Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

I accept the Acting Chairman's advice.

I raised EU issues during the debate on the fiscal treaty referendum. Many of us felt the treaty was flawed and did not inspire confidence in the economy. I also said it was a rushed decision. Rushed decisions are bad decisions and this has been proved by a number of decisions taken in recent years to address the banking crisis. I heard the Taoiseach having a go at Deputy Shane Ross this morning regarding his proposal some weeks ago to defer the fiscal treaty referendum. When Deputy Ross put forward that proposal, polls showed that 54% of the electorate wanted the Government to take a calmer and cooler approach. The failure of almost half of the electorate to cast their vote in the referendum last week tells its own tale.

Economic growth and jobs should have been at the heart of the treaty instead of in the form of an add-in which indicated that action will hopefully be taken in six months time. That will be too late for many people. One can only hope that the change of government in France will provide some impetus to progress in this regard. Regardless of the positions taken in other member states, our Government should come out strongly on the issue. There was a great deal of reference during the debate on the referendum to Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 4 of the treaty, with many of us expressing concern that the additional €5.7 billion in cuts from 2015 would only deepen the recession. Commerzbank, a European financial giant, observed that the treaty was totally irrelevant to an Irish recovery and would have no major impact on it. Although I would not generally be on the side of such organisations, that assessment is particularly clear and instructive.

On the broader issue of economic sovereignty and the sovereignty of the State, I am greatly concerned by the treaty provisions which give powers of oversight to the European Union. The treaty bypasses the Dáil as the final arbiter of budgetary policy and, as such, is yet another agreement which signs away Irish sovereignty and freedom and assigns a power of determination over their affairs beyond that of the Irish people as represented by the Oireachtas. Governments will no longer have a free rein on broad economic policies in terms of when to spend to stimulate the economy. The elephant in the room is that this marks the first serious step towards a federal Union where national governments are subservient to the European Commission or the European Central Bank. I have no difficulty in others expressing support for European federalism - a type of united states of Europe - but my own preference is for a Europe of independent nation states. The global economic crisis, however, has led us to a situation where Germany is the only country in a strong position in these negotiations. The reality is that the entire European Union project is being moulded into the German model for the future. That is an issue deserving of our close attention. We should have been afforded more time and latitude to consider the ongoing debate on the treaty in Germany before asking the Irish people to make their decision thereon.

This morning we heard further proof that the German Parliament, across all political parties, is determined to shut the door firmly on any proposed deal on our bank debt. Many of us made the case during the debate that the treaty opens the door for the European Union to dictate precisely how Irish governments can spend Exchequer moneys and that the current troika arrangements may become a standard in the future. We are all in favour of good housekeeping and seek to adhere to it in our family and personal lives. No Member of this House is opposed to the country getting its financial act together. However, the other elephant in the room is that the treaty includes no provisions for the easing of the debt burden. I have referred to Germany, but the situation in Greece, France and right across Europe is changing by the day.

The Bill provides for the substitution of a new definition for the existing definition of the treaties governing the European Union. I emphasise the word "treaty", which implies a respect for difference and diversity. A community is about looking after each another, not having major players walking over smaller entities. I have spoken to a number of Members of the European Parliament who, although very pro-Europe, are greatly concerned by the manner in which democracy has been shafted in the past 12 months. Recent elections in various member states must serve as a wake-up call to us all. I take this opportunity to wish the Irish football team well in the European Championships. However, concern as been expressed for the safety of supporters in certain locations where we have seen the emergence of political groups on the extreme right. Resentment of the Union among ordinary European citizens is an issue that cannot be ignored by any government.

Section 2 of the Bill refers to the European Council decision of 25 March 2011 amending Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union with regard to the European Stability Mechanism. The reality, at this time, is that we have stagnation instead of stability, coercion in place of co-operation and authoritarianism rather than governance, all of which is leading to a stifling of growth across the Union. I remind the Tánaiste of his pre-election promises to burn the Anglo Irish Bank bondholders and his claim that it would be Labour's way or Frankfurt's way. I urge him and his Government colleagues to support the pro-growth voices across the Union. The Tánaiste must also support the reform of the ECB that would allow it to issue euro bonds.

Small business owners in this country are very concerned by the provisions of Article 3 which stipulate that eurozone members' budgetary position must be balanced or in surplus, with a structural deficit ceiling of 0.5% of gross domestic product. Article 4 provides that when the ratio of government debt to gross domestic products exceeds 60%, the member state in question must reduce that debt at an average rate of one twentieth per year. These issues were discussed during the debate and remain relevant to today's discussion.

We must have a broader debate on the European Union which allows us to examine in a positive way where we are going and whether we are making the right decisions. Many of us who raised genuine concerns in recent weeks were dismissed as cranks and worse. As an Independent Member of this House and a member of the Technical Group, my responsibility, together with my colleagues, is to ensure every proposal the Government brings before the House is scrutinised, challenged and debated in the interests of the people. I accept without qualm the democratic result of the referendum. However, it must be borne in mind that in my own constituency of Dublin North Central, for instance, 37.8% of voters rejected the proposal on the basis of very genuine concerns, while many others stayed at home. There is a disconnect between ordinary citizens and the establishment right across the European Union.

See this speech in context