Ulick Burke (Galway East, Fine Gael)

We have been told on numerous occasions that the purpose of this rescue package for Greece is to stabilise the euro. The contributions by the 15 member states are headed by Germany with €22 billion, followed by Italy, France and the Netherlands with €14 million, €16 million and €9 million. We realise that those major economies in Europe have seen it as essential to support the euro. Given that it is Greece that is in trouble, one wonders whether it would be the same for all other countries in Europe if any of them had fallen into this plight.

In page 16 of the Bill, item No. 14 states: "This Agreement and any non-contractual obligations arising out of or in connection with it shall be governed by and shall be construed in accordance with English law". I find that strange on the basis that Britain is not a contributor because it is outside the eurozone, why is there this reference to English law?

Since the start of 2010 the Greek Government has shown its determination to address its fiscal difficulties through its three-year programme. One wonders how effective it can be when we see that it is a question of raising VAT to 21%, increasing taxes on alcohol, tobacco, petrol and diesel. A property tax is to be included and pensions are to be reformed. Most other countries in Europe have a far wider economic base than has Greece. What has it other than tourism? It has very little for export. Deputy Bruton made the contrast today in saying that while Ireland has many similarities and some of the same needs as has Greece regarding recovery, we have a very important export trade with other European countries and beyond. One wonders whether it will be possible for Greece with those efforts of reconstruction of the economy to extract itself from the difficulties in which it finds itself despite the fact that it is getting an enormous subvention of €80 billion over three years from the eurozone countries.

It is stated that the European Commission has imposed strict surveillance conditions on Greece for the first time. On many occasions the Bill provides for very interference by Europe - interference might be too strong a word. Repeatedly the EU, the Council of Ministers, the Commission or the ECB are all there on the sidelines. There is a series of watchdogs demanding serious input into the decisions made within the Greek economy. One wonders whether this is the first real establishment of the power of Europe, a power it has not had to date. This seems the first time it has the opportunity to flex its muscles and impose on member states its particular policies. I ask the Minister to comment on that.

The Minister and representatives of other governments have said that there will be a profit for the countries that have made these loans. They are bilateral loans on the one hand, while at the same time the governance is not between the lending state and the borrower. Europe is the dominant force. It needs explanation as to why it should be called bilateral.

The Bill provides that the Commission "shall open an account in the name of the Lenders with the ECB, to be used for processing all payments on behalf of the Lenders and the Borrower in the context of this Agreement". The Commission has the power with regard to the lenders' loans to the borrower. Will it have the same determination and power regarding the repayment of the loans? If there is default, what is the process then? I believe the Bill provides that the lender then goes after the borrower rather than the Commission, whereas in this instance it states, "The Commission shall open an account in the name of the Lenders with the ECB, to be used for processing all payments on behalf of the Lenders and the Borrower in the context of this Agreement." Does the reverse apply when the repayments are being made?

We have reached various critical dates in early 2010, including on 25 March, in April, and on 4 May and 11 May. Tomorrow, 19 May, is the crucial day with the reception of the loans. The Bill states:

The rights of each Lender under or in connection with this Agreement shall be separate and independent rights and any debt arising under this Agreement to a Lender from the Borrower shall be a separate and independent debt. The Borrower shall not give priority to one Lender over the other Lenders.

Surely as have said, there is an obligation on the Commission to move into that particular area and make a decision. Certainly no priority can be given to one rather than another. It is clear that with Germany providing €22 billion, it will have the first bite of the cherry.

In Ireland the Revenue always has first bite of the cherry in this regard.

Another issue I wish to bring to the Minister's attention concerns the scrutiny and surveillance by the Commission of activities in Greece. If we apply the same effort and endeavour to countries such as Ireland, Portugal and perhaps Spain, and if similar situations recur, there is a danger of a very serious adverse effect on the euro. Will the same degree of support continue within the EU?

We are talking essentially about the 15 members of the eurozone that are making contributions. Some member states, especially Britain, which has a huge deficit as we know from the very recent past, have not shown the same solidarity with the eurozone as have other countries that have their own currencies. One wonders therefore whether there is a two-tier Europe now because of the absence of support for Greece from these non-euro countries.

See this speech in context