Martin Mansergh (Tipperary South, Fianna Fail)

I will share time with Deputy Michael Mulcahy.

The Minister for Finance has set out in detail the context of the Bill and its provisions. Notwithstanding arguments made, I welcome what I understand to be the support of the main Opposition parties for the Bill.

European Union and euro membership are fundamental to our positioning as a country and our economic strategy. We have every interest in sustaining not only our euro participation but the currency itself. Every member is systemic to the euro, which means in recent times we have had to do what was necessary. Those who have been observing events will have noted that this storm has been brewing up for some time, certainly over the past two or three months.

There are, among certain high profile commentators outside the House, some who urge us to part company with the euro. In that context, I will cite the words of Kevin Gardiner, the man who invented the phrase "Celtic tiger" in August 1994. Mr. Gardiner, who is Irish, is the head of investment strategy for the Europe, Middle East and Asia region, EMEA, at Barclays Wealth. In a recent article, he noted:

Euro participation is part of the competitive package that initially made Ireland such an attractive place in which to invest. After all, if a large US company wants to invest in an English-speaking, financially volatile and euro-sceptic EU base outside the single currency, there is always the UK.

Precisely. There are echoes in Mr. Gardiner's words of my favourite historical quotation, which is from Thomas Addis Emmet. Answering a question at a parliamentary committee on the causes of the 1798 rebellion as to how Ireland could possibly go it alone economically, he replied: "America is the best market in the world and Ireland is the best situated country in Europe to trade with that market." These words sum up our position if not then, certainly now.

There is a necessity not only in Ireland but around the world to pull the financial reins tighter and get on to a more sustainable path. While we could have found ourselves in the same position as Greece, we have not done so. With all due respect to Deputy Mitchell, the reason is that we have taken many correct decisions during this crisis. The Deputy quoted one article from the Financial Times. One could find many quotations, particularly in recent weeks, in praise of the course being followed by Ireland.

The position has been the same for the best part of two years. Either we make our own necessary choices or have them imposed on us in a way we may not like or choose. Experience has shown that complying with the Maastricht criteria, while necessary, is far from sufficient because the buoyancy in many countries, whether one describes it as a boom or bubble or uses another word, has hidden a much more vulnerable situation.

We are not paying the Greeks but providing money that is pooled by the European Commission, which is lending to Greece. I do not believe there is any fundamental dispute that we have to show solidarity. If we do not hang together, we will hang separately and there are powerful speculative forces. I was interested in the argument as to the reason they justify their attacks on the euro, namely, that countries will either not be able to sustain the difficult policies they are imposing or having imposed on them or, alternatively, if they all do so successfully, they will depress the economy so much so that it is not successful. The attitude seems to be one of heads one loses, tails one loses. Nonetheless, I am hopeful that as a result of the decisions taken on Sunday, 9 May, the situation will gradually stabilise and turn around with further details of implementation.

There has been some debate inside and outside the House on the issue of European surveillance. The European Commission has put forward some propositions to which many governments have reacted. Budgetary surveillance is of two kinds, both of which we are accustomed to in some degree. One relates to specific budget measures which may offend against state aid rules. Often, in budget speeches, the Minister states he will introduce a certain scheme subject to the consent of the European Commission. Some weeks or months later, this consent is generally forthcoming and the measure is then implemented. The second is a more general type of surveillance which is reflected in the EU stability report that appears at the back of the budget booklet. This is normally three or four year projections on the sustainability of the public finances. There has not been a particular difficulty in principle. We announced months before this year's budget that we would be seeking €4 billion in expenditure cuts, and that was duly implemented.

I was surprised by the shrill nature of the initial Fine Gael reaction to those proposals. I wondered on radio whether it was connected with concerns about the NewERA document. I was re-reading it on the train from Tipperary on Saturday and it seems to involve quite a lot of additional borrowing which-----

See this speech in context