is a challenge here, not only for the parties in Government but for all of the parties in the House to become part of the crusade to ensure that we stay at the heart of Europe.

Once issues of guarantees have been resolved and the concerns of the Irish people addressed, it will be in our best economic interest to ratify the Lisbon treaty. I suggest that we should do so handsomely by ratifying it with the same sort of numbers we ratified the original treaty to join the European Union. This will not provide the single solution to all of our economic ills but it will represent a clear signal that Ireland wants to remain at the heart of the European Union. If we are to make progress and if we are to rebuild in particular on the jobs front — I listened to contributions of the Deputies opposite — we have to stay at the very heart of the Union. We have to dispel the clouds that have gathered over this country's position in Europe since 12 June 2008. We have to be able to say to those people who will be involved in the future in foreign direct investment that Ireland is still open for business as the entry port to Europe.

The only hope of influencing the turn of world events is by working together with European Union colleagues. We can only ensure that Ireland's interests are represented in the international response to the crisis by being at the heart of the Union. Even the most deluded Eurosceptics must recognise that at this time. I cannot understand some of the rhetoric I listened to in recent days, not only in this House but outside it. People who resolutely have argued for the past 35 years that somehow Europe is inimical to us have blinded themselves to the truth that it is vital to our future. Those who refuse to see this essential truth put at risk our national well-being. This is not a time to consider ourselves as À la carte Europeans. Ireland needs to be a core member of the Union if it is to have an influence.

To take one example, the Union is currently working on the area of financial regulatory reform. I accept the analysis that regulatory reform in this country did not perform well and has not performed well internationally. The new supervisory arrangements will have to be supranational as well as national in character. The only way that we can influence the way they are constructed is by being at the heart of the Union.

Within the European Union finance Ministers and the Commission are currently working intensively to implement reforms that will address some of the problems the financial turmoil has exposed. We have to be part of that work, we cannot be semi-detached from it. Eurozone membership is another area of critical importance. It has been critical to providing the stability and security to the Irish economy at this difficult time. The single currency has provided a stable foundation in Europe in these times of financial turmoil. Where would this country be if we were not part of the European Union and of the eurozone?

We must not let a sense of national hubris cloud our vision. We saw plenty of examples of hubris last June as we came up to the referendum. The delusion that we could go it alone and that somehow we in Ireland were impregnable has been blown away by the perfect storm that has ripped through the international financial services. I am not suggesting that people should be convinced to vote "Yes" for Europe on the basis of fear, but I argue the case that we should be willing to vote "Yes" for Europe on the basis of the logic of the argument.

Yesterday's Financial Times reported that more than 80,000 workers lost their jobs across the United States and Europe in just one day. Some 80,000 families were cast into turmoil. Irish workers and their families can only be protected if we continue to attract investors. Members on all sides of the House have seen the misery, fears and concerns that exist about the threat of job losses.

However, just as currency traders choose safe currencies in troubled times, so too will major investors look for stability and security in making investment decisions. We have to maintain our position at the heart of Europe if we want to remain an attractive location for investors. I am fearful, as I believe are people who think about this, that our decision on 12 June last came at a very significant cost. It raised questions in the minds of people on boards who make investment decisions. We all know that reality to be the case. High value technologies are the area that we have to attract into this country because of our cost structures. Such investments will only be made if those who are making the investment decisions believe that we are going to stay at the heart of the Union.

Voting "No" last June was not cost free. It raised questions about this country and about where Ireland stands. It did real damage to us in the area where we are pursuing investment decisions. Admittedly, the so-called employment pipeline is quite full at the moment, but what has been the effect on investors who have not yet come to us? Goodwill that has taken 35 years to build up was lost among our European partners. How do we put a value on that? Goodwill is something that one cannot easily dispose of, yet we have done so. This all comes at a strategic cost. Less immediately measurable questions about our place in Europe have been placed in the minds of those who look from outside the EU for a place to invest. This has a cost in jobs. I shall offer the House a couple of examples. We know because we have had contacts from a number of investors in the United States — a small number of investors — wondering what are the effects of the decision of 12 June last. What we do not know, and what we can only surmise, is the impact of the doubts being put in the minds of those who have yet to make their investment decisions. Are we even in contention for investment?

See this speech in context