Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)

The brief proposal before us today is straightforward and Sinn Féin will not oppose it. However, when the Dáil last discussed the most recent round of IMF reforms in January of this year, Sinn Féin raised serious concerns about the continued domination of the IMF by the overdeveloped world. Wealthy countries represent 15% of the membership of the IMF. Even after the recent reforms we still control 60% of the voting rights. If Germany or France proposed such a voting arrangement in the European Union, no party in this House would support it.

The IMF is in urgent need of real reform and central to it is giving the developing world an equal say in how it is run. There is an argument that those countries most affected by IMF policies should have a greater say in how it operates. There is also a need for the IMF to abandon the use of policy conditionality attached to its loans. Clearly there is a need for a lender of last resort on the international stage and the IMF is an appropriate body to fulfil this function.

However, it should lend money solely on the basis that it has a reasonable expectation of the money being repaid. It should not be in the business of imposing any particular economic philosophy or democratically-elected governments in return for loans. The impact of so-called structural adjustment programmes in Africa and Latin America in the 1980s and 1990s has been devastating. Country after country has seen poverty rates increase, expenditure on education and social services fall and democracy undermined. Meanwhile, international corporations and local elites profit off the back of widespread misery and social dislocation.

Mali is a case in point. It is one of the poorest countries in the world in that 90% of its population lives on less than $2 a day. The consequences of the IMF's most recent involvement in it are stark. Utility prices rose dramatically following privatisation, cotton prices dropped heavily following trade liberalisation and development aid from the World Bank to the value of $72 million was blocked. All of this made the poor majority of the country even poorer. It is hardly a record to be proud of.

There is also a need for the IMF to seriously consider the amount of money it pays its senior management and staff. Dominique Strauss-Kahn received a salary $441,980 in 2010, more than the Presidents of France or the US receive. As if this were not enough, the former IMF chief also received an annual expense allowance of $79,120. To cap it off, his IMF income was tax-free. It is nice arrangement.

Considering the level of financial hardship imposed on ordinary people living in those countries who borrow from the IMF, these kind of excessive salaries, allowances and tax breaks are not only wrong, but undermine public confidence in the fund. As we know from our experience of IMF involvement in Irish affairs, the cost of borrowing money is crippling austerity and repeated bailouts for the banks. I take this opportunity to remind the House of the impact of the IMF austerity programme on ordinary citizens in this State.

It was not long ago that the parties now in government joined Sinn Féin in opposition to the actions of Fianna Fáil. There was a time when we were all in this together, standing up for the rights and welfare of ordinary citizens. The Fine Gael and Labour parties opposed the IMF-EU deal. Both parties campaigned aggressively during the general election campaign for a renegotiation of the agreement. They promised if elected to break with the failed policies of austerity and bank bailouts that were preceded by the previous Government. Yet, less than 12 months since the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party took office the very same politicians who once opposed the actions of the IMF and Ireland have become its biggest cheerleaders.

If anyone is in any doubt, he or she should look at the issues that have dominated the Dáil this week. A Labour Party Minister for Social Protection cut 15 separate social welfare payments and funding for community employment schemes. A Labour Party Minister for Education and Skills cut funds for disadvantaged schools. A Fine Gael Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government imposed a flat rate household charge and a punitive septic tank charge. A Fine Gael Minister for Finance increased VAT by 2% and a Labour Party Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform slashed 6,000 public sector jobs in single year.

These are the policies once pursued by the previous Government but now enthusiastically promoted by Fine Gael and the Labour Party, all under the watchful eye of the troika. Behind the political rhetoric are the real human stories of hardship and misery. The hodgepodge arrangement the delegates at the summit came up with is no solution to the crisis in Europe and the Minister knows that.

No solution that condemns people in Ireland and other countries in Europe to a lost decade of austerity and limited economic growth will work. Even the proposition to involve the IMF in this arrangement is already facing criticism in Estonia and the Czech Republic from the German Central Bank, Canada and Japan. They are not comfortable with the so-called solution that has been cobbled together.

The comments made yesterday to the effect that this is a referendum on Ireland's future in terms of the euro demean the office of the Minister. That type of approach is outrageous scaremongering.

Above all, it is inaccurate. At a time when people are weary and in despair and businesses are seeking a ray of hope, they do not need that type of irresponsible rhetoric from the Minister in charge of the most important portfolio in Government excepting that of the Taoiseach. I urge the Minister to reflect on that.

Where is the solution for the banking crisis, debt crisis and investment crisis - the three profound elements to this crisis? In regard to the first element, we know that many of the banks in the core European states are in serious trouble. Yet there has been no comprehensive stress testing of those banks, without which we cannot know the extent of their capitalisation requirements. On the second issue, we have no sense of how we can deal with the sovereign debt crisis faced by this country, Greece and others in a fair way that allows growth to take place. Worst of all, perhaps, we have no grounds for hope in respect of the third element of the crisis, because there is no strategy in regard to investment. We are not deploying the immense capacity of the European Investment Bank, together with the member states, to put in place a programme of regeneration.

This proposed technical reform of the IMF and the various botched solutions on offer are being presented to the Irish people in the context of our future in Europe and with a warning that failure to fall into line will lead to Armageddon. It reminds one of the announcement of a movie sequel, "If you thought the last one was bad, wait until you see the next one". That approach is simply irresponsible. I hope the Minister will focus henceforth on defending the interests of the Irish people, not by writing letters to Herman Van Rompuy but by raising these issues directly with our European colleagues in an effort to find a solution to this country's difficulty and the difficulties of people throughout Europe. Our focus must be on a collective resolution to the economic crisis that is devastating the people of Ireland and of Europe, and it must be done in a sensible and measured fashion.

See this speech in context