John Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)

I believe I am sharing time with Deputy White. I note matters seem to be running a little faster and I assume he will pop in at some stage. I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for the opportunity to speak.

I want to speak about this ESM Bill in the context of three matters: the "Yes" vote that was received last week; a better deal on our bank debt, which a number of Members have mentioned; and moving on from crisis management to taking more proactive steps to tackle the unemployment crisis in Europe, particularly in Ireland.

First, I am pleased we voted "Yes" on Thursday last for the fiscal compact treaty. It was an important vote for the country and one that gives us a platform on which to build our recovery. Financial stability is very important and the rules that have been laid down on debts and deficits will enhance confidence in the country, and I am pleased that voters endorsed these proposals.

In saying that, I spent a great deal of time on the doorsteps over the past five weeks or thereabouts and we must take on the views we heard. Among those who voted "Yes" and those who voted "No", there are genuine concerns and we, as a Government, need to see what we can do about some of those concerns. They are real and there is an obligation on us to do something about that.

Much has been said in recent weeks about the European Stability Mechanism and the limitations of the eurozone, but what we need to remember is that nothing like the ESM existed before for the eurozone. Up to now, the euro did not have a permanent bailout fund to back up the currency. We now will have such a fund. The European Central Bank has also evolved over recent years to take up a role far broader that was ever imagined in the first place. These are important developments.

We use a shared currency but it is also a global reserve currency and the crisis of recent years has exposed some of its limitations. These limitations have created uncertainty about how certain eurozone countries could continue to finance themselves independently. This uncertainty persists in this country and in other countries, and countries may need this fund. The fund also is a backstop for countries. It will be there if we need it and if others need it.

It was a huge mistake to suggest, as some on the "No" side did over recent weeks, that vetoing or attempting to veto this fund would in any way advance the interests of the Irish people. What was never explained by the "No" side was how, if we did vote "No", we would ever finance ourselves or get rid of our deficit.

On the doorsteps, Sinn Féin members were exceptionally disingenuous in what they said to people and on the reasons to vote "No". They encouraged people in my area, an area which relies heavily on State supports and where people rely heavily on family income supports to meet their daily needs, to vote "No". They went and knocked on those doors and encouraged people to vote "No". One story I heard was they went to the house of a person was a carer and stated that if the carer voted "Yes", the carer's allowance would be cut even further. That is being disingenuous with people and I believe that is morally wrong.

Sinn Féin needs to stop being involved in political opportunism. I am disappointed Deputy Tóibín has left the Chamber. The party's members need to stop putting the political advancement of their party ahead of the people who have elected them here. It was morally wrong to do what they did during the referendum campaign and they need to stop doing so. This was not the first time. They have been doing it endlessly and they need to stop it if they want to be taken seriously.

I, for one, do not take Sinn Féin seriously. I hope anybody who is watching this, or watches it repeated on Facebook, etc., understands the need to question whether he or she should take them seriously. If Sinn Féin wants to be in real democratic politics down here, it must start playing ball fairly and the way to start is by being honest and genuine with those who elected its members.

I stood on those doorsteps and because I was on the "Yes" side, I was limited in what I could say because I could only speak the truth. When one is on the "No" side, it is easy to say what one likes. The "No" side were unlimited in what they could say because they did not have to speak the truth alone. One need only look to the North. I am compelled to refer to this because we have referred to it endlessly but people simply do not appear to be listening. Those in Sinn Féin say certain things and give out about certain things down here. They called on people to vote "No" down here. I cannot understand why people take them seriously. I refer to one quote in particular. An advertisement appeared in the Belfast Telegraph. Pat Kenny referred to it during his one-to-one interview with Deputy Pearse Doherty. He asked why Deputy Doherty was talking about pay caps down here and rural schools being encouraged to amalgamate while they were doing the same in the North. There is one frightening piece of evidence which shows that they do not mean what they say. Sinn Féin issued an advertisement in the Belfast Telegraph seeking an adviser to the Deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness, with a salary of up to £205,000, approximately €250,000.

If those in Sinn Féin are serious about politics here they need to start playing ball. They could start by being honest. If honesty means loosing one seat, I would rather that than maintain my seat and use it for political advancement. I offer one word of advice to those in Sinn Féin before I proceed: they should stop leading people up the garden path, stop being disingenuous and stop their auction politics.

We should bear in mind that we have a common cause in this area. We have shared responsibilities as part of a common currency area. We depend on our currency. It is the money in our pocket and the money that pays our bills and mortgages. Speculation about its future directly impacts on our economy and the lives of the people. Attempting to veto a fund designed to help countries in distress, as suggested by the "No" side, would have served no one's interests. I believe we voted for the stability of a shared currency last week and we have played our part in this regard. We are in uncertain times and the situation in Spain and other countries and the unknown losses in their banks has considerable potential consequences for us.

The lesson of how the banking crisis was handled here is that we must separate the banking losses from the State. In this regard, we now need a deal on our debt to reduce the burden we have taken on. This point was raised many times on the doorsteps. If this can be done through the ESM or by some means of sharing the liabilities we took on, it would help the State.

I welcome the comments of the Tánaiste, Deputy Eamon Gilmore, this week to the effect that the "Yes" vote strengthened our hand in negotiations on the bank debt and also on the growth agenda in Europe. We are not privy to what form these negotiations on the bank debt are taking. However, I appreciate that in negotiations one does not disclose one's strategy or broadcast one's every move. Anyway, I sincerely hope we see progress on this issue for the people. Whatever the outcome, the solution to Europe's banking debt will be a political solution and, therefore, we need to be at the heart of policy responses to the crisis. I believe the "Yes" vote has put us in that position.

It is also important to recognise the importance of the "Yes" vote in terms of our influence in Europe and on the future growth agenda, in which Fine Gael and the Labour Party believe. Political developments in Europe recently, including the French election results, have given added impetus to the growth agenda. There have been welcome soundings at European level about country specific jobs plans, better use of Structural Funds for job creation and, in particular, youth unemployment, an area of considerable interest to me. The political dialogue is changing to address these situations. There has been no sign to date of additional funds at European level to tackle the problems in individual countries, including the problem of youth unemployment in Ireland.

The unemployment problem in Europe, in particular the problem of youth unemployment, is critical. A recent OECD report stated that the proportion of European youths not in employment, education or training ranges from between 5% and 6% in countries such as Sweden and Austria up to between 16% and 17% in Ireland and Italy. This emerging divide in Europe should not be allowed to continue. A Europe with such a clear opportunities divide would shatter the idea of common cause or solidarity. New policies based on solidarity between European countries should be adopted to take these considerable challenges on board. This is why influence matters and why our "Yes" vote last week mattered. The result provides for Irish involvement in Europe to operate at full capacity, fighting for our recovery, jobs and growth.

See this speech in context