Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I wish the Taoiseach and his family a happy Christmas. We will re-engage in the new year.

This week's Council meeting will be the first under the Presidency of Donald Tusk. While Mr. Tusk has not yet had enough time in office to shape the agenda, his appointment is a cause of optimism for all those who want a more active and responsive Europe. He was a progressive and successful Prime Minister of Poland and consistent friend of Ireland. As Minister for Foreign Affairs, I had regular and close working relations with his Government. I have no doubt that building on the strong bonds of friendship between our countries will be a priority for Ireland. I wish President Tusk well and encourage the Taoiseach to issue an early invitation for him to visit Ireland and, if possible, address the Oireachtas.

While I welcome Donald Tusk's appointment, I do not welcome the fact that the Taoiseach failed again to raise the case of Ireland's treatment on bank related debt during the appointment of a senior European Union official. In 2011, the Taoiseach nodded through Mario Draghi without any discussion with him. This year, he has supported Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk without once raising the issue of what their approach would be to the adverse impact of now abandoned EU policies on Ireland.

It is more than two years since the Taoiseach returned breathlessly from a summit to state that the link between sovereign and banking debt had been broken and recompense for Ireland was in the bag. The Ministers for Finance and Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputies Noonan and Howlin, respectively, confirmed that Ireland was seeking money but refused to indicate how many billions were being sought. Today, we are in the absurd position that the Taoiseach will not even state if we are seeking anything, let alone explain the reason his claims of 2012 have failed to materialise. This is par for the course from a Government which is more interested in negotiating press conferences than engaging in a real campaign to obtain full justice for Ireland's case. Deputies should reread all the statements on the issue made at the time by the Taoiseach and then Tánaiste as well as media commentary and contrast them with the language and rhetoric the Taoiseach now uses on the same decision and issue.

In the past, we observed the ridiculous spectacle of the Taoiseach expressing the hope of securing a particular interest rate cut for Ireland at a summit and, when Greece negotiated a cut four times greater than the figure we sought, proceeding to praise himself for his visionary leadership. Last week, the policy of pushing nothing but picking up what was coming in any case was eulogised by Ministers as decisive in turning the country around. What is striking is how these fairytales, once so persuasive, have been completely seen through. No one believes them any more. What is worse is that the campaign of self-congratulation is directly getting in the way of Ireland asserting its right to fair treatment. We will not receive fair treatment by accident but only if the Government does what it has thus far failed to do, namely, set out exactly what Ireland wants and how it proposes to get it.

On the promissory notes deal, if current policy continues, the Central Bank of Ireland will sell off its holdings of Irish bonds faster than planned. As a result, the entire claimed benefit of the deal would disappear and the policy would cost Ireland more than the previous scenario. Ireland needs to get serious in its engagement with the European Central Bank. While the ECB has political independence, as is appropriate, this does not mean a country cannot forcefully represent its opinions. The refusal of the ECB to participate in the banking inquiry is a disgrace and must be challenged. Its intervention in European Union policy and in respect of Ireland's ability to burn bondholders was decisive, particularly in 2010, in the failures which pushed us out of the bond market and obliged us to assume additional layers of debt.

The final three years of Mr. Jean-Claude Trichet's presidency of the European Central Bank were a disaster for Europe and Ireland. No meaningful inquiry can report without addressing the ECB's role. As I noted, representatives of the ECB attended the Bundestag and should not, therefore, get away with taking a selective approach to these matters. Let us also remember that the European Central Bank is also our central bank and its role is to serve the citizens of this State as much as those of any other European Union member state. Its arrogant and unacceptable attitude should not be allowed to stand.

It is also completely unacceptable that the European Central Bank continues to retain profits from its holdings of Irish bonds. If this money were returned to Ireland in full, as it is to Greece, it would make a significant contribution to reversing damaging cuts in important public services.

This is a moment when the European Central Bank, under the presidency of Mr. Mario Draghi, is preparing to undertake unprecedented action to save Europe from deflation. If Mr. Draghi had been the president of the ECB five years ago, Ireland's position would have been radically different and the bank would certainly not have pursued a policy of allowing damage to accumulate before adopting new policies. It appears likely that Mr. Draghi will announce the start of a major programme of asset purchases on 22 January 2015. This is by far the most important economic stimulus being discussed in any forum in Europe. A major counter-attack is under way, in particular by Germany, which is threatening to take the European Central Bank to court to stop the stimulus. The Bundesbank chairman went as far as to describe the rest of Europe as lemmings which were about to lose everything with quantitative easing. While many politicians in many countries have contributed publicly to the debate, thus far, not a peep has been heard from Ireland. A defining debate is reaching its final stages. It may decide whether there is a European recovery or a period of long, slow deflation and recession. Ireland should stand squarely with those who argue that carrying on with the same policies is not acceptable. Every European institution has a duty to go to the limits to try to stop the deflationary spiral.

Ireland also has an opening in that even the Bundesbank president has stated that national central banks could carry more of the burden of asset holdings. If the European Central Bank were to transfer to the Central Bank of Ireland its Irish bonds and allow the bank to retain and build its stock of Irish bonds, it would be of immediate and significant help to Ireland. The Taoiseach should get off the fence and start supporting a radical change in the actions of the European Central Bank in order that it becomes an enabler rather than a destroyer of growth in the European economy.

The published agenda for the summit gives only a general outline of what is to be discussed under the heading, Economic and Social Policy, although it mentions the initiative of the Commission President on investment spending in the next three years. The figure involved in the initiative is not €300 billion and it will not be an additional €300 billion. It is in the order of €10 billion in existing funding that is to be directed to measures which, it is hoped, will allow the rest to be leveraged from the European Investment Bank and private sector. This investment is too small to stimulate the European economy and is almost designed to fail to meet its targets. I hope it fulfils its targets and that the Government has developed a plan for maximising the return to Ireland. If there is such a plan, it has been kept secret for some reason. The Taoiseach cited a number of projects that have been submitted for early consideration under this fund. Perhaps he will provide me with a copy of the list of projects. There is no reason such a list should not be published.

The issue of corporation tax may arise again. It is not yet clear whether Luxembourg did anything illegal on the issue of transferring tax liabilities when Commission President Juncker was the country's Prime Minister. What is clear, however, is that much of what has been said about corporation tax in recent years has been hypocritical and the focus on Ireland has been wildly disproportionate. Our corporation tax is fair and transparent. If others want to end tax competition, it is their duty to outline how they propose to support smaller and peripheral economies to compete fairly and retain employment.

Rebalancing investment towards the larger economies would be a basic betrayal of the European compact in place since the Maastricht treaty was ratified. The House has not sufficiently debated this issue. On the one hand, certain people want to throw away our entire corporation tax regime while, on the other, the Government appears to be moving towards acquiescence to an agenda being promoted by the OECD and richer countries which want some of this tax revenue. The base erosion and profit shifting, BEPS, process and moves towards a consolidated tax rate in Europe have the potential to be injurious to Ireland's foreign direct investment proposition and capacity to attract inward investment. We should be cautious about embracing some aspects of this agenda without fully thinking through the implications for future investment in Ireland.

The summit is also due to consider briefly the response to the Ebola crisis. As I said before, in proportionate terms, Europe's response has been generous and effective, and should be increased. The west African countries which are worst hit need our help and resources. Where there has been real partnership between local communities, national administrations and international aid organisations, major progress has been seen. We know what needs to be done and there is no excuse for failing to commit to provide whatever funding it takes to turn back this horrible virus.

While it does not appear on the formal agenda, it is likely that the situation in Syria will be discussed again. This has the potential to turn into one of the greatest human tragedies of the 21st century. The scale of the displacement of people is breathtaking, and the misery being imposed on Syrians is growing all the time. This matter was addressed briefly yesterday during Leaders' Questions. I repeat here my belief that Europe must step up its aid to refugees. Ireland can be proud of its record as the highest per capitadonor, and I acknowledge the personal commitment of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Charles Flanagan, to this issue at meetings of the Foreign Affairs Council.

I would also like to agree with comments made here yesterday about how the Kurdish forces are central to pushing back the Assad regime and ISIS.Both claim to be different, but are offering nothing but misery and brutality to the Syrian people.

Turkey’s growing authoritarianism is something we must stand against. The widespread attack on free media is unacceptable. Within Turkey the PKK has shown its goodwill. At this moment it is an essential - perhaps the essential - element required to stop barbarous armies. It is time for Ireland and Europe to recognise this and support the PKK in Syria and Iraq.

The bombing yesterday of over 100 children and their teachers while they were at school should be utterly condemned by the Council, and every effort should be made to assist the global efforts to suppress such barbaric acts by the Taliban. It was a truly barbaric attack on innocent young children, who were mowed down while at school. The European Summit should place this issue on its agenda, if not in an emergency manner at the next meeting then in the following one, and address how Europe intends to respond to the increasingly barbaric and reckless approach to human life, children and so on. It is an issue which has shown no sign of abatement.

Given this week’s near-implosion of the rouble, there will obviously be a discussion about Russia and its occupation and partitioning of Ukraine. The Russian people are facing into the possibility of a deep and damaging recession. This is the direct and inevitable result of the policies of their government. The hyper-nationalist, authoritarian and aggressive behaviour of Vladimir Putin’s government has been a disaster for Russia. I find it amazing that for much of the last year we have heard fellow-travelling calls to do nothing and stand by as Putin invaded a neighbouring country and funded a devastating conflict. Sinn Féin has constantly refused to clearly call on Russia to get out of Ukraine and has followed its allies in the European Parliament's former communist group in attacking Europe and the United States as being to blame for Russia’s aggression. Of course, this was not something mentioned by Deputy Gerry Adams when raising money in New York recently. In Russia, basic legal norms have been abandoned and the only rule today is that whatever the government wants, it can take. The free media has been destroyed, opposition parties have effectively been banned and a near-hysterical anti-West propaganda campaign has been implemented.

Russia should be a friend and partner of Europe, but Europe must stand with basic democratic values and with the interests of smaller nations against Russian aggression. Europe must also understand that the new democratic government in Kiev needs more help. It needs debt restructuring and significantly increased direct aid. Russia will not let up on its efforts to crush any neighbouring state which refuses to bow to Moscow in what President Putin last month called its "rightful sphere of influence". We cannot step back from a significantly higher scale of aid to a country and people in dire need.

There is no doubt that at the summit the Taoiseach will have an opportunity to talk to the UK Prime Minister, David Cameron. I hope he will take the opportunity for the two of them to reflect on the shambles of last week in Stormont. The DUP and Sinn Féin have refused to act responsibly in government, but the way to respond to this is not to introduce the type of negotiating tactics which have served the UK so disastrously badly in Brussels. Take-it-or-leave-it walkouts or threats to withdraw are not what one expects from the parties, and they have done enough of this over the years. It is not something one expects of governments.

I welcome the fact that Mr. Cameron’s recent speech on freedom of movement stepped back from his earlier extreme position and the impulses of the majority of his party. As in so many areas, after nearly four years in office the Government has never set out a strategy for basic European issues. It has no negotiating strategy. There is some discussion of a treaty in the next two years, for example, emanating from the discussions about Britain and its relationship with the EU. It has no stated objectives on bank debt, no position on the EU budget’s future, no position on the powers of the ECB and no position on the possible exit of the UK other than "We’d hate to see you go." Perhaps in 2015 we will finally see the Government commit to a more active and engaged European policy. The speeches about supposedly rebuilding our reputation are self-serving nonsense and simply expose the "PR first" approach. Let us have a proper debate about Europe and our role in it. It is too important to go on in this stumbling and uncoordinated way.

See this speech in context