Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance) | Oireachtas source

The whole debate about Europe in this State and in Britain is founded on a big lie. It is a propaganda technique which involves a lie so big that nobody could believe it is a lie. The central lie is that the European Union is a bringer of economic and social progress, democratic and is founded on the basis of human rights. When we debate Europe, that big lie is combined with Project Fear. Today, Alistair Campbell is trying to recruit Irish people into joining Project Fear to spread its message. The Government would also like Members to join in with the message of Project Fear. I, for one, will not participate in it. I am not going to participate in what is the favoured weapon of the European establishment used here whenever we have had referenda on particular EU issues. It has also been used to an incredible extent in Greece and is now being used in Britain, as well as in the North where it has an added sectarian edge. We do not accept the central line of Project Fear that, if one does not go along with the neoliberal orthodoxy and undemocratic nature of the European Union, disaster will unfold.

The reality of this European Union was shielded for a long time behind an extensive facade of rhetoric and propaganda. However, while it might not be clear to many Members, that facade has been crumbling and the reality has been brutality laid bare because of the actions of the EU institutions in the economic crisis over the past several years. It is now clear to whole numbers of people that the Europe we have is not one of democracy or human rights but, instead, one of institutionalised austerity, of attacks on workers' rights, of war and racism.

Taking the issue of the rights of refugees, the big lie is that the EU welcomes refugees and defends their rights. “Not for us the policies of Donald Trump”, it claims. The reality is that the policies of fortress Europe are directly responsible for turning the Mediterranean into a graveyard of refugees. The new report, published two days ago, Death by Rescue, confirmed what I argued here six months ago, namely, that in withdrawing Operation Triton and replacing it with Mare Nostrum, the European authorities knew more refugees could die and did so to try to discourage people from coming. A 2014 Frontex internal assessment stated: “It has to be stressed that the withdrawal of naval assets from the area, if not properly planned and announced well in advance, would likely result in a higher number of fatalities.” What was predicted is what happened, which means that Charles Heller, a co-author of the report, was correct when he said, "European policymakers and Frontex have made themselves guilty of killing by omission".

The same approach is evident in the rotten deal with Turkey for the mass expulsion of asylum seekers to that country with a record of human rights abuse and persecution, turning Turkey into an open prison camp for those trying to escape the horrors of the Middle East and enter Europe.

As for the idea we have a social Europe that is a force for workers' rights and social progress, that idea can only be maintained by closing our eyes to the actions of the troika over the course of the economic crisis.

In this country, the ECB and European Commission pressured the then Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government to agree to the biggest bank bailout in the world, for which we are still paying the price. They imposed, and governments agreed to, an immense programme of austerity here that resulted in deep crises in our public services, deep inequality and a low wage economy. Why? They did it to save the big European banks and to ensure the bondholders got their money back. That is who this European Union works for: it is a club for the bankers, the bondholders and big business. They did the same with Greece, with even more horrifying consequences, and with Spain and Portugal. The result is a humanitarian catastrophe in Greece, with wages cut by a third, public services cut by a quarter, and widespread poverty. Every single index of deprivation is completely off the charts. It has not worked to resolve the crisis, but it has worked for those for whom it was meant to work, namely, the 1% in Europe.

Social Europe was always a myth. It has just been exposed over recent years. Those elements like equal pay for equal work in EU law were not granted by the European Commission or the European Council from above. They were won by struggles from below. In that case, they were won by the struggles and strikes of French women workers in the bread and roses strikes of 1946, before it was enshrined in the Treaty of Rome in 1957 but not implemented since further waves of strike movements and mobilisations in the 1960s and 1970s. With the interpretation of the posted workers directive in cases like Laval in Vaxholm, we see the reality of how this works to facilitate a race to the bottom in terms of workers' wages and conditions. This policy of the dictation of austerity is not a temporary aberration for the crisis. It is a permanent policy and has been written into law, first by the Maastricht treaty, then by the fiscal treaty, the six pack and the two pack. They are the reasons we had this ridiculous debate during the elections about the so-called fiscal space. That is the almost non-existent space within the right-wing, neoliberal, Thatcherite EU rules which outline the policies we can implement that stay within those rules. With optimistic growth projections, they were able to say there was up to €10 billion to put back into public services when €40 billion was taken out in the course of the crisis. If that growth turns into recession, those same fiscal rules mean the fiscal space becomes a negative figure and more austerity is demanded by those rules, as we pointed out at the time of the fiscal treaty, so there is a crisis and then more austerity is imposed, driving a downward spiral.

The lie that the EU is democratic or a force for democracy deserves to be utterly ridiculed. We have had at least three silent coups driven by the unelected European Central Bank over the past six years. The Italian and Greek governments were removed in 2011 and both were replaced with government by bankers and for bankers, operating in the interests of bankers. Then there was the coup last year in Greece, with which, unfortunately, Tsipras was complicit. This was directed against the Syriza programme and against the 61% rejection of austerity measures. The ECB, which is responsible for the banking system in Europe, deliberately brought the Greek banking system to the brink of collapse, with the Irish Government screaming at them to pull the trigger, to try to force people to accept austerity.

These right-wing policies apply not just internally in the EU but also in its external policies. If we look at the trade deals the EU does around the world, they are designed to exploit the natural resources and workers of the global south. It is currently negotiating the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, TTIP, which would be the biggest free trade deal in the world. It is a charter for corporate rights, driving a race to the bottom of the Atlantic in terms of worker, consumer and environmental rights. It would also grant corporations the right to sue states for doing anything that interferes with their right to profit.

The notion that the EU is in some sense a project for peace also does not relate to the facts we have. For example, we have the establishment of battle groups, which means the EU can field 50,000 troops anywhere in the world within five days. Article 42.3 of the Lisbon treaty sets out very clearly that, "Member States shall undertake progressively to improve their military capabilities." The EU has war and imperialism at its heart, rather than peace.

The resources exist within Europe to have a decent life for everybody, to have decent wages and conditions and good, quality public services for everybody, to protect the right of asylum for everybody, and for everybody to have the right to a decent home. The problem is that those resources are hoarded by a small, super-rich minority, corporations in particular, which collectively hoards €3 trillion in the EU. That wealth needs to be nationalised. That wealth, from the major financial institutions and the big corporations, needs to be taken into democratic public ownership and used in a democratically planned way to meet the needs and aspirations of people. In other words, we need a socialist Europe. A socialist Europe would be built democratically from the bottom up, without the dictatorial powers of the European Commission or the European Central Bank. That is the vision of a democratic and socialist Europe that we and socialists across Europe are fighting for.

When people go to the polls for this referendum, in Britain and in the North, there will be no option of voting for that socialist Europe. The choice is for or against this Europe - the Europe of austerity, of war and of racism. Therefore, socialists in Britain and in the North, including the Socialist Party, are campaigning against this right-wing Europe as a way of removing barriers to socialist change. They have zero in common with the right-wing Tories and UKIP members who, unfortunately, have been allowed to dominate the campaign to leave. Their vision of a more neoliberal, more anti-immigrant, more anti-worker Britain outside the EU is anathema to socialists. Instead, socialists see this as an opportunity to take out two barriers to socialist change - the Tories on one side and the European Union and its restrictive rules on the other. We are for a vote against this EU on a socialist and internationalist basis. It is not a vote for isolation, but a vote for building a democratic and socialist Europe that works for the millions instead of the millionaires.

A vote against the EU is a real possibility. If it happens, it will cause a deep crisis for Cameron and the Tories. It could also precipitate a general election, which could lead to a Corbyn-led Labour Party coming to power. If that government were to implement socialist policies in Britain, it would transform the debate about what kind of society we have, about how our wealth is used and owned, and what kind of Europe we need. It would be an important step to building the socialist Europe we need.

Regarding the debate in this country, the indications are that in the event of Brexit, IBEC would use it to try to attack and undermine wages and conditions. It has said that even the paltry 50 cent increase in the minimum wage was a mistake and that in the event of Brexit and sterling devaluation, the minimum wage could be 40% higher here than in Britain. That indicates IBEC would go on an offensive against the minimum wage and against wages in general. A strong signal should go out against that so-called Project Fear to say that IBEC should back off and that Brexit will not be accepted as a reason to attack wages and conditions. We reject that whole notion of the so-called Project Fear and we join in that struggle for a Europe not of the 1%, of the bankers, bondholders and big business, but a socialist Europe of the 99% and of the millions right across Europe.

See this speech in context