Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the debate. It touches on the very serious and important issue of what we do with the shares of AIB. I say that it touches on the issue because unfortunately it does not really deal with the fundamental questions of whether we should sell AIB in the first place and whether that is in the interests of the people. For the guts of the last hour no one has actually put forward an argument. The Labour Party, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil all agree one version, which is the sale of AIB, but no one has articulated an argument as to why we should sell the share of AIB in the first place. The Labour Party position falls into the logic that the sale is inevitable and that the only reason to delay the sale is to decide what should be done with the proceeds of the sale. That is not Sinn Féin's position and we have tabled an amendment to effect the position we hold. We believe that nobody inside or outside of this Chamber has articulated a case as to why AIB shares should be sold in the first place. It is now paying hundreds of millions of euro in dividends to the people. This is money with which we can do whatever we wish; we can invest it in capital, in our schools, in our health system or whatever. There is no constraint in regard to the dividends we receive from AIB.

Last week the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, confirmed to me that the sale of a 25% share in AIB would reduce Ireland's debt by 1%, which is not going to make a massive impact in the reduction of the debt. We see from the economic growth, and because of some artificial adjustments, that the ratio of debt has shrunk considerably. The closest thing we have seen to any cost benefit analysis of the sale of AIB came from the former AIB director and former CEO of the NTMA, Dr. Michael Somers, when he appeared before the banking inquiry. Dr. Somers explained that if he was to sell the bank, "say a tranche of 25% ... you're going to have to sell it at a discount because people are not going to pay you the full value". He went on to say why they would not pay the full value. It was because the State was holding the other 75%. He then argued that it would be in the best interests of the State to retain the full shareholding because writing down debt when bond yields are quite low does not make financial sense. The best thing to do was to receive the dividends the State receives from AIB. That is the reality. Sinn Féin believes that it makes economic sense to hold on to AIB and as the bank becomes more profitable to continue to reap the rewards from that, while always having the option of selling off AIB in the future.

We know who would benefit from this measure. The bankers would benefit because their pay cap of €500,000 would soon be gone. The advisers would benefit and they would all get their cut out of it. In 2015 we were told that Goldman Sachs was appointed to advise the Government on AIB and that it was going to do this out of the goodness of its heart. Last month, however, we saw Goldman Sachs' real motivation when it purchased the loan book of non-performing loans from AIB. That is the type of thing that happens in a country when State assets are up for sale. The bankers gain, Goldman Sachs gains, and many others like Goldman Sachs gain. What do the people of Ireland get? They reduce their debt by 1% but they lose a strategic and financial State asset of huge importance. If we were selling an airline or a port we would be holding a full debate in the House over many days and there would be a national conversation about it but because it is a bank and is seen as toxic debt, the establishment party considers it a done deal. This is not where Sinn Féin stands.

The other element of the motion takes the Labour Party to the top of the table for brass neck. The Labour Party sold the fiscal rules to the people, along with their cheerleaders in Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil. They told us that the State needed the fiscal rules and that it was for the betterment of the country. Yet, every single one of these parties now agree with Sinn Féin's analysis from that time and they have all stated that it is preventing us from investing into the basic capital infrastructure that we need. Consider the words echoed by the Minister for Finance today telling us how the fiscal rules are not allowing the State to invest in our crippled infrastructure or into the types of infrastructure we need to invest for the future of our economy, our people and our communities.

Sinn Féin's concerns were dismissed and anyone who raised issues in respect of the fiscal rules was dismissed as a naysayer. Unfortunately we have been proven correct. The fiscal rules are having the exact effect Sinn Féin and others said they would have; they are crippling investment when it is needed most. I am glad the Labour Party has copped on to this. Fine Gael has also copped on to this and even Fianna Fáil is arguing that the rules need to be changed. Rather than seeking a blind eye to be turned or a rule to be tweaked they should be working to reverse the damage by renegotiating the rules in a substantial way.

Of course we need greater investment in capital infrastructure. We told Teachta Howlin when he was the Minister overseeing this-----

See this speech in context