Gary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Taoiseach for a comprehensive presentation. I will start by focusing on the parts on which we find agreement. The Taoiseach's statements, both today and in the past week, in relation to Europe and the Polish challenge to the primacy of EU law were strong and effective.

I do not think we can equivocate in this belief. There seems to be a change of tone from Ursula von der Leyen, who seems to be somewhat equivocating and trying to find a compromise with people who are not being fair players on the rights of the LGBTQI+ community in Poland and the rights of women. I want to make it very clear that there can be no appeasement of people who seem unwilling to find common ground on values. I do not think we can compromise on other people's human rights. I strongly endorse the position taken by the Irish Government in advocating for conditionality of funding where necessary, particularly with regard to Poland's treatment of minority communities within its borders. It is absolutely essential and we should not equivocate. I do not feel we are doing so.

The Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, will speak about migration in his comments but I will quickly touch on it before he does so. EU funding simply cannot be used for barbed wire, fencing or any structure of this type that seeks to pen people in or make Europe a fortress. This rhetoric has come into the conversation from countries that are admittedly under pressure. People such as Lukashenko and governments such as the Turkish Government seem to be making pawns out of people trying to flee war and conflict. It should never be the case that EU funding is used for fencing, borders or to make Europe a fortress. It is anathema to the values on which the European Union was founded. We all have a role to play. We all have our fair share to do in terms of providing sanctuary where needed for people fleeing conflict and trying to find safety. I accept this. EU funding should never be used to fund borders and fencing.

The issue of rising energy costs has been mentioned substantially throughout the Chamber. It is one on which we will find common ground on our sentiments but differ on approach. There are geopolitical aspects to this. Energy costs have increased substantially and we have been encouraged by the Commission to find our own solutions. Tax breaks are also being advocated. I cannot step away from the fact that until June we had a moratorium in this country on disconnections. This moratorium was taken away during a period when the weather was hot. Now the weather is cold. We are being promised there will not be blackouts on a mass scale. This is the same in Ireland as it is in various parts of the European Union. This does not take from the fact that there is genuine fear in homes the length and breadth of the country that people will have their energy cut off due to an inability to pay.

Energy poverty was referenced in the Taoiseach's speech and it is welcome to see. What has not been referenced too much, not only in the Taoiseach's speech but also in conversations throughout Europe, is the extent to which energy poverty is a symptom of general poverty experienced by people in the European Union and Ireland today. Poverty is one of the greatest threats to the Union at present. A total of 22% of people in the European Union are living at risk of poverty or social exclusion. This will manifest itself in an inability to keep their homes or wear warm clothing. We need to tackle this on a macro scale. When I think of poverty I think of places in Britain that voted for Brexit such as Holyhead and Anglesey that are totally dependent on trade, and places such as Sunderland that had huge communities built on building and exporting products. Because they did not feel the warm hand of progress and felt poverty and experienced all that goes with it, they voted to leave. There are 112 million people in the EU who experience not only energy poverty but all of the other sources of poverty that go with it. Ireland should be a leader in advocating on behalf of these people and bringing poverty to the fore of our conversations.

The rise in cases of coronavirus throughout the EU is a source of concern. We are speaking about approaching this from a position of unity, and why would we not within the European Union? Let us be very clear. While the pandemic is surging and there is an inequality of access to vaccination throughout the world, we are all at risk. We cannot have a scenario where we are focused on vaccine boosters in the European Union and Ireland. It is a welcome conversation but to have it at the same time as people throughout the developing world have not had any vaccine brings a lie to it. Unless we are advocating for a TRIPS waiver on patents that can create an equity of vaccinations, we are all going to be at risk. We need to be advocating strongly for a TRIPS waiver. It will not be a panacea and we will need to provide access to technology and fridges in the globalised south. We need to create a lot more urgency with regard to vaccine justice. Otherwise we will all continue to be at risk.

See this speech in context