Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

In the past four months Ireland has had a great opportunity to put Irish interests first in Europe. I am not a great subscriber to the polite protocol that when we assume the Presidency, we should always sacrifice our own interests in favour of the greater European interests. We are in a situation where we need to use this opportunity and there was nothing in the contributions from the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste to suggest they had put Ireland first. The problem with the Irish Presidency - it is permeating throughout Europe - as acknowledged by Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan and which is not shouted about very loudly, is that, first, we have been fire fighting. We have no vision of where we are going. Second, much more importantly, is the excuses offered, whether quietly or loudly, that nothing can happen until after the German elections are held in the autumn. That is a terrible reflection on where the European Union stand. The hidden message - it is not well hidden - is that Angela Merkel is the most powerful figure in Europe and we have to defer to her. We cannot reflate; we cannot do anything about austerity; we cannot move in any direction until she wins her election in October when, suddenly and miraculously, she will reflate the German economy, loosen the purse strings in Europe, loosen her grip on other economies and allow us a little more freedom to do what is in the interests of the economy. There is no evidence, however, that hidden in the Christian Democratic Party is some sort of liberal who will allow the purse strings to be relaxed. I suggest to the Tánaiste that the time to confront the great German hegemony in Europe is now when he is in a position to do it, but that is not happening. The deference shown to Germany and the German economy is at the heart of the problems of Europe, but it is not acknowledged.

The contributions of the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste were big on aspirations, laying foundations and the achievements for which they were waiting, but they were very light on detail. I am a little weary of hearing how we are working towards separating sovereign and banking debt.

That, as everybody in the House knows, has proved to be a great disappointment because Germany will not allow it to happen. There is no guarantee it will allow it to happen in October either, whoever wins the election.

There has been no discussion on the part of the Government of the magnificent ideas put forward by the President of Ireland last week and the previous week in this debate. Is it embarrassed by the fact that he has plunged Ireland into a debate about European institutions, a debate long overdue? What are the Taoiseach's and the Tánaiste's views on the fact that the President of Ireland took to the European Community the arguments made about the inadequacy of democratic accountability in the European Union of which we are a member? Is it an embarrassment to the Government that he spoke so eloquently about the ECB and named it or about the fact that it was running what he called an unacceptable "hegemonic model"? Are they embarrassed by the fact that he criticised the leaders of Europe, not by name, but by saying they needed a radical rethink of their economic policies? Are they embarrassed by the fact that he also said it was extraordinary how Ireland had put up with the policies of austerity - he did not mention "austerity" but cutbacks and sacrifices - and that it had shown such endurance? He described this - in its most polite terms - as pragmatic, by which he meant we h ad deferred again to the greater powers in Europe.

That is the debate we should be having here today, not engaging in the self-congratulatory stuff we have been hearing from Government spokespersons about how well we are doing in terms of worthy aspirations such as solidarity and the nondescript non-achievements listed today. We should do ourselves proud by welcoming what the President had to say. We should say we wish to debate what he called "fiscal technocracy" and that we are willing to criticise the leaders and institutions in Europe on being unaccountable. We must say we are willing not to be craven in the face of the greater economic powers which are pulling the strings.

See this speech in context