Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. The Bill gives the Dáil the power to ratify the treaty on the stability, co-ordination and governance of the European Union. I previously welcomed the decision to have a referendum on the treaty, and I think it is vitally important. The treaty, appropriately better known as the austerity treaty, contains a number of blackmail clauses and this is the way the Irish people will refer to the treaty when they decide to vote for or against it on 31 May. The treaty contains a number of provisions and it has been said they simply restate what is already there under European law. It provides for balanced budget rules to ensure that no state can run a deficit in excess of 0.5% and ensure that states must run a surplus if possible. It will also require Ireland to reduce our national debt over 20 years, which could mean €4 billion to €5 billion reductions in our national debt every year after 2015. This is to come on top of any of the austerity that the Government proposes to bring in. We will have to find this €4 billion to €5 billion. The treaty enshrines austerity for the future of Ireland and enshrines austerity for those people who have already suffered under four years of punishing austerity. The treaty contains automatic penalties, where cases can be brought to the ECJ against member states that breach these rules, which can impose fines should they be found to be in breach. This could have significant implications for us.

When Government Deputies spoke this morning about the Bill and the provisions contained in the treaty, they mentioned the three aspects of the treaty that I have just outlined. It is most telling to list some of the things they did not mention. The treaty contains a provision where if action is initiated against countries for breaching the rules, a reverse majority vote can be used by those countries to prevent the ECJ taking action. This means, in effect, that France and Germany, along with one or two smaller countries, would have the power to block the ECJ taking action against the State. This is interesting because we know that rules in the Maastricht treaty on government deficits and the Stability and Growth Pact were first breached by France and Germany in 2001. They ignored those rules and the fact that they were in breach of the treaties. I imagine that in future, the first countries to breach these new rules will probably be France and Germany because we have seen in recent years that they have the power and the might and that they are taking the power unto themselves.

They will be able to block the European Court of Justice in future from investigating their breaches of the rules.

The Government failed to mention that article 10 of the stability, co-ordination and governance, SCG, treaty, specifically references the stability mechanism to be established within the Union and the ability of countries to access the stability mechanism. This is also mentioned in the preamble to the treaty where a state which fails to ratify the stability and co-ordination treaty will be unable to access the stability mechanism when it is established under that treaty. This shows that this treaty and the treaty establishing the European Stability Mechanism are intrinsically linked and these treaties are complementary to each other. You cannot have one without the other. Both treaties are designed to operate in a complementary manner and are independent and each treaty acknowledges this to be the case.

The Government duly obtained the advice of the Attorney General on the SCG treaty. Having received it and having considered it at Cabinet, the Dáil was informed on 28 February that because the treaty was outside the EU architecture it would be necessary to put it to the people by way of a referendum. I respectfully agree with the tenor of the Attorney General's advice. The SCG treaty is clearly outside the ambit of Article 29.4.3o to 29.4.8o of the Constitution. Therefore, it must be assessed by reference to the provisions of the Constitution governing domestic competence and decision making, fiscal and budgetary matters and for that reason it will be put before the people.

We need to examine the European Stability Mechanism treaty as well. On 9 March I wrote to the Taoiseach outlining my concerns in regard to the linked nature of the two treaties in regard to the European Stability Mechanism and to date I have not received a response other than an automated e-mail reply acknowledging receipt of the letter. On foot of that, I lodged a plenary summons with the High Court last Friday seeking a number of remedies from the court and for it to consider a number of question in regard to this. These questions are relevant to both treaties.

Under the ESM treaty a new permanent €700 billion bailout fund, called the European Stability Mechanism, will be set up with the power to call on Ireland, at any time of that's institution's choosing, to make capital contributions of up to €11.1 billion in various forms of capital, including cash. This is equivalent to approximately one third of Government tax revenue for 2011. This figure can be increased at the sole behest of the ESM at any time in the future with no limits set in the treaty as to what may be sought from member states in the future. In effect, the ESM can direct the State to raise sovereign debt, give the money it raises to it and then it can decide where, when, whether and how it is spent. Therefore, Ireland will not be in a position to control decisions regarding the use of sovereign debt raised by it. What are the implications of this? What if a majority of voters in the May referendum on the fiscal compact treaty vote in favour of imposing permanent austerity rules on the country in order to get access to a proposed permanent eurozone loan fund only to discover that the treaty to establish the fund is possibly illegal under EU law and unconstitutional in Ireland and may never come into force?

I have asked the court to examine the legality of the amendment of Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union before any further action is taken by Government to approve that amendment. That amendment is being adopted under a so-called simplified revision procedure which I believe is legally wrong. The changes being proposed are so fundamental they should go through the ordinary revision procedure of the EU to ensure proper democratic scrutiny. They should also require the approval of the Irish people.

I have asked the court to consider whether the ESM treaty is in breach of existing EU treaty principles which have been approved by the Irish people in previous referenda and which are now therefore part of our law. In addition, I have asked the court to decide whether the State can ratify the treaty establishing the European Stability Mechanism without first having the approval of the people in a referendum. The Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union signed on 2 March 2012 is intertwined with the ESM treaty. Each is dependent on the other. If I am right in my belief that the ESM treaty is unlawful then there is a question over the validity of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union.

I call on the Government today not to announce a date for the referendum on the treaty on stability, coordination and governance of the Union until the court can examine the legality of the amendment proposed and give its decision. I have asked the court to consider that question. I have asked the Taoiseach to respond to the summons and I have not received a response but I hope he will respond in the coming days. It is vital we do not ask the people to vote on the treaty on the proposed date of 31 May until after these questions have been decided. In effect, we are asking the people to ratify a treaty that contains provisions that may well be illegal under our Constitution and under EU law. That is a very important question that needs to be decided. I urge the Government not to announce a date to allow these questions to be considered and then, if necessary, to put these questions in total to the Irish people so they can have their say. I urge that the people should not be blackmailed in the run up to the vote on the stability, co-ordination and governance treaty by the use of the blackmail clause and the inherent threat - although the Government may not mention it during the campaign - that if we do not ratify this treaty, we will be unable to access funds in future.

See this speech in context