Peter Fitzpatrick (Louth, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Ireland settled the first two tranches of €3.1 billion in 2011 and 2012. The first tranche was paid in full on 31 March 2011, while the 2012 payment was settled by way of a long-term Government bond. That means the State did not pay the €3.1 billion in cash in March 2012. The bond was a complicated arrangement financed with the Bank of Ireland. While this arrangement reduced the level of the emergency liquidity assistance provided by the Central Bank to the IBRC, the Government will still have to repay the bond. This Government is confident of a deal before 31 March 2013 and is engaged in continuing talks with all relevant parties in Europe.

The Government is examining all options, including the source of funding, the duration of the notes and the interest rate applicable. Ireland has been recognised as a special case. The Government has made painful sacrifices in successive budgets to hold up our part of the bargain. Any suggestion that we move away from this agreed approach will only bring additional risks to the table and raise the stakes at a critical time in the discussions.

The Opposition motion, if passed, is a threat of default that would further increase the cost of credit in the economy and tie us permanently into relying on support from the IMF, the EU and their associated conditions. It would also undermine 250,000 jobs which are directly and indirectly supported by foreign direct investment.

This Government has delivered success through agreements to date, including a reinstatement of the minimum wage and an agreement to retain half the proceeds from State asset sales for investment in job creation projects.

In addition, there has been renegotiation of many of the conditions of the programme, as well as a reduction in the interest rate of the European Union funds, which will save the taxpayer almost €10 billion. Moreover, on 29 June 2012, there was an agreement on breaking the vicious circle between the banks and the State and specific reference was made to improving the sustainability of the programme. I urge Members opposite to withdraw this ill-conceived motion and thank the Chair for allowing me this opportunity to respond to the motion tabled by the Independent Members.

See this speech in context