Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

We are informed by commentators and by Deputy Martin that the European Council meeting was a formal affair. It was noted by some commentators that it was supposedly tamer and less robust than normal because the make-up of the German Government had not been finalised. We know that Ms Merkel will be the head of state but negotiations on the coalition government are ongoing. Germany now has the most important say in European economic matters, and due to the actions of consecutive Irish Governments it now has control and a significant say over Irish economic and budgetary matters.

The agenda of the European Council meeting was thrown into disarray because of the recent revelations of US spying on EU member states, their diplomatic offices, and even the mobile phones of their heads of state. That was the elephant in the room during that meeting. I note a statement issued by the heads of government to underline the close relationship between Europe and the USA and the need for this valuable partnership to be based on respect and trust. The Taoiseach referred in his contribution to the digital economy and the importance of building trust and confidence. However, those revelations must have caused difficulties in the room with member states who are possibly involved in spying on other states. The Tánaiste is reported to have visited the US embassy in Dublin to discuss whether this Government is being spied on or was spied on in the past. I am sure the Tánaiste will not make public the details of that meeting. However, he informs us that he has received assurances from the US Government on the matter of military war planes in Shannon, although these are suspected to be less than factual. I am unsure how forthcoming the US authorities will be with regard to this latest matter.

The spying revelations have only come to light due to the foresight - and, many say, the bravery - of Edward Snowden. It is clear that the US never intended the details of its huge spying operations, including on so-called allies, to be made public; nor did EU countries want the details to be made public because of the difficult and awkward situation in which they find themselves. This is due in the main to the negotiations over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership or TTIP, a major free trade agreement between the US and EU that would go far beyond and behind each other's borders to systematically enforce a near-single market between the two - so much so that corporations from either the EU or US could have the power to strike down domestic laws within the EU. While the EU and US are discussing co-operation on the digital industry and progress on new European data privacy laws, the scale and depth of spying by the US on the people with whom it is negotiating continues to be revealed.

Did the Taoiseach discuss this issue with his European counterparts at the Council meeting? Will he support the call for a suspension of the TTIP negotiations? To make matters even more interesting for the EU, the breaking news over the past two days is that the British embassy in Berlin had a spy nest installed on its roof to carry out covert electronic surveillance on Angela Merkel's Government. It is clear the Cold War seems to have broken out across Europe and we are only now heading into the winter. The opposition party Die Linke has stated that if the substance of the allegations proves to be true it will call for a special EU summit to discuss possible financial sanctions against the British. I ask the Taoiseach if the Government would support such a move.

Before this latest Council meeting my party colleague, Deputy Gerry Adams, raised with the Taoiseach the possibility of Ireland's leaving the bailout programme and the reality behind the spin. Will the Taoiseach accept that because of arrangements agreed by the Taoiseach, Ireland will be under German and EU surveillance for a long time, and that next year's budget, like this year's budget, will have to be signed off in Brussels, Frankfurt and Berlin?

Last week, a Sinn Féin delegation met the troika and was informed that the chances of Ireland being able retroactively to recapitalise its banks through the ESM fund are "very slim" - those were the words used. When the delegation members asked the reason, the European Commission representative told them there were political circumstances that would have to be taken into account and that the potential for this was low.

The IMF representative said it was an issue the Government should continue to pursue with officials in Europe. With whom does the Taoiseach agree in respect of these matters? While the private banking debt remains as our sovereign debt, ending the bailout programme will not change the reality of austerity for ordinary people and it increases the risks of needing another bailout. In his contribution the Taoiseach mentioned his own views on sovereign and banking debt and what he outlined to the meeting but he did not outline exactly to the House the response of other members. It would be useful in respect of post-Council meetings if we were to get a sense of whether there was consensus on the position and what the other players in the process are saying.

Before the Council meeting the Taoiseach wrote to all 27 leaders and the Council President, Mr. Van Rompuy on this issue. What were the answers to his letters? Has anything really changed? The Irish people were told in June 2012 of a game-changer. In November 2013 are we any closer and when will we see the game-changer?

I note from the recommendations of the Council meeting that the same empty rhetoric on youth employment is being used. We are told that "the fight against youth unemployment remains a key objective of the EU strategy to foster growth, competitiveness and jobs". We know to our cost that the small amount of money that is being put aside is far too small to make a significant dent in European youth unemployment. For example, the National Youth Council of Ireland has highlighted the Swedish model as the preferred option for Ireland. This would cost an estimated €6,600 per person, or approximately €400 million, which could be provided by a combination of Exchequer funding and matched funding from the EU.

We know that to their shame the Labour Party and Fine Gael MEPs recently voted against increasing EU funding for youth employment measures. I do not know the explanation for this.

The Government also announced a cut to the jobseeker's benefit for those under 25 years of age in its 2014 budget. Young people aged between 21 to 24 will lose almost 33% of their weekly payment while 25 year olds will lose 25% of their payment. It is easy to see that the Government and its MEPs can talk the talk about a youth guarantee, but when it comes to real jobs and delivering real jobs, it cannot deliver.

Sinn Féin's pre-budget 2014 measures included a proposal to ring-fence wealth tax income for jobs for young people. We believe this would provide an additional investment to get our young people into appropriate training and back into full-time work.

The Government and its MEPs need to get serious about supporting and assisting the unemployed youth of Ireland. They need to drop the rhetoric and follow through with some practical activation measures.

We were all shocked when more than 350 people died after their boat got into difficulty near the Italian island of Lampedusa, an issue mentioned by the Taoiseach in his contribution. I think we can all agree right across the House that the EU needs to do more to assist migrants who are trying to reach the European Union in increasingly dangerous ways, due to the daily poverty they struggle against. This brutal and avoidable tragedy has caught the EU's attention and it is vitally important that steps are taken to ensure nothing like this ever happens again and that the Mediterranean Sea does not become a graveyard for poor and vulnerable migrants. It is important that the push factors that are behind these migrants risking their lives, such as poverty or their being victims of human trafficking, are addressed. Were these factors discussed at the Council meeting and, if so, what is going to be done to address them? We know that human trafficking is happening on a huge scale around the world and victims are ending up in every member state. What practical steps, if any, will the EU take in this regard? This is not an issue that can be tackled by one country alone. It needs increased co-operation and support between countries to ensure that vulnerable people do not end up being economically and sexually abused by even more sophisticated criminal gangs.

Does the Taoiseach support increased co-operation between EU states and countries in neighbouring regions to tackle this growing problem? It is obvious, even to the most naive, that strict and robust measures must be put in place to track vessels carrying these migrants, which are usually dangerously overloaded, and ensure that if they encounter a difficulty in international or national waters that everything humanly possible is done to ensure their lives are saved and that they receive humanitarian care and supports.

Due to our geographic location we have not had to face this issue as much as southern European countries, but the State's treatment of asylum seekers through the direct provision system is a scandal and a disgrace. The direct provision system, which systematically institutionalises asylum seekers, has operated for the past 13 years at a huge financial and human cost. I hope the Government will use the EU focus on migration to look at the broken system and move toward ending direct provision and replacing it with a reception system that meets the needs of all refugees.

I have posed a few questions to the Taoiseach. If we are serious about addressing these and Council issues, as part of the Taoiseach's address to House when outlining the Irish position on many of the difficulties facing this country and the European Union it would be useful if he were to include some of the responses to the Irish position.

See this speech in context