Alex White (Dublin South, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I cannot disagree with much of what Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan has said, with one exception, that is, on the question that has come up from time to time as to why the Government did not ask for a write-down and the suggestion one might have been available had the Government simply asked for it. Let us examine this suggestion. Let us imagine the Government and the Central Bank are in negotiations with the European Central Bank. The Government must deal with the institutions also. It is operating in a situation where a sovereign promise has been made on behalf of the State, one which the Government assumed in 2011. It must face the realities and the facts presented to it. Then it discovers that what can only be described as a hard line is being taken on the promissory notes and other commitments entered into on behalf of the Irish sovereign. There is an attempt to renegotiate these instruments and so-called deals. The Government was engaging in that process and encountered considerable difficulty in persuading people to move its point of view, but it persisted nevertheless. It is being suggesting that in the course of that activity the Government should have asked the ECB to delete the entire arrangement. Is there any credibility associated with taking such a course of action in any circumstance, not just in the circumstances pertaining to sovereign debt?

Let us suppose one goes to a bank, or anyone, to renegotiate a debt and one is seeking better terms but then one suggests that before getting into the detail, the other party should simply write off the debt. I am sorry if it sounds strange - I certainly do not wish to make fun of any Member in the House for one minute - but there is no credibility associated with adopting such a position. It would affect one's credibility in doing the job one had to do, that is, to renegotiate. Such a stand would reduce and undermine immediately one's credibility and perception as a party able to bring about an agreement in a renegotiation.

It is a credibility issue. I agree with practically everything that Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan has said but the notion that we should suck it and see is devoid of reality or credibility. The actions of this Government will have to be assessed. Deputy Colreavy pointed out that the Government will have to face the people, as will his own party at some stage. We will have to account for what we did and did not do. We entered office at a time of unprecedented crisis and economic and financial collapse. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan correctly noted that the private debts of failed banks and financial institutions had been lumped onto the backs of the Irish people and were transformed almost overnight into sovereign debt. One of the instruments used to achieve this was the promissory note, which contained a solemn and sovereign promise by the State. Listening to Sinn Féin one would believe this promise was made last week but it happened in 2010 as the inevitable consequence of the profoundly mistaken blanket guarantee introduced in 2008.

The new Government had to contend with the most onerous challenges ever faced by a sovereign Irish Government if, indeed, we accept we were still sovereign at that stage. Both Government parties undertook to renegotiate the debt. Deputy Martin has a habit of suggesting that the Labour Party and Fine Gael promised to burn the bondholders but that certainly was not the position for my party. We always spoke about renegotiation. We never said we would repudiate sovereign commitments made on our behalf, much as we regard them as odious and outrageous. Sinn Féin has been in government in Stormont for several years and it knows that when a Minister makes a legal agreement on behalf of a Government, he or she binds his or her successors to that agreement. The new Minister does not get to start afresh on coming into office. Sinn Féin Deputies know that when a sovereign Irish Government makes a commitment on the part of the people and the State, its successors are bound to that commitment. This is basic stuff but it does not mean we should neglect our responsibility to seek to renegotiate a better deal.

Deputy Daly spoke about celebrations. I am not in a celebratory mode. God knows, there is little to celebrate in this situation but I ask her to be reasonable and acknowledge that the arrangement introduced last week is a considerable improvement on what existed heretofore. Deputy Wallace cited an article by a former IMF official but he failed to quote the opening paragraphs, which noted that while the task ahead remains daunting, Ireland will benefit from the reprieve this important achievement offers. We should assess whether the Government achieved a good outcome in the context of the circumstances in which it was required to operate rather than ask why the Government did not seek to unwind or roll back on commitments made on behalf of the State when the latter option was not available. Deputy Colreavy knows that as well as anybody else. I care more about this country than about the prospects of any particular political party, including my own. If Sinn Féin manages to garner more support in the community in the next election, I hope to God that it puts together credible economic and financial policies that can sustain this country. At present it is devoid of credibility.

See this speech in context