Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)

I have much to respond to in my time of five minutes. I will begin by addressing some of the points and remarks of the Deputies opposite, whom I thank for participating in the debate. I also thank the Deputies on this side who have sat through the debate, even though there has not been an opportunity for them to contribute. It is to be hoped this can be arranged next time.

Deputy Donnelly said our so-called EU partners are simply protecting their banking institutions and this is one way of looking at it. However, such a view demonstrates a lack of understanding of the situation in the member states and the motivation for much of the lack of understanding of our position and, indeed, the position of other member states in a similar situation. If one considers which European prime ministers or Heads of Government have been calling for so-called burden sharing or burning of bondholders - two phrases I really loathe - the first person who comes to mind is Chancellor Merkel.

I have heard Deputy Donnelly and others refer to the fact that the German Government is simply protecting the interests of German banks. This is not an accurate point because the reality is that domestic forces are at play. One could criticise the understanding of German taxpayers with regard to the eurozone crisis but there is no doubt that the German leaders are currently responding, rightly or wrongly, to the deep concerns of German taxpayers who are afraid that the burden which is being shouldered by the Irish, the Greeks, the Portuguese and, potentially, by others will ultimately end up being their burden. Whether we agree or not, one has at least to understand the viewpoint of the German taxpayers if one wishes to arrive at a solution. In my view, there is a lack of understanding in much of the commentary in this country, in particular in much of the debate in this House.

Deputy Micheál Martin said since January there has been a lack of progress across the eurozone. This is an extraordinary comment when one bears in mind that just last March, a whole range of measures were agreed. These are significant measures which I argue should have been in place since the Maastricht treaty. These include measures such as economic governance and the euro plus pact, for example. I refer to some of the essential elements of the agreement on economic governance, such as surveillance of budgetary positions, surveillance and co-ordination of economic policies, a speeding up and clarification of the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure, requirements for budgetary frameworks, the critical prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances, enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic imbalances in the euro area and, critically, the enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area. These are significant steps that have been taken since this Government took office. It is disingenuous and quite a shift in viewpoint for Deputy Martin, who was such a strong proponent of closer economic co-operation on these matters just some months ago, to dismiss it now as insignificant or to say that nothing has happened in the eurozone or across the member states since January. This is simply not true; it is factually incorrect. These developments with respect to economic governance, commitments on competitiveness and moving the European economy forward are probably the most significant steps that have been taken in the eurozone since it was established.

I refer to some of Deputy Mac Lochlainn's points. It is all very well and all very simplistic and populist to say that austerity measures and cuts will not solve our problems. However, I must pose a question I have asked of Deputy Boyd Barrett in the past. Ireland needs to have in place a programme of funding to keep this State ticking over. Deputy Boyd Barrett alluded to working people and Deputy Joe Higgins also frequently refers to working people. However, what about the people who are not working, the 450,000 or so people who are on the live register? If we turn our backs on this programme next week, who does Deputy Boyd Barrett propose will pay the dole payments which those people will be expecting to collect next week? Who does he expect will pay the pensions?

See this speech in context