Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach has just outlined that the summit will be dominated by negotiations on the EU seven-year budget. However, first I wish to deal with the ongoing negotiations on the promissory note. Two weeks ago it was reported that the ECB refused to endorse an Irish proposal on the promissory note. I understand from media reports that a new proposal will be brought by the Governor of the Central Bank, Mr. Honohan, to the ECB this week. The critical issue in all of this is not whether a deal is done but precisely what kind of deal is agreed. Sinn Féin's position is clear. We want the Government to secure a deal and we wish it well in that regard, but it must be a deal that removes the toxic banking debt from the shoulders of Irish citizens.

From the outset the Government has approached this issue in the wrong way. Rather than stating, as the Taoiseach did in the Dáil, that we would not have the word "defaulter" written on our foreheads, he should have said that it is not our debt. He should have sought a write-down but he did not even ask for one and he has still not asked. He should have told our European partners that this debt is not sustainable and the Irish people simply cannot pay it. He still has the opportunity to do it.

Sinn Féin does not accept that debt restructuring, as proposed by Fianna Fáil, or paying the debt over a longer timeframe is a credible deal for taxpayers. The notes should not be paid. The people of the State, on a per capita basis, have already contributed more to the banking crisis and the stabilising of the entire European banking system than any other EU state. It is time we got assistance from our EU partners. The citizens of the State have just had their sixth austerity budget, bringing the total in taxes and cuts to €28 billion to date. By December 2013 we are due to have made €31 billion in tax adjustments and cuts to our economy. The sum of €31 billion is what the Government and Fianna Fáil want us to pay into what remains of the bad banks, namely Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide, now the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation, IBRC. Every billion paid to the IBRC is a cut to the health budget, an increase in PRSI, a new property tax, more overcrowding in classrooms, more workers out of jobs, more families struggling to make ends meet, more Garda stations being closed and more nurses emigrating.

The third instalment of €3.1 billion worth of promissory notes is due to be paid to the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation on 31 March. Any deal on the bank debt must bring relief for citizens. A deal must mean a reduction in the cuts and taxes to be faced in the next budget. Could the Taoiseach tell us what impact he expects a debt deal to have on next year’s budgetary situation? Will a deal on debt result in a windfall for the State and will the Taoiseach assure us that any benefit from it will be used to reduce the burden of austerity on citizens? Could he also inform the House whether last year’s payment of the promissory note is part of the current negotiations? Last year’s payment was covered by the issue of a bond to Bank Of Ireland which is due to be redeemed in May at a cost of €3.1 billion plus €90 million in interest to Bank of Ireland. Where will the money come from?

I wish to deal briefly with the negotiations on the EU budget. The Government holds the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. In every negotiation the Government must argue for a budget that is fit-for-purpose and that brings an end to austerity. The budget must also tackle the enormous issue of unemployment in the State and across the EU. There is much talk and rhetoric from the EU about jobs stimulus and measures to drive the jobs and growth agenda. At the same time many in the EU are looking to cut, or at the very least not to increase, the budget, One cannot do both. In the negotiations the Government must be on the side of investing in jobs and growth. An Teachta Crowe will deal with this issue in more detail, in particular on the scandalous issue of youth unemployment.

The Presidency should also be used to protect our vital national interests. That includes securing a well-funded and fair Common Agricultural Policy which prioritises the needs of working farmers. I also hope the Presidency can secure a PEACE IV programme in order that the good work of the PEACE programmes to date is not squandered. Last week Mr. Martin McGuinness and Mr. Peter Robinson were in Brussels pressing the case for additional PEACE funding to continue. Will the Government support those efforts?

Finally, I raise the issue of Ireland’s European Parliament representation. The European Parliament is currently considering a proposal which would reduce the number of MEPs in the State from 12 to 11. The proposal before the Parliament would leave most of the bigger states with their full complement of MEPs while medium to small-sized states, including this one, could lose seats. Sinn Féin argued in successive referendum campaigns that there is a drift towards greater centralisation of decision-making at EU level and a reduction in the influence of smaller states such as this one.

Ms Martina Anderson, MEP, has tabled an amendment to this proposal within the Parliament to attempt to preserve the State's current complement of seats. The Government has been silent on the issue and seems almost unconcerned at the prospect of a further diminution of our say in Europe. Will the Taoiseach inform us of the Government's position on the issue? Does he support the reduction in seats or does he plan to lobby to maintain our current complement?

See this speech in context