Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Before calling Deputy Micheál Martin, I wish to point out for the information of the House that as this is the first time we have had Leaders' Questions in this the 31st Dáil, I remind Members of Standing Order 27 which allows questions to be asked by leaders in the following order: the leader of the Fianna Fáil Party, then the leader of Sinn Féin, who will be followed by the nominated leader of the Technical Group. Some 21 minutes overall are allowed for Leaders' Questions, seven minutes to each question with the leader having two minutes to ask his question and the Taoiseach being given three minutes to reply, with that leader having one minute for a supplementary question and the Taoiseach one minute for a final reply. I wish to give notice that I intend to ensure these limits are adhered to on both sides of the House.

Deputies:

Hear, hear.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I call Deputy Micheál Martin.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle. I wish to add my voice and join with you in articulating our sympathy with the people of Japan as the horror has unfolded in recent days and to say that we support the Government's offer of support and assistance to the Japanese people. We have always been of that disposition in respect of the situation in which we find ourselves. The Government has my full support in regard to that issue. I would also like to assure the Taoiseach and Tánaiste of my full support in respect of any comprehensive programme of assistance that may be offered to Irish citizens who may be anxious to return home or to leave. I am aware of certain situations developing in that regard and, perhaps, a comprehensive programme may be required. The Government can, perhaps, comment on that later in the afternoon in the Taoiseach's contribution. That is important.

Last Friday a number of our European colleagues again tried to put pressure on the Government to increase our corporation tax rate in return for a lower interest rate on the loan facility we enjoy from the European Union and the IMF. They clearly hoped there would be movement on an issue which they also endeavoured to raise with the previous Government and on which they had failed. They could not get that commitment. I think they made the offer during discussions which were not really scheduled for decision-making but were rather exploratory in that regard. I think the Taoiseach recognises that it was a classic try-on and I wish to articulate my full support for the stance he took and his refusal to accept this offer and his rejection of other attempts to exploit this situation in terms of endeavouring to bring about tax harmonisation.

I have heard talk across the political domain about the need for a referendum on the bailout and so on. However, it is important to remind the European leaders, and I ask the Taoiseach to do so, that we had a referendum on corporation tax. We negotiated with the European leaders a protocol to be attached to the second Lisbon referendum proposal, which was put to the people. They were left in no doubt on that occasion about how sincerely and deeply held this view was among the Irish people.

In that respect, if the European Union is to mean anything to its people, the European leaders must keep their word and their word must be their bond. I ask the Taoiseach to remind President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel of that at the summit meeting. It is an important point which perhaps has been lost sight of in the recent discussions.

It is unfortunate that the issue of the reduction in the interest rate has been conjoined with that of corporate taxation. They are two separate issues. Over the past number of months, we have witnessed greater insight into, and people becoming more enlightened about, the need for a change and an improvement in the loan facility deal. Does the Taoiseach agree that perhaps the most important thing to emerge from the meeting on Friday was the confirmation that the consensus now exists to improve the European Financial Stability Fund, EFSF, and to ensure greater sustainability and recoverability from the programme?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I join with the Ceann Comhairle in expressing the sympathy of the Irish people to the Japanese people in their crisis arising from the awesome power of nature coupled with the difficulties being experienced with the nuclear reactors. I commend Deputy Martin on comments of support in respect of what the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, on behalf of the Irish people, can to do assist in this regard with expertise. Obviously, Ireland has a unique record of assistance in humanitarian crises of one sort or another, as Deputy Martin is well aware from his experience as Minister for Foreign Affairs.

It is heartening to hear Deputy Martin speak like this about our corporation tax rate. This is an issue of fundamental importance to everybody in this House and in our country. It may well have been a classic try-on but the point was made perfectly clear at the meeting in Brussels that these issues are separate and that the question of common consolidated corporate tax base, CCCTB, or the corporate tax rates are separate matters from the IMF-EU deal.

Our position has been to seek an improvement in the terms of the deal in so far as the Irish taxpayer is concerned. The decision at the conclusion of the meeting on Friday was that the countries involved in the EFSF would have interest rate reductions brought about. Ireland, of course, is the only country in that package. Greece achieved a reduction of 100 basis points, or 1%. While it is not a member of that particular package, its situation is particularly difficult.

I, on behalf of the Irish people and Government, and given the mandate the Government has been given, am not prepared to accept anything less than absolute clarity in respect of the corporate tax rate and the question of CCCTB. Deputy Martin will appreciate the references to this matter in New York yesterday are a cause of anxiety and concern. It is my privilege to travel to the United States this evening. Tomorrow I will reassure business interests who have an interest in investing in our country that these matters are of absolute importance to us.

The discussions over the past few days and again next week centre around getting an improvement for the Irish taxpayer in respect of the IMF-EU deal. As Deputy Martin will be aware, the Minister for Finance met the President of the ECB and Commissioner Rehn yesterday and is in a meeting of the Ministers for Finance today, and there are other meetings scheduled as we prepare for the meeting of 24 and 25 March. In that regard, our focus is to achieve a flexibility which will bring about an easing of this position for the Irish taxpayer.

I want to see that everything we do can advance us to a point where our country can borrow again in the bond markets, where we have retrieved our sovereignty and where our destiny is in our own hands. One can take it that every action the Government will take will be focused on that. Absolute clarity has been our point in respect of the corporate tax rate and CCCTB, and that is the way it will remain.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is clear for some time that a new deal is on the table in this regard. I would agree with the Taoiseach's emphasis on the term "clarity". We need clarity on this and on a number of other issues because clarity is essential to economic recovery, in particular, to investor confidence.

I ask the Taoiseach two questions in that context. First, would he support the motion that I intend to bring to the House next week to confirm again to the country, and to Europe and to the world, that there is cross-party political support for our corporation tax strategy and that this unanimous approach in the House has been unaffected by the recent election? There was a similar motion brought before the previous Dáil in November last. That would be an important statement in itself from the newly-elected Dáil.

Second, during the election campaign there was much commentary about burning the bond holders. In Fine Gael's document "Credit Where Credit is Due", there were references - in essence, a pledge - that this may have to happen. I was struck by the comments of the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes. Would the Taoiseach agree with the view of the Minister of State that such a move would be "crazy"?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have not seen the terms of Deputy Martin's motion. When on that side of the House, we put down a motion in respect of corporate tax rates as sending out a signal from the Parliament of how important it is for Ireland. I fully support the principle. I would like to see the wording of the motion. I would consider there will not be any difference of opinion about it.

In respect of bond holders, we made it clear during the course of the election campaign and in the programme for Government that there should be no further moneys put into the banks beyond what is already committed until we see how that responsibility is to be shared. Those are the discussions that are taking place at present.

Irrespective of changed views from Europe, as I made the point on many occasions, it is grossly unfair to expect the Irish taxpayer to have to pay fully for the cause of reckless banking, which happened over the years and which culminated in an agreement by the Government of which Deputy Martin was a member. There are serious difficulties being encountered by ordinary people in respect of the consequences of this. That is the focus of our attention, to get a better deal for the Irish taxpayer in respect of the IMF-EU deal.

All of these issues are now being discussed and considered. Hopefully, by Friday week we will be in a much clearer position arising from some of the works that are ongoing with the stress tests on the banks to have some greater clarity as to the true level of indebtedness.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I raised a specific point made by the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes when he said a unilateral burning of the bond holders would be "crazy". Does the Taoiseach agree?

Brian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Good try.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I call Deputy Adams.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Caithfidh mé a rá ar dtús go n-aontaím leis an Taoiseach agus leis an Cheann Comhairle faoin rud millteanach a tharla do phobal na Seapáine. Táimid i Sinn Féin ag smaoineamh faoi mhuintir na tíre sin ag an uair millteanach seo. I am very minded that there were two small earthquakes in England recently. One of them was in Cumbria, where Sellafield is located. Perhaps the Taoiseach might want to raise this issue with the British authorities. Our thoughts are with the people of Japan at this dreadful time in their lives.

Like many other Deputies, I have been back to my constituency. I have been hearing - as I am sure all of them have - tales of the misery caused by the universal social charge. The people of County Louth are very oppressed by this tax, all the more so because they are being asked to pay it in order to meet the price of the banking debt. I have read about recent remarks made by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan; he is one of the Finance Ministers, at least. I will read those remarks as I do not want to misquote them: "we are explaining to our European-----

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I apologise for interrupting the Deputy, but this is Leaders' Questions.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Tuigim é sin.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I ask the Deputy to put a question to the Taoiseach.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Níor chuir tú isteach ar an ceannaire eile. You did not interrupt the other speaker.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I did. I want to make it quite clear that this is Leaders' Questions. I ask the Deputy to put a question to the Taoiseach on a topical issue.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Tá mé ag cur na ceiste. Éist liom, le do thoil. I am putting a question. The Minister for Finance is quoted as saying that "we are explaining to our European colleagues that there's a certain point where a combination of the sovereign debt is manageable and [with] the bank debt put on top of it we reach a point where the sustainability of the situation becomes doubtful". Sinn Féin has been saying this from day one. Does the Taoiseach agree with the Minister for Finance? When will we reach the stage at which "the sustainability of the situation becomes doubtful", as the Minister has said? Is the Taoiseach prepared to arrange a referendum on this issue and thereby allow the people to have their say?

Shane McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We had one.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Adams has asked a number of questions. I will raise the incident in Cumbria that he mentioned. I do not have the full details of it, but I will be happy to raise it with the British Prime Minister when I meet him.

The Government agreed in the programme for Government to carry out a review of the universal social charge before the budget for 2012 is drawn up. The charge is having an impact on thousands of people, particularly those at the lower end of the scale. I feel something needs to be done in respect of people in that category. We will review the situation.

I share the view expressed by the Minister for Finance in the comment that has been mentioned. That is exactly where the discussions are at the moment. The meeting of the eurozone leaders related to debt sustainability. This country's position was made perfectly clear, given the situation that exists here. In my view, a referendum on this matter was held when the general election took place. This Government was given a clear mandate to improve the terms, in respect of the circumstances in which we find ourselves, on behalf of the Irish taxpayer. That is where our entire focus will be.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With respect, the question is very simple. The Taoiseach has agreed with what the Minister for Finance said. When will it be appreciated that the combination of the sovereign debt and the banking debt is not sustainable? What will the Government do about it? I predict that the interest rates will be reduced. We do not need to talk about corporation tax. We were told during the debate on the Lisbon treaty that corporation tax was not an issue and would not come up again. The real question relates to the comment of the Minister for Finance that the situation will not be sustainable. When will that happen? We are riding into a crisis about which our party warned during the election campaign. When will the situation become unsustainable? What will the Government do about it?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Adams will be glad to know that the conclusion of the meeting on Friday - it was contained in the statement that was issued - was that it was agreed that countries in the European Financial Stability Facility package would have their interest rates reduced. That has not applied to Ireland because of claims for conditionality that are being attached to it. I cannot speak for other European leaders but I speak with them on corporate tax rates or anything else. As the Deputy will be aware, the Commission published a paper on the common consolidated corporate tax base. It is fully entitled to initiate legislation and neither I nor the Deputy can stop it from doing so. However, in respect of that, I stated that we would participate in discussions but our view is absolutely clear in respect of the CCCTB and the corporate tax rate. On the question of the debt being sustainable, we have made this point on many occasions. The problem for our country is that we are able to deal with a challenging position in respect of the difficulties arising from our own economy but it is the cost of the banking structure that places the real burden on our people and it is there that flexibility, change and adjustments have to apply. That is exactly where the discussions will be focussed as we prepare for the meeting of 24 and 25 March, and beyond.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The deal is a bad one and the Taoiseach needs to end it. He is dodging the question.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am answering the question.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I express the solidarity of the ordinary people with the traumatised and suffering people of Japan. I earnestly hope that a worse nuclear disaster does not materialise and quietly salute the wisdom of our people, whose campaign in the 1970s ensured that we do not have to contend with the generation of power by nuclear fission.

Only six short Hibernian nights and days have passed since the formation of this Government and it is already guilty of monumentally betraying its promise of honesty to the people.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He could have waited a week.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Do not exaggerate.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The programme for Government promised burden sharing so that the gambling bondholders in the Irish banks would carry at least some of the massive losses they incurred and which are now being foisted on the people. However, the Minister for Finance said yesterday that we are no longer pursuing this option. In other words the economic lifeblood of the people is to continue pouring for all the bad gambling debts of the speculators. What has changed? Did big sister, Chancellor Merkel, order the Taoiseach to drop this demand at the meeting of EU leaders? What was he told at the meeting about the demand? We need clear answers. What has changed with his Labour Party colleagues? Only three weeks ago they were lining up the tanks to roll on Frankfurt to insist on terms with the ECB against the pressure of speculators. Now it appears the tanks will not get any further than the local social welfare office to shake down the unemployed and the poor to pay off the very same speculators. What happened? Let us have a clear and honest answer.

Since 2009, €15.4 billion has been poured into the banks by the taxpayer and a further €40 billion is contemplated. The Minister for Finance stated yesterday, as was alluded to, that sustainability becomes doubtful. In other words, a default is possible because the people cannot pay this amount. At what point is it unsustainable? Is it when interest reaches €7 billion, €8 billion or €10 billion per annum? Can the Taoiseach tell us? Is he aware of the comment by Mr. David McWilliams that the talk in Wall Street is of a default among the marketeers? Will the Taoiseach at least declare now that the people cannot pay and, starting with the €19 billion of largely subordinated unsecured bonds that are due to be paid by crippled banks very shortly, pour those billions instead into massive job creation programmes here to end the awful suffering of our unemployed people?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Higgins is welcome back. In his absence there was no difference between a day in Hibernia and a day anywhere else. It has been 144 hours or, as the Deputy notes, six Hibernian days and nights since the Government took office. Maybe if the Deputy had not been sent away to Europe by the voters on the last occasion, he might have found out what happened. I would like to know myself, actually. He might have a word with the former Minister for Finance when he leaves the Chamber to find out exactly what happened. As the Deputy knows, there is to be a parliamentary inquiry - with which, no doubt, he will assist - to determine what came about.

I have held the view for a long time that it was always unfair to expect the Irish taxpayer to fork out 100% of the cost of the consequences of reckless banking. I still hold that view. The discussions that took place last Friday, yesterday and today, and will continue next week, will centre specifically on this issue. Our taxpayers have taken a major hit due to this crisis, which was brought about by the previous Government of Fianna Fáil and the Green Party. The economic burden on our people is already severe. It is not that we want to get into a programme; we are in a programme - the IMF-EU deal - which is exceptionally challenging and has seriously dented our sovereignty, and which requires us to make reports each week. I repeat that no further moneys, beyond what is already committed, should go to the banks without some sharing of responsibility by those who have involvement in a number of categories. If other European countries do not want to proceed with that, or have a different view, these are the areas on which the discussion will be centred. My focus is on obtaining an improvement in the terms of this deal for the Irish people, and that is where my focus will remain.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach answered neither of my questions. What happened between last Wednesday, when the new programme for Government promised that the bondholders would take a hit, and yesterday, when the Minister of Finance said we were no longer pursuing this issue? I ask the Taoiseach to answer that when he comes to his final reply. At what stage is it unsustainable, as we have been warned by the Minister for Finance, to continue to increase this burden on the Irish people?

The Taoiseach said the situation was unfair. He might agree, then, with the argument put forward by some people drawing a parallel between the Famine and what is happening today. I would not wish to compare the trauma of the Famine with today, but at that time, fresh produce was going abroad to pay landlords while our people starved and now billions are going into European banks while half a million people are languishing on the dole.

The Taoiseach mentioned an inquiry into the banking disaster. I ask him to be specific about this, along with the two earlier parts of my question, in his reply. Will representatives of the Irish people be provided with a structure to find out the inside story of the orgy of profiteering in property and banking? We need to know who was involved, the profits that were made, the deals that were done and where the money is now. Will people be compelled to provide information and every book possible opened to get to the truth?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The position of the Government is clear, in respect of the programme for Government, on burden sharing. I will repeat that since last Wednesday the focus of our discussions has been on relieving the burden on the Irish taxpayer. I would much prefer if our country was in a position to borrow from the bond markets and be in charge of our own destiny. Unfortunately, because of reckless actions, that is not possible, and we are currently constrained by the consequences of the deal that was done.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What did the Taoiseach learn at the last meeting?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I learned quite a lot, actually.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Tell us.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I learned how to stand up for the Irish people.

Deputies:

Hear, hear.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I learned to stand up and defend our mandate. I learned to articulate on behalf of our country, and it was a privilege to do so, that we will stand up for what we believe in and for what we signed up to.

I made it clear to our European colleagues that when they came looking for assistance, this country voted for the Lisbon treaty to allow the institutions of Europe to develop and be able to live up to their potential. I also learned about some of the ways that other countries participate in debates and do their business. That, too, I suppose is always a learning experience.

I am not sure what type of orgies the Deputy is talking about, in respect of developers, bankers and all the rest, but I share his view that the truth should be known here, however it may become available through this House and the opportunities provided by the Oireachtas as a whole. I, too, would like to find out the truth about much of what went on and I hope that the Deputy will participate and help us in those discussions when they take place.