Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)

The headline coming out of last week's summit was that the link between banking and sovereign debt has been broken, but the problem with headlines is that they are short on detail, they can miss the bigger picture and they can distract from more substantive issues. I am afraid last week's headlines did all three.

We cannot even talk about the detail of what was achieved because we have no idea. We know there is some sort of commitment to look at splitting banking and sovereign debt by allowing banks to be recapitalised by the ESM. That, if it comes to pass, will be a good thing, would represent an achievement for the Spanish and Italian Governments and should act as an example to this Government of what is possible when we argue for it. This could most definitely bring big benefits to Ireland, and Sinn Féin warmly welcomes that.

It is also what should have happened in the first place but we were told it was not possible and to stop asking for it. However, the devil will be in the detail and, as ever, we are promised conditionality will be the deciding factor. Conditionality, as we have learned, means doing as we are told. We will learn over time what the President of the Council means when he says "under certain circumstances and under certain conditions, the ESM could recapitalise banks directly". We know that it will come with a memorandum of understanding and the conditions will be, to quote the euro area statement, "institution-specific, sector-specific or economy-wide". That clears that up. There will be no charity and no solidarity flowing from this decision. Of that we can be sure.

If it helps to ease the proportion of debt directly lumped onto our people, then it is welcome. The use of the ESM to which we could have a total liability of €11 billion represents, once again, a huge amount of money being pumped into failed banks instead of the real economy. Sinn Féin has always argued that depositors must be protected but private banks must be allowed to wind up and bondholders must feel losses. Banks should only be recapitalised when toxic losses are removed from their balance sheets and when it is of benefit to the State. We argue the ECB, not taxpayers, should be directly involved in the recapitalisation. That is the bigger picture the headline misses and one that is linked to much more substantive issues that the summit skirted around or simply ignored.

The substantive issue of this summit should have been getting energy back into Europe's economy through stimulating growth and making the investment and the policies necessary to achieve that. The real headline should be the latest failure in a summit, after countless other times, of the EU to change tack and move towards a policy that would create jobs and wealth throughout the EU. I am sure the apologists for the austerity hawks will point to what was agreed in the so-called compact for growth and jobs and Council conclusions as proof a pro-growth agenda. That argument is very quickly dispelled by even a cursory glance at the content of what was agreed.

First, a stimulus package must be about putting money into the real economy. Here, the deal falls at the first hurdle. The amount of extra moneys is pitifully small. Only one point of the compact deals with figures, and they are noticeable only for their tininess. We are told the ElB's paid-in capital will be increased by €10 billion and that, magically, this will unlock €180 billion of additional investment. How €10 billion becomes €180 billion is not explained. There is mention of project bonds of €4.5 billion for pilot projects, none of which include Ireland. There is the often repeated story of reallocating Structural Funds. We know by now that this has almost zero impact in Ireland. We have spent or committed all our Structural Funds for this period.

The Commission, and now the Council, has clearly stated that member states "also have the possibility to consider reallocations within their national envelopes, under existing rules and in cooperation with the Commission". There will be no impact in Ireland due to any tinkering with Structural Funds and little anywhere else.

To put this in context, SIPTU and others have argued for a €10 billion stimulus package for this part of Ireland with a population of 5 million. What the EU effectively is putting on the table is €10 billion for 500 million people. It is pathetically small and is not a serious stimulus package or even close to one. Everyone knows it. There is, thankfully, more to the compact than figures; there are some worthwhile ideas, it must be admitted. Adapting the ESF to provide a youth guarantee is worth examining, as is the need to focus on the EU's research and development capabilities and strengthening our SMEs.

Unfortunately, however, in total the compact and the ideas in it make for depressing reading for anybody looking for a change in direction or genuinely new socially and economically responsible thinking. We are told the austerity-driven two-pack should be applied fully and effectively and recourse to peer pressure should be enhanced. The language is telling and it is depressing. "Fiscal consolidation" that is "growth-friendly" yet "differentiated" yet "respecting the Stability and Growth Pact" yet "taking into account country-specific circumstances" is to be used to get us of this mess. This language, like austerity, makes no sense.

We have an ideological return to what has failed and what is failing. Great emphasis will be put on the implementation of the services directive, one of the most neoliberal, anti-worker directives ever to come from Brussels - from the leadership of Charlie McCreevy, to be precise. The compact for growth and jobs is not a stimulus. There is barely any money and it is not a new push for jobs and growth. It contains old failed policies given a new lease of life and a new name. It will not work and it is not designed to work; it is designed to give political cover as austerity grinds on.

The growth sideshow is of course also cover for the other real purpose of this summit: to centralise, centralise and centralise at all costs. President Van Rompuy was quite explicit in his post-Council statement: "This summit was about combining short-term action to stimulate growth and to stabilise the markets, together with a longer-term vision on the way forward to strengthen our economic and monetary union." The first part of that statement is the cover, while the second part is the truth of what this summit was really about: the deepening of fiscal ties to the point of fiscal union.

Who is to be charged with carrying out this task that our Government will not talk about? The President of the European Council, in close co-operation with the Presidents of the Commission, the euro group and the European Central Bank - four presidents without a single citizen's vote behind them as a mandate. President Van Rompuy stated that "Member states will be closely involved" and "There will also be consultations with the European Parliament", but the power is with the cabal. Our Government and our MEPs are reduced to waiting with bated breath for the wise words of bureaucrats with a simple and explicit agenda - fiscal and political union above all else. These four unelected middle-aged men are to go off and come back with a plan to realise full economic and monetary union in the interests of the citizens of Ireland and other nations. What has our Government got to say? As usual, absolutely nothing. That is what we are used to - going along with the flow, never raising objections or standing up for Irish sovereignty. It has got us nowhere and it will never work as a strategy, although to call it a strategy might be giving the Government too much credit. It was another summit demonstrating another failure of the EU and particularly of this Government to deliver an agenda of growth and to stand up against the forces of centralisation and permanent austerity.

A number of Syrian citizens appeared before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade recently. Their testimony, which had to be given in camera to protect their families, was harrowing. It is important that our Government works in partnership with others to deal with this issue. The concern of the Syrian citizens based in Ireland who testified is that every time well-intentioned international diplomats such as former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan come up with a plan in good faith, the Assad regime, which is a mere cover for the military, uses the opportunity to carry out more horrendous massacres. We must be clear in the international community and Ireland must not hesitate. A time must come when the agreed programmes become mandatory and their abuse must end. We have seen what happened in Rwanda and the Balkans, where standing back resulted in massacres. Hopefully the international community can resolve this and I welcome any Irish involvement in achieving that, particularly having heard the testimony given to the committee.

See this speech in context