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

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. I put it to the Taoiseach that one of the driving forces behind growing disillusionment with the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive has been a belief that the two largest parties are primarily interested in promoting their respective party interests. In other words, they see themselves as leaders and protectors of their part of society, rather than taking the tougher and braver route of looking at it in terms of society as a whole. It is striking how these parties always protect their own when they are caught out for behaviour which would end the career of any office holder in this House. It is interesting that when one Sinn Féin Minister was found by an independent tribunal to have discriminated in appointments and to have installed a party supporter as head of Northern Ireland Water, the party then went on to attack the tribunal. Then, when the Northern Ireland High Court found the party guilty of defaming a person, it attacked the court. I gather there have been similar problems with DUP ministers.

This shines a spotlight on the constant attempt by the dominant parties to close down alternative forums for civil society. They believe in community activism, but only in so far as it serves an interest of theirs. Openly and secretly, direct preference is being given to organisations connected with the two main parties. This was why the civic forum was shut down and never got off the ground.

I put it to the Taoiseach that there is a legal obligation under the Good Friday agreement, yet this legal obligation continues to be ignored. There is some commitment in the Stormont House Agreement to a civic consultative body, whatever that means. That body is to be appointed by the Northern Ireland First Minister and Deputy First Minister. It will be made up of people hand-picked by Sinn Féin and the DUP, rather than a genuinely representative civic forum. Notwithstanding the misgivings of the parties in respect of the civic forum, articulated off the record and in private gatherings and so on, the degree to which they can decide that such a legal obligation in the Good Friday Agreement can be essentially dispensed with is alarming. What is the Taoiseach's view? Why does he say nothing about it? Why does he allow such a flagrant breach of the Good Friday Agreement? Can he offer any assurances that the consultative body to be established will not be simply another Sinn Féin-DUP stitch-up? We have had too many of those in recent years.

Will the Taoiseach outline his views on his meetings with Theresa Villiers and the analysis of the budget situation? The budget announced in Stormont will have a savage impact on core services. The Northern Ireland Executive will be able to borrow more money, which may moderate some of that impact, but essentially the only parties now suggesting that front-line services will not be cut are the DUP and Sinn Féin. The fact is that 500 teaching posts will go while the parties are claiming that things are getting better. Moreover, 20,000 public servants will be removed. What Sinn Féin would term serious cutbacks or austerity if implemented here is deemed to represent social progress in Northern Ireland.

We, the Taoiseach and our Government have a role. I have discussed with Theresa Villiers how Northern Ireland is exceptional. It has a real issue with education completion among a substantial proportion of those who attend second-level schools. Up to 40% of pupils in some schools are not completing second-level education. This is storing up numerous issues for the future in Northern Ireland.

It seems to me that both Governments, the Executive and all the parties should be taking a sort of Marshall plan approach to social injustice in the North in so far as it relates to education completion and health inequalities. That has never happened since the Good Friday Agreement, and there never has been that sort of concrete comprehensive, co-ordinated response to all of those concerns. In terms of the overall development of the North and the sustainability of the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement, these are very serious issues. Will the Taoiseach inform me whether the Government has carried out an analysis of the impact of the budgetary decisions that have been taken in Northern Ireland as part of the Stormont House Agreement?

The Taoiseach spoke about North-South co-operation. Four years ago, he said that new proposals for North-South bodies were being prepared. In the interim, he has told us that things are going fine, and all the rest of it. However, I have seen absolutely no progress at all either in terms of new bodies being established or new ideas being churned out with regard to how we can enhance and improve the degree of interaction between North and South. I accept there are difficulties but we could have seen far more imagination than we have in the past four years. I have outlined some ideas on this already, as I did in a speech more than two years ago in Clare in regard to a range of bodies. One I suggested is in the enterprise area, where I think there should be one all-island Enterprise Ireland, or whatever name we give it, to support indigenous small to medium size companies on the island as a whole, with a common set of supports in terms of external marketing, mentoring, development and so on. There is absolutely no reason this could not happen. There are other areas, for example, in health, where we could be more effective, particularly in terms of rare diseases and, in particular, paediatric health in centres of excellence on the island, where, if we allied both, we could achieve quite a lot. I know some work has been done already in the cardiac area.

On the cross-Border side, in a timely manner a committee of the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly has produced an alarming report, Cross-border Police Cooperation and Illicit Trade. The scale of this is quite alarming in terms of its financial impact, which is €250 million to €260 million in loss of revenue to the Exchequer here, and the committee members also found the visibility of the fuel laundering operations meant they were there for all to see. The report states, "The problem was ... most concentrated along the Monaghan/South Armagh border, constituting a large drain on council resources" in Louth, Monaghan and Donegal in terms of supporting the authorities' efforts to halt this illicit trade and deal with the pollution clean-up. When stations had moved on, the cost of cleaning up the toxic waste from dumping sites was estimated to be approximately €1,000 per cu. m. In addition to fuel laundering, there is also the issue of tobacco fraud.

What is interesting is that resources have been enhanced for revenue collection in the UK, where there is a substantial addition of Stg£917 million in funding which focuses on tax evasion, organised crime and debt collection. This is expected to raise additional revenue of £26 billion per annum. In other words, if we put more resources into Revenue, we will get a greater outcome.

With regard to the Revenue Commissioners in the Republic, the committee noted that overall expenditure had been reduced by 21%, with a reduction in full-time staff of 13% in recent years, which impairs its capacity to deal with this particular crime along the Border. The committee "...recommends that the Cross-Border Enforcement Groups establish a permanent, full time task force dedicated to eliminate the activities of organised crime gangs involved with cross-border illicit trade." It wants such a force to be "...comprised of seconded staff from all relevant agencies, including environmental and criminal asset recovery agencies, and supported by a central dedicated secretariat." I would ask the Taoiseach for his perspectives on that.

The report also states, "The Committee is alarmed by the evidence of the widespread presence of fuel laundering plants and filling stations selling illicit fuel in border regions." One can apparently drive by and look at them, which raises all sorts of questions about the level of enforcement. How serious is the crack down on this? Something has to happen. While it may be unfounded, there has been an anecdotal view that, because of the peace process and everything else, a certain blind eye has been turned to some of this. That may be unfair but it seems to me that the budgetary difficulties faced by the Governments in both jurisdictions has caused issues here. The very fact that these plants are so visible to Seán Citizen is incomprehensible. The committee also "...believes that concerns regarding the ultimate beneficiaries and application of proceeds of these crimes can only be addressed through a more focussed and concentrated effort to deal with these cross-border activities, and through Criminal Assets Bureau and National Crime Agency investigation to follow the money trail."

Does the Government intend to act on this report? Will the Government, with the British Government, establish a full-time cross-Border enforcement task force? Will the Taoiseach initiate an investigation between the Criminal Assets Bureau and the National Crime Agency towards dealing with and following the money trail?

See this speech in context