Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Anti-Austerity Alliance) | Oireachtas source

We are discussing a new Standing Order which would require that Opposition Bills relating to banking, Central Bank currency and such like would need to be referred to the European Central Bank for an opinion before proceeding through the various Stages in this House.

I will begin by registering our view of the body we are being asked to send Bills to, namely, the European Central Bank. The European Central Bank was part of the troika which implemented and forced austerity measures on this country. It was part of the most hardline wing of the troika when it came to implementing austerity here. It was involved in forcing 1% of the population of the European Union to carry the can for 42% of Europe's banking debt. When burden sharing was put on the agenda - the idea of burning some bondholders - we were told by the head of the European Central Bank at the time that a financial bomb would go off in Dublin if that measure was to be taken. The ECB has an agenda; it is a neoliberal agenda.

This proposal is a control mechanism. I notice that both Deputy Kelleher and the Minister of State, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, were silent. They did not mention that a refusal to co-operate with this measure means that infringement proceedings against the State can be taken, which would mean fines being levied on the State. They did not mention either that if the recommendations and opinions of the ECB are ignored, if an individual takes a case to the courts against the State about the legislation, the ECB opinion that was ignored can be used as part of the evidence in that case.

We have been told that there must be consistency and that 33 items of Government legislation have been sent to the ECB already. It seems the ECB wants a control mechanism over Government Bills but now over Opposition Bills as well. We believe that is undemocratic and we will call a vote on this issue at the end of the debate.

What has brought us to this point? It was a Bill from Deputy Michael McGrath on variable mortgage rates, which would mean that the Central Bank might be in a position to give some measure of relief to 300,000 householders paying variable interest rates on their loans. We supported that Bill. We criticised it as well because we felt it was a very mild measure, but it aimed to turn the tables to some extent - instead of favouring the banks at the expense of ordinary people, it would have favoured ordinary people at the expense of the banks, although not nearly to the extent we would have liked. That is the Bill that caused the problem, and that is significant in and of itself. I would be interested to know if it was the Minister who contacted the Attorney General for a decision or if the ECB contacted the Minister - whether by phone or e-mail or in conversation - to ask that this be dealt with.

I am not surprised but I note that the mood in the Parliament has been that this is not a big deal; there has been a certain shrug of the shoulders. I have to say that criticism expressed by the Sinn Féin Deputy in the debate was very mild. In fact, he said they would be supporting the motion. That is out of step with the view of ordinary people regarding this issue. I believe that when ordinary people read and hear about this, they will be shocked at the level of surveillance we are talking about from the European Central Bank. The Deputies and the parties in the House underestimate the feelings of people on this issue. This is now about the reality of the capitalist European Union and surveillance of the budgets of member states. Only a few weeks ago our housing committee felt it could not propose that 50,000 houses be built from State funds for fear it would transgress European Union fiscal rules. Tonight we see a stifling and overbearing level of surveillance from the European Central Bank regarding not just Government Bills but Opposition Bills as well. We will be calling a vote on this measure.

See this speech in context