Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I agree it is imperative decisions be followed up. It is the lack of follow through on the part of the Taoiseach that baffles me. It is incredible he did not feel the need to ring the leaders concerned at the very minimum. This was no ordinary statement. It was a serious and profound statement by three senior Ministers for Finance from three very important countries whose interpretation of the June summit meeting decision is in contrast with our interpretation of it and the interpretation the Taoiseach spun at the time.

At the very least the leaders concerned should have been contacted.

The Taoiseach has made strong statements since but to a home audience. He stamped his foot at the Burlington Hotel and said this is not on and that the deal must be followed through. He did the same at the convention centre on Thursday at the Dublin Chamber of Commerce dinner. I respectfully put it to the Taoiseach that there is not much value in speaking to a home audience in the Burlington Hotel on this issue, it is to the capitals concerned that the strong statements need to be made. Statements of this importance should be nipped in the bud and clear markers should be put down by communicating with the leaders of those countries. How does the Taoiseach know that the statement was made without reference to the prime ministers? He did not ask them that question, he is surmising that. Why is it left to officials all the time?

When elected Taoiseach, Deputy Kenny waited longer than any of his predecessors to hold a direct meeting with a European colleague and since then he has continued the policy of reducing bilaterals to a minimum. What is behind this hands-off policy? Why did the Taoiseach not telephone the leaders concerned in the aftermath of what any objective assessment would consider to be a significant statement on the separation of bank debt from Government debt, the legacy issue and so forth, which has implications not only for Ireland but other countries as well? What is clear from all his replies today is a sense of lack of engagement with those key countries who have raised doubts and have given a completely different perspective and a different interpretation of the decision in June. Why did the Taoiseach not telephone them? At any stage at which he has spoken to the other leaders, has he ever raised the issue of the non-secured non-guaranteed banking debt?

See this speech in context