Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)

The Taoiseach mentioned officials and so on. The Canadian Prime Minister put it succinctly when he said we were four years into the crisis and still trying to get a sense of what the game plan was at European leaders' level. That is what external commentators are saying about the succession of European summits. Every summit in the past 15 months was said to be a breakthrough in dealing with the crisis only for hopes to be dashed within months. Now Spain is on the precipice. Its budget Minister has said the doors to the markets are no longer open to Spain.

The Taoiseach raised the issue of the ESM and said that in his view it should be used and have its mandate changed to facilitate the recapitalisation of and aid banks. We support that, but why are we debating the ESM legislation today without that mandate? The German Chancellor has opposed changing the mandate of the ESM to facilitate the recapitalisation of banks. Did she say this to the Taoiseach in her conversation with him this week? He said he had advocated this change to the mandate. Did he say this to the Chancellor and what did she say in response? What did she say to him about a decisive intervention to change what was happening at European level? We did not advocate a "Yes" vote on the debt issue. We clearly separated it, unlike some of the Taoiseach's Ministers who subsequent to the vote again raised it.

We need a deal on the bank debt issue to ensure sustainability into the future. That is the fundamental issue in regard to the Irish position. The European Union needs a different approach to the issue in terms of the sustainability of the euro. The House will debate and pass the ESM legislation today, yet the Taoiseach advocated that the mandate of the ESM needed to change. I have had no indication from him as to whether the Chancellor agrees with him. What did he say to her? What did she say to him about Irish bank debt?

See this speech in context