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

First, with regard to the Apple judgment, obviously we have the committee on economic recovery but the Cabinet as a whole will consider it this evening and will have a report on it. It is important to make the point that Ireland is only entitled to revenue within the law and legal framework. The essential judgment is that the Commission's decision is being annulled and so Ireland was not in a position to get any of that revenue because it was not entitled to it. That is the decision of the courts.

I also make that point that we need to look at the broader issue of global companies and multinationals and how their tax treatment is organised. Equally, it must be said that Ireland's industrial policy for more than 40 years now has been to attract foreign direct investment. It is founded on a basic strong relationship with those companies be they in life sciences, technology, financial services or in other sectors.

Tax certainty has been critical to that success, and it has been a success story. For far too long people on the far-left, in particular, and I am not going to put those in that bracket, have been niggardly in any acknowledgment of the central role of foreign direct investment in terms of the creation of modern Ireland as being a country of manufacturing excellence that creates good synergies with small to medium-sized indigenous companies and a sector that has created significant employment. I rarely hear that being said when this debate happens. It is a debate that has been fought on populist and simplistic grounds. The other key part of that agenda has been Ireland's reputation and credibility, in particular, the credibility of our revenue, because it is not just about one company, it is about a broader approach.

In essence, the court is saying that no special aid was given. No State aid was given in this respect. This may be appealed and if Apple had appealed it on its own it would have been the same decision of the court. That must be said. The Cabinet as a whole will assess it in the first instance. The Government's position is that we prefer the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, approach to dealing with it. I take the Deputy's point that there are issues. Global companies are bigger than states now. This is happening at European Union level as well and there is much vigorous debate internationally on this.

With regard to Deputy McDonald's question, I did answer that question yesterday. The Deputy has a habit of suggesting that I never answered a question. I did answer the question, which was if this was the mechanism by which issues around the Deputy Cowen controversy would be organised, in other words, the Cabinet co-ordination committee. The Cabinet co-ordination committee is a Cabinet committee. Discussions held there are, like all Cabinet committees, subject to the framework of confidentiality. I said to Deputy McDonald yesterday it is possible that at such a committee issues of that kind would be discussed, and also that outside of that committee there had been discussions. As Deputy Ryan said, he was fully informed on a timely basis. I was not fully informed on 3 or 4 July.

See this speech in context