Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I wish to share time with Deputy Crowe.

It seems that Thursday's summit of EU leaders will be dominated by the future role of the ECB as a supervisor of eurozone banks, getting eurozone member states to buy into the so-called annual contracts that will commit them to structural reform of their labour markets, welfare and pensions systems, and the creation of what has been described as a federal eurozone budget that is distinct from the EU budget. The summit is shaping up to be another quarrelsome affairs with reports today suggesting that there is little prospect of an agreement between the Greek Government and the EU and IMF on a further package of significant cuts, and that Finland is expressing grave concern about the new budget proposal. What is the Government's position on this and on the annual contract for reform of the labour market and welfare and pensions systems? Is the Taoiseach in favour of a eurozone federal budget? Is he for annual contracts to reform the labour market and the welfare and pensions system? Have these been discussed with the trade union movement and business organisations? Does the establishment of a eurozone budget not risk exacerbating the division that exists between those inside and outside the eurozone? If he agrees to such a budget, is that not another important step towards fiscal unity? Does not drive another nail into the coffin of his claim that he wants to be the Taoiseach who restores Irish sovereignty because it appears that fiscal unity of the Union and Irish sovereignty are mutually exclusive positions?

Thursday's summit will also see the continuing battle between France and Germany over the use of austerity measures but the Taoiseach is for austerity and this is not a concern for him. That brings me to the crucial issues of bank debt. First, there is no sign of a deal on the Anglo Irish Bank promissory note debt. The Government now claims that it will be March 2013 at the earliest before the matter is concluded, and last week ECB President Mario Draghi cast further doubt on potential promissory note deals. From the start of this European wide debt crisis, as I reminded the Taoiseach earlier, Sinn Féin has advocated a write-down of private bank debt. This needs to be sorted out at this summit. Bank debt needs to be separated from sovereign debt. The burden of bad banking debt - the so-called legacy issue - which was foisted on the shoulders of Irish people also needs to be removed.

I welcome the Government's conversion to this point of view. I have noted the Taoiseach's recent declaration that the Government had long argued for the separation of bank and sovereign debt. That patently contradicts his declaration in this Chamber last January that he would not have the word "defaulter" stamped on our foreheads and that he had not sought a debt write-down. At the time, he was for leaving Irish citizens to shoulder the burden of the bank bailout and, as other Sinn Féin spokespersons and I said at the time, that was politically, economically and morally wrong. It is good he has changed his position and I welcome that, but now he must deliver. It is imperative this debt be removed.

As we discussed earlier, in June, the Government oversold the deal, which was described as "a seismic shift" and a "game changer", and I note his remarks during Taoiseach's Questions earlier about the issue of the write-down of legacy payments. That is the big question. Was there a commitment that the State would benefit from a write-down of legacy payments? European Commission President, Jose Manuel Barroso, supports breaking the link between bank and sovereign debt but draws a distinction and refused to be drawn on legacy debt, describing the issue of putting billions into bad banks as a discussion on semantics. Last week, the new chief of the ESM said the issue had not been discussed by any European leader. It appears other leaders are rowing away and no one else is rowing in to support the Government's interpretation of the June deal. I hope the Taoiseach is right but this needs to be clarified and he has to return to the House with a clear position. That needs to be his primary objective. He repeated in his contribution comments he made in Europe a week or two ago:

We must now ensure that we deliver on that undertaking. Having set our stall in this way, expectations are now high that we will deliver. Be in no doubt we will be punished for any backsliding or stepping away from what has been agreed.

There is a certain irony to this and I hope these words do not come back to haunt him; they should be stamped on his forehead. The reality is there has been no bailout for our citizens. We have endured brutal health cuts, reductions in the number of special needs assistants, cuts to child benefit and other social welfare benefits, cuts to home care packages and home help hours, the imposition of a household charge and new stealth taxes. No matter how it is spun, the budget will inflict further cuts and hardship on those least able to afford it.

Even the IMF has concluded that austerity is not the answer to the economic difficulties of Ireland and other European states. The answer is jobs and growth. Other Sinn Féin spokespersons and I genuinely welcome the recent jobs announcements, but 33,000 jobs have been lost since the Taoiseach took up office. We would need an announcement similar to that of Paddy Power every eight days for the next year even to return to last year's jobs figures. That is a sense of the magnitude of the challenge facing us. Across the EU, 24 million citizens are unemployed with almost 500,000 in this State. Emigration is not a solution. It is a huge burden on families and communities, especially in rural areas.

Last week, Sinn Féin launched a fully costed, practical series of detailed proposals to tackle the jobs crisis, a copy of which I sent to the Taoiseach. We propose a jobs stimulus plan and I commend it to him. Austerity will not work and the Taoiseach faces a big challenge to return to the House the week after next with a proper deal which writes off our bank debt.

See this speech in context