Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)

I congratulate Deputy Barrett on his elevation to the Front Bench and on his appointment to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Foreign Affairs.

The June summit concentrated on the ten-year European 2020 strategy for jobs and sustainable growth and on a package of proposals to help create financial stability in the markets of member states, which was appropriate because they are critical issues. Like Deputy Kenny, I was disappointed that the Taoiseach did not mention the Gaza conflict or the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, considering an Irish ship was hijacked and impounded in Ashdod by the Israeli authorities and nobody knows what has happened to its cargo. I thought the Taoiseach would have raised this but perhaps it was raised on the margins of the summit and he might mention this in his reply.

The summit was one of the most important European Council meetings in recent times as the Heads of State, including the Taoiseach, agreed broad parameters for the next decade and the decisions taken were far-reaching and important. I have a gripe about the manner in which we conduct our business in this respect. Today, three weeks after the event, we are discussing what happened, the conclusions and decisions but this is a worthless, empty exercise. There was no opportunity prior to the Taoiseach's trip to Brussels to tease out the issues in the strategy, engage in debate, elicit the views of the Oireachtas and hold the Government to account for decisions it was about to take, which we are elected to do. I do not say we would necessarily have failed to endorse the strategy but Members might have liked to have matters emphasised or dealt with differently. The Taoiseach referred to the omission of agriculture in the original proposals. He stated Ireland had worked to ensure the sector was covered and that all common policies such as the Common Agricultural Policy will be integrated in such a manner to become part of the overall strategy. The manner in which we conduct our business is unacceptable in any circumstances. In the context of the provisions of the Lisbon treaty this was not envisaged for member states. There is a great deal of work to be done in this regard in order that we do not have ourselves back in the House in these circumstances where the horse has bolted and we are debating in a vacuum.

The Lisbon strategy had as its objective the creation of the EU as "the most competitive economy in the world". Sadly, this did not transpire and many EU economies are in crisis with debilitated banking sectors and sharply increasing unemployment. Ireland is an extreme example of how a healthy economy can rapidly deteriorate and collapse and of how full unemployment can suddenly become 13% unemployment in a few years. Poverty levels throughout the Union did not improve over the ten years of the previous strategy. A total of 80 million citizens are living in poverty or at risk of poverty. It is proposed the number will be reduced by 25% in the new strategy to take 20 million people out of poverty. That target was also set in 2000 but it was not met and the position is as bad as it ever was. That was the acid test of the Lisbon strategy and it has failed.

The objects of the new European strategy for this decade are remarkably similar to the previous strategy. It proposes to boost competitiveness, productivity, growth, social cohesion and economic convergence and it sets out a vision of Europe's economy for the 21st century, while asserting the Continent can emerge stronger from the crisis, even though there was supposed to be no crisis at this stage. However, while the strategy and its objectives are laudable, as with its predecessor, how will it be ensured it does not go the same way and fail as dismally?

If Europe 2020 is to succeed, member states must co-ordinate their actions, act collectively, reform their financial governance structures and, above all, be honest with each other and provide correct data to EU institutions. They must impose regulation and supervision on the financial markets. However, it is difficult to ascertain how individual member states will implement these proposals, if at all. At the same, EU institutions must exert surveillance and monitoring over financial institutions and the economic policies pursued by member states.

The European Union must ensure that the budgetary policies of member states are in accordance with agreed principles and parameters and that the Stability and Growth Pact is implemented effectively, rather than simply being disregarded as has been the case up to now.

Without effective implementation and constant monitoring, Europe 2020 will go the way of the Lisbon strategy. It must be implemented as quickly as possible, with the agreement of the member states, and the principle of subsidiarity must not be breached in the process, while the sovereignty of each member state must not be undermined. I agree with the Taoiseach that what we are doing at present is a necessary sharing of responsibility. We are not, in fact, in breach of the principle of subsidiarity or of the sovereignty of each country. It is promised that the task force to examine economic governance will produce its final report in the autumn. We hope that will be robust and point the way forward.

It has been proposed that there should be a budgetary spring semester, and that member states would come together under the auspices of the Commission and indicate the broad parameters and guidelines of their respective budgets. That would be very worthwhile. One would think budget preparations were the third secret of Fatima in this country. The budget was always a secretive matter, I believe unnecessarily, but now that these matters will be discussed in Brussels every spring, we should have our own spring semester in this country in which the House would discuss these matters prior to the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance going to Europe and discussing them with their 26 partners there. This should be an opportunity to bring some of the thinking on the budget into the open and for the House to discuss it, rather than waiting for the Minister to reveal a budget that is seen to be the greatest mystery in the country. It would be much better if we conducted these matters in a proper and open fashion. Perhaps the Minister will consider holding our own pre-Europe budgetary semester in the House.

The headline targets that have been set are laudable. Nobody can object to a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy or to the five headline targets. The question is how we will implement them. How will we achieve a 75% employment rate for men and women aged from 20 to 64 years? The greater participation of young people, older workers, low skilled workers and the better integration of legal migrants will have to be teased out considerably if it is to take place. There is little in our present policies to suggest there will be any progress in that direction, particularly in the areas specified.

The second headline target is improving conditions for research and development, with the aim of raising combined public and private investment levels to 3% of GDP. How will that happen? We are less than half way to the target at present. There is no worthwhile private development and investment coming in and the State is too strapped for cash to provide it in this sector as well. It is obsessed with investing and injecting money into the banks, which is where all the money appears to be going at present. We have long way to go before we can operate meaningfully in the research and development area. The new Irish EU Commissioner, Ms Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, has the innovation and science portfolio so, hopefully, it will be pushed a little more strongly than it has been in the past with regard to this country getting involved in research and development.

We have a bigger problem, however. A huge amount of research is taking place in our universities but it is taking place in a vacuum. There is no link between the research that takes place, the design of a product and the marketing of that product. We are almost incapable of bringing research to the marketplace to generate employment and create wealth or to make it commercial. We are far behind countries such as Finland and Israel, which have a process and structures in place for providing the public and private investment, conducting the research, using third level institutions and linking them to industry, having creativity in the design models and then marketing them, in terms of bringing the product to the market and being commercial. We must do a huge amount of work in that regard but nothing is being done at present. Who will drive that?

With regard to reducing greenhouse gases, we have had the 2020 target for a long time. The proposal was to raise it to 30% if the situation warranted it but, given the Taoiseach's remarks, that will clearly not happen. He indicated that 2020 is the end of it. The ambitious targets are not there, which is disappointing. Of all countries, as Deputy Barrett said, Ireland has great potential with regard to new renewable energy sources. Investment and research are required in this area. Ireland has the potential to be the leading country in the EU with new energy sources so we should set new targets that are well in excess of the 20%.

Education will be our biggest problem. We have not reformed the education sector for a long time. It is stubbornly difficult to achieve reform in that area. Our examinations system is driven by rote learning, and there is very little creativity in our second level system. Many of the subjects that are necessary for the progress we are discussing are not studied. A few months ago the former chief executive of Intel, Mr. Craig Barrett, showed the statistics that prove we are far behind in studying mathematics and science and as a result are seriously hampered with regard to industrial output. That is the issue. That feeds into the area of research and the link between research modules that are carried out but being unable to bring a product to the market.

There is a long road to travel. The draft national reform programme must be published as quickly as possible. It must be finalised by spring next year so it must be published as quickly as possible to facilitate a debate on it and to ensure structures can be put in place to deal with the many challenges outlined in the Europe 2020 strategy.

See this speech in context