Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

This is a very interesting proposal when one looks at the details of it. I must say that the only reason I looked at it was that Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan was not going to be around last week when this was supposed to come up for debate so I was standing in for her to discuss it and read through it and read up on it to see what I could find out about it. It is very interesting because if one looks at what we say and the impression we present to the world as to how Ireland takes our responsibilities very seriously in looking at the developing world, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade says one thing, and then when one looks at what is actually being done through the Department of Finance and through these treaties, it raises many questions, such as what we are actually doing. This Ghana double taxation order is a perfect example. The Department has said that it did not initiate the agreement, but papers were released from the Department which show clearly that it was the Department that initiated the negotiation. We, therefore, do not know what is actually happening. Then we see that since 2012, Ireland has become Ghana's biggest source of foreign direct investment.

No doubt the Government will argue that the reason it is pushing for the agreement is Ghana is becoming more important. However, the agreement will limit Ghana's rights over income, profits and economic activity. One has to wonder why it is being pushed through now if that is the case.

I refer to Christian Aid's document in respect of withholding taxes as it encapsulates the issue. It states that the Ireland-Ghana treaty halves Ghana's taxing rights over income paid from Ghana to Ireland as royalties and technical services fees. It, therefore, reduces Ghana's key defence against profit shifting via such payments, for which Ireland remains Europe's leading conduit. This greatly increases Ghana's exposure to the risk of this kind of profit shifting. What are we doing here? It goes against everything we have been saying in other fora.

The Minister of State said that this agreement will be beneficial for Ghana and that the spillover analysis agrees with him. However, I have information that the analysis does not agree with him and that it says that it will not be beneficial for Ghana. What is the position? Even the IMF, of which I am not in wild favour, says that the benefits are doubtful. We would not put much store in the IMF but it is speaking out against this as well. We should be more careful and engage in much more scrutiny. These agreements should be opened up to more discussion in this House.

See this speech in context