Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This country has come a long way in the past 12 months. Through the hard work and sacrifice of the Irish people we have re-established political and financial stability and we have laid the foundations for economic recovery. The choice facing us now in the referendum on the European stability treaty is whether we build on what we have achieved or go backwards. Nobody is trying to pretend that the treaty is the solution to the problems facing Ireland or Europe. It is an important part of the solution, however, and an essential building block in our economic recovery.

Ireland is a small and open economy. Our jobs and living standards depend on what we make and sell to others. Our prosperity depends on the stability and prosperity of others, including in particular the stability and prosperity of the eurozone countries. The euro is not an abstract concept. It is the very money in our pockets. It is a simple fact that what is good for stability in Europe is good for us.

Twelve months ago, Ireland was stuck in a profound economic and political crisis. This Government has gotten to grips with the problem, however. We have brought about far greater stability and worked hard to restore Ireland's reputation abroad. We are succeeding in our task but to make further progress we need the instability in the Euro area to end. As Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, I recognise that what is holding down confidence and investment is not uncertainty about Ireland but uncertainty about Europe and the euro. We have to overcome that problem and this treaty is an essential part of achieving our objective.

Viewed from the outside, Europe as a whole has often seemed slow in responding to the crisis. There is some truth in that analysis. Europe has been deeply affected by the crisis of recent years, with its institutions and leaders having to navigate through uncharted waters. However, it is also true to say that a lot more has been achieved than is often appreciated and we are now making tangible progress. When the crisis broke, Europe lacked the tools it needed to deal with an unprecedented set of circumstances. Step by step, it has put a response in place and has moved to address the immediate crisis, while learning lessons as events unfolded. It was improvising when the first package of support for Greece was put in place but it has since put in place the temporary mechanism of the EFSF, under which Ireland has drawn down some of its funding, and building on its experience the permanent mechanism of the ESM will come into being in the middle of this year.

The Union has also taken steps to strengthen the rules through which economic and monetary union is built. At the end of last year six legislative measures were adopted and another two are currently in the pipeline, with a shared commitment to their early adoption. Taken together, these measures enhance our capacity to see what is really happening in each other's economies. For example, it will now be easier to spot imbalances, such as the property bubble and over-reliance on unsustainable taxes that contributed to Ireland's downfall. They enhance our ability to enforce the rules by ensuring that all member states, whether big or small, live up to the responsibilities that come with a shared currency. In the European semester and Europe 2020 processes, Europe has put in place systems that can ensure the structural reforms vital to a sustainable return to growth are delivered. These will be at the heart of the discussions that will take place at the European Council tomorrow and on Friday. Ireland has strongly supported this work as vital to our national recovery and investing in our future.

The stability treaty is another part of the solution that Europe is putting in place. The new treaty has to be seen as an important part of this overall picture. It responds, in particular, to a desire on the part of the countries of the euro area to deepen their commitment to each other in recognition of the responsibilities and obligations they share. It is a signal to the wider world that the problems which have undermined confidence in the currency cannot be repeated and that the necessary lessons have been learned. It is simple logic that if one asks people to fix a problem, one must make sure the mistakes that caused it are not repeated. Other elements of the picture include the measures being taken by the ECB to provide liquidity to the European banking system and the new firewalls that have been put in place to protect countries from the effects of contagion in financial markets.

Financial discipline is part of the solution but growth is another part. This Government has consistently called for the drive for discipline and reform to be matched by an equal commitment to growth and job creation. We have argued that any other approach is lopsided and doomed to fail. It is clear that our analysis is being taken on board. The Government is working with like-minded colleagues to drive the agenda forward. At the end of January the European Council identified priority areas for action. Tomorrow's meeting will build on this and in June the European Council will return to the matter to ensure that commitments are being honoured. The Taoiseach and I have engaged with our colleagues and are helping to shape the agenda in Europe. Matters are progressing and repairs are underway.

What will it mean for Ireland to ratify the Treaty? In a narrow sense it will commit us to implementing budgetary rules and procedures to which we are already substantially committed. Voting for the treaty also has far wider implications, however. It will send a message to our partners that we recognise and accept the fact that our fates are locked together. We are ready to shoulder the responsibilities this brings. It will send a message to those looking to invest in Ireland that we are deeply serious about restoring the stability and security of our currency and helping to provide the certainty that investors seek before they can commit their money with confidence. It will enable us to hold our partners to account in a way that has not been possible heretofore. The larger member states will no longer be able to use their weight to escape the rigour they apply to others. It also puts in place a set of rules about how future Governments will manage the public finances. The Government was already committed to this approach regardless of whether our partners in Europe were minded to do likewise.

We were already committed to a fiscal responsibility Bill containing many of the provisions now set out in the new treaty. As a small and open economy, we have to learn the lessons of this crisis and ensure that our national finances can endure the buffeting of future shifts and changes in the global economy. Ratification of the treaty will also mean that Ireland will continue to have access to emergency funding under the ESM should it ever be required in the future. We have made plain our determination to exit the EU-IMF programme of support as quickly as we can and without resort to the ESM. That remains the Government's steadfast intention but we should also recognise that having the ESM available as a backstop is a sensible and prudent precaution which will further enhance international confidence in Ireland.

I have no doubt that some people will seek to distort the truth about this treaty for their own ends. They are already doing so and we heard some of it earlier today. I believe the Irish people will see beyond such self-interested arguments and will recognise that the treaty is part of a package of measures at national and European level to restore stability, underpin confidence and support a return to growth and job creation. It is absolutely in our national interests to ratify it, as a step towards a more secure and sustainable future. In seeking that support, we are asking the people to cast their votes for economic and financial stability. In the end, this treaty is about providing a foundation of stability, on which we can build a sustainable and real economic recovery.

As I said to the House yesterday, the Government was elected to office in the face of the gravest political, economic and financial crisis the country has faced. Before that, the people had looked on in horror as the economy went into a nose-dive and as the economic crisis was followed by a political crisis. In the past year, the Government has taken a grip of the problem and we have been successful in restoring political, economic and financial stability. We have worked diligently in the slow and painstaking task of restoring our reputation as a country and our standing among the member states of the European Union.

Our efforts have been widely recognised, and they are showing results. As a country we are making progress together, step by step. Our cost of borrowing has fallen and we have improved the terms of our EU-IMF programme, saving the country €10 billion in interest payments. We are once again, as we were in the past, held in high regard internationally. Our credibility is being re-established and confidence in Ireland is growing. Investment is returning and with it jobs as we have seen in jobs announcements in recent weeks. We know where we are going and we have shown that we have what it takes to get there. Thanks to the hard work and sacrifice of the people, we are now in a far better position than we were a year ago. We now need to build on that stability, achieve economic recovery, create jobs and make existing jobs more secure.

However, we cannot take that stability for granted, and we must also recognise that we can only do so much for ourselves. We are part of the euro currency union. For Ireland to succeed, Europe must also succeed. For there to be stability in Ireland, we also need stability in the euro area. People should not listen to those who try to make cynical use of the debate to advance narrow partisan interests to the detriment of the interests of the people. The situation is too serious and the issues involved are too important. In the face of the worst crisis we have weathered together, the people have shown their mettle. In doing so, they have gained the respect and confidence of our partners in Europe and beyond.

We now have an important opportunity to take a decision that will help to secure all that we have worked hard to achieve with a positive step towards our national recovery and a vote of confidence in our capacity to recover and regain control of our own affairs. I look forward to a full and respectful debate, to a clear and positive outcome and to moving forward together.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis an Rialtas as ucht an díospóireacht tábhachtach seo a bheith againn inniu. I wish to reflect the sentiments expressed by Deputy Ross in respect of the initiative taken on the advice given by the Attorney General, Ms Máire Whelan, who has done the State some service.

Yesterday at 3 o'clock, the eyes of Europe once more turned towards Ireland. Supported by the enduring strengths of our Constitution, the people, despite Government efforts to avoid it, have finally been given the opportunity to give their opinion on the future direction of the EU. It is a chance for the people to affirm our role in a Union that has transformed a war-torn continent onto the most peaceful and prosperous community in the globe. As it has since we guided Ireland into the European Economic Community in 1973, Fianna Fáil will support efforts to move Ireland and the European project forward.

Since the agreement of the outline of the fiscal compact in December, Fianna Fáil has consistently called for a referendum to be held. The democratic deficit that is gnawing away at the heart of Europe cannot be ignored despite desperate and ultimately failed Government attempts to avoid a referendum, which have weakened our position in the eyes of the electorate and our EU partners.

We will vote in favour of the treaty as a step towards facing up to the fundamental challenges facing the eurozone. However, we believe it does not go far enough and that the ECB's role needs to be reformed, fiscal union needs to be established and pan-European banking regulation needs to be set out. The fundamental design flaws of the euro need to be addressed in order to get Europe's and Ireland's economies moving again. Our policy of constructive engagement with Europe has benefited Ireland immensely and will continue to do so into the future. The benefits of free trade, infrastructural investment and unprecedented movement across the Continent are central parts of Irish people's lives today. The greatest assertion of Irish independence from Britain was the day we joined the EEC and broke the cords of economic reliance on the UK that had bound the country since 1922. Those who cynically play the nationalist card in the upcoming referendum should recall that independence is more than mere slogans.

Our engagement with the EU is founded on shared values of solidarity, human rights and democracy. It is an engagement that involves - like any good friend - criticism where necessary. We are profoundly critical of the limits of the fiscal compact, which is just one step in a far longer journey in addressing the crisis we all face. However, as the proverb goes, every journey starts with a single step and we will not indulge in cruel populism, demagoguery and snake-oil salesman solutions to problems that demand honest action. The responsibility that falls on us as public representatives deserves more than that.

It is important for us to consider the context of the treaty, its details and the potential future repercussions on Ireland. The European project stands at a crossroads. Internally, it is assailed by a currency crisis, a stagnant economy and rising unemployment. Externally, it faces a volatile globe with rising economic powers which threaten to sideline it and condemn Europe to increasing irrelevance. Europe needs to take decisive choices on what direction to take in order to address these problems. This treaty is just a step towards the decisive action necessary. The economic future of our country is bound up with the choices the EU as a whole makes in the critical coming months and years. Ultimately, no amount of action plans will solve the unemployment crisis if the broader European macroeconomic situation remains dire. All pathways to work will lead nowhere if the EU continues to lurch from crisis to crisis as it has done.

The 1992 Maastricht treaty created the common currency after years of grave volatility in the markets and an utterly transformed Europe after 1989. It aimed to face up to the dramatic seismic fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Bloc that had been a dark shadow over the free Europe since the end of the Second World War. It was envisaged by Jacques Delors, Helmut Kohl and François Mitterrand as a core part of a new framework for a new Europe. However, from the inception of currency, it suffered from fundamental design flaws. Monetary union requires fiscal union. The Stability and Growth Pact of 1996, which aimed to establish rules to co-ordinate budgetary policies across the common currency area, was wholly inadequate in this regard. The fiscal compact treaty on which we will vote on coming months is basically a ramped-up version of the Stability and Growth Pact from 16 years ago, which built on the Maastricht treaty of 20 years earlier. After the Stability and Growth Pact was consistently breached by Germany and France, it was clear that it needed stronger enforcement rules. More recently the economic governance six-pack passed by the Council and European Parliament took steps towards this in December. The fiscal compact treaty is not a radical departure or a shocking loss of sovereignty. It is not the quantum leap required to solve the crisis at hand. Essentially, the treaty attempts to reduce the chances of poor fiscal policy in one country affecting another country. The rules, as well as budgetary oversight, co-ordination and multi-year budgeting, are in place to enshrine such good fiscal policy by making imprudent fiscal policies harder to enact. The compact is an international treaty outside of the EU treaty framework. It will enter into force following ratification by at least 12 euro area member states. It is open to these countries and to EU countries currently not members of the EU area alike. Unlike the Lisbon or Nice treaties, it does not require agreement of all EU member states, including Ireland, to go ahead. Ireland now has a choice not a veto on whether it wishes to move forward with our EU partners.

Fianna Fáil does not believe in a two-speed Europe and considers the United Kingdom's decision to step outside this treaty with grave concern. The unity and solidarity of the EU across all member states is vital to its future success. Verification of the treaty is required to qualify for the European Stability Mechanism which replaces our current funding arrangements under the European Financial Stability Facility, EFSF, in January 2013. The ESM is the permanent funding mechanism designed to stave off future sovereign debt crises. If Ireland decides to vote against this referendum and we are unable to return to the sovereign debt markets after the end of the EFSF, we will not be eligible of the ESM. A "No" vote would be a self-fulfilling prophesy in preventing a return to the markets. The bond markets will inevitably react harshly to the removal of the security net of the ESM.

Fianna Fáil has set out clear views on what action must be taken to get the European and Irish economies moving again. The treaty is not enough to solve the eurozone crisis. It is one step towards a comprehensive set of policies. An overhaul of the eurozone design framework is needed to address the fundamental problems facing the eurozone. The three main problems are the limited mandate of the European Central Bank; the lack of uniform financial regulation, including a pan-European bank resolution regime; and the lack of a more ambitious fiscal union, in particular one which involves transfers between member states. Dr. Alan Ahearne correctly describes the treaty as an indispensable bridge to the policies necessary to confront the crisis. Creating a framework to co-ordinate fiscal policy in countries sharing the euro currency allows for greater macroeconomic policy efforts throughout the eurozone.

Ultimately, a combination of fiscal and monetary measures is required to tackle the crisis by attacking the basic design flaws in the euro. Fiscal union is the only real solution to the crisis as well as generating economic growth and job creation. Without financial transfers the dominance of Germany and other northern European countries would be copper-fastened and the union would be placed under immense pressure because weaker countries cannot devalue their currencies to compensate. Fiscal union with eurobonds that pool sovereign debt will strengthen all member states' economic performance.

The ECB's mandate should be reformed to a model similar to the US Federal Reserve in which the ECB can expand monetary policy by buying debt from member states. Strong unified financial regulation throughout the union, reflecting the reality of international finance under the remit of the ECB, will be vital to ensure the banking crisis that we have endured does not recur. These changes are necessary to put the euro on a solid footing and secure the future of the European Union in a rapidly changing world.

The Government has wasted immense energy and political credibility in its attempts to avoid a referendum. In the eyes of the electorate, it is seen to be running away from going to the people on a difficult topic and to only grudgingly accepting a referendum now on foot of legal advice. In the eyes of our EU partners, the efforts to accommodate a Government that consistently emphasised the need to avoid a referendum have been utterly useless. No doubt a sense of shock and surprise spread throughout the corridors of Brussels yesterday evening. When the Tánaiste commented last July to the Institute of International and European Affairs, IIEA, about how the Government was determined to re-build our relationships and restore our standing within the European Union, did he mean haranguing other governments into changing the treaty to avoid votes, only to find out that, ultimately, it had to hold a referendum anyway?

Since the agreement of the outlines of the treaty in December 2011 Fianna Fáil has called for a referendum. We believe that without democratic legitimacy the steps necessary towards addressing the critical problems of the Union will be doomed to failure. The people must be consulted and the democratic values upon which the Union was founded should always be at the heart of major policy decisions. In the long term, the European project cannot survive if ordinary citizens do not have an active role in shaping its future. After the initial defeat of the Lisbon treaty in 2008, significant pressure was placed on the Government to press ahead with other routes to advance the treaty without another referendum. That was the wrong route to take. Hiding from the people in the ivory towers of Merrion Street or the Berlaymont building is no way for democratic states to work together. We took the right route and held another campaign. We made an effort to engage constructively with the people and ensure that the views of the people guided our way forward. The Government of the day should never avoid the people as any short-term gain is always at the greatest of long-term costs.

I regret the attitude taken by Cabinet Ministers towards the referendum. The views expressed by the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Varadkar, that a referendum would not be very democratic or that it would turn into a referendum on extraneous issues do not represent the sort of positive open engagement that this campaign needs to win. The people will not be impressed by a half-hearted Government forced into a referendum fighting a rear-guard action. The Government must transform its negative attitude towards referendums, a core part of Irish democracy, and run an campaign of open engagement easily accessible information and positive but not uncritical EU participation.

Just as we call for a referendum to allow the people a choice, we also call for a campaign that is not dominated by fear mongering on one side and charlatanism and conspiracies on the other. Europe is more than a "Goldman Sachs conspiracy", as my good friend, Deputy MacLochlainn, has stated previously. His party, which claims to be pro-European, has voted against every European treaty since 1972. The people deserve honesty on all sides in this debate and not self-serving clinical political points with no real interest in solutions.

This is a high stakes referendum for Ireland which will have profound repercussions economically and politically. More important, it is also a chance at this juncture in history for a country on the geographical fringes of Europe to once more affirm its role as part of an unprecedented political community, a community which has turned a Continent ravaged by genocide and conflict between rival states into a transnational organisation unrivalled anywhere in the world and one that has allowed Ireland to break free from our historic reliance on the United Kingdom and drive on immense social and economic progress. Fianna Fáil will argue for a "Yes" vote as a step towards the actions we need to take to provide financial stability and establish a framework for jobs. We will argue for a "Yes" vote for our continued role at the heart of Europe. As is right and proper, the people will have the final say on whether we move forward on this treaty. I look forward to engaging them in the coming months.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I imagine the mood among those in the Cabinet was sombre yesterday when the Attorney General's deliberations were reported and it dawned on them that a referendum was unavoidable. I recall when the Tánaiste addressed the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs on this issue. We probed and determined that the term "preferably constitutional" was changed in the text. The only achievement our Government actively negotiated, apparently, was to weaken the text to avoid a referendum. The Tánaiste confirmed that-----

Arthur Spring (Kerry North-West Limerick, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Apparently.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Not at all.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is on the record so the Tánaiste can deny it all he likes.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Only what I said is on the record.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He confirmed that our Government's negotiators worked with other governments to achieve this weakening of the text. In return, we got the German Government's insistence that ESM access would be conditional on supporting the treaty, a fine achievement.

The Government must have been gutted yesterday when the Attorney General reported on her deliberations. Of course, Sinn Féin had already sought and received the same expert legal advice and we were ready and willing to take the case to the courts if the Government had denied the people their say. Now the people have the outcome they wanted.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sinn Féin must have been disappointed.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As our party president said, the Government has saved us a lot of money. We are pleased the people have got their outcome and that we do not have to court as we did previously when Deputy Pearse Doherty took his case.

It is strange to look across the House and see the leader of the Labour Party there because as we debate these issues and make our statements, the European Trade Union Congress and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions - the Labour Party grass roots - are protesting outside the European Commission building on Molesworth Street. They are protesting against what this treaty represents and against the right wing policies of austerity which have failed people across Europe. That should inform the Tánaiste as to the approach he should have taken on this issue and as to the negotiation strategy he should have adopted.

It is interesting that when people question the direction Europe is taking, we hear all sorts of statements about them being self-serving, cynical, conspiracy theorists, etc. Yet, when the European Constitution was put to the people of France, debates took throughout that country, in libraries, town halls and hotels and, on a progressive basis, the French people rejected the proposition of the European Constitution. They rejected the direction Europe was taking. The people of Holland did the same.

Before it came to Ireland, those in Europe stopped the process because the constitution was clearly being rejected. What happened instead? Did they go back to the drawing board saying they needed to reflect on the fact the European project was losing its way and was disconnected from the people on the ground? Not at all. They reconfigured some small parts of the constitution and put together the Lisbon treaty. The only reason Ireland had its say on the Lisbon treaty was thanks to Raymond Crotty, who took his case in the 1980s and against all the odds eventually won the right for the Irish people to have their say on these matters, the transfer of economic and political sovereignty to another remit. The Irish people then became the third country to reject what was, essentially, the same proposition.

What did Europe do about this? We know what the Tánaiste did about it. He went into the US embassy and told the US ambassador we would go back and do it again.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I did not. I never went to the US ambassador and never talked to him about it.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is good the Tánaiste is on the record now as saying that was not the case and that he gave absolutely no assurance to the US ambassador. Despite the Tánaiste's protestations, that is what was reported through WikiLeaks at the time and that disturbed the Labour Party grass roots.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should not believe everything he reads in the media.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Here we were again and we came back with the second Lisbon treaty referendum. We had an alliance of Fianna Fáil, the Labour Party and Fine Gael with their leaders walking down the street and telling people to vote "Yes" for jobs, growth and prosperity.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sinn Féin voted on that.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The economic crisis was just beginning at that stage and people's concerns were heightened, which made that a powerful combined message and promise to the people. They believed and voted "Yes", but they did not get jobs, growth and prosperity. Did they even get solidarity? No.

When economists across the world, both left and right, analyse the situation in Ireland, they all agree that the fact that our people were saddled with horrendous banking debt, which was a result of the failure of regulation at European level, was completely unfair and unjust. Have we got justice and did we get jobs, prosperity and all the good things promised? We did not. Yet, you wonder why Irish people are turning against the institutions of Europe and why people across Europe have lost confidence.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should address his remarks through the Chair.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am addressing the issue clearly. I am explaining the context of how this treaty came about.

This crisis was about free market capitalism, deregulation of markets, privatisation and all of those things that came with Reagan and Thatcherite policies, which were embraced in Europe against the will of the European people. This led to a collapse of that system. What did we get in response to the collapse of that ideology and belief system? We got more of it. We have a treaty now that blames investment in public services for the crisis.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Where does it do that? In what paragraph does it do that? The Deputy is making this up.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

People talk about conspiracy theories with regard to Goldman Sachs. The technical Prime Ministers of Greece and Italy are of the Goldman Sachs stable. The president of the ECB is from the Goldman Sachs stable. We have senior treasury secretaries and economic advisers in America from that stable. We must ask the question whether if these people and Governments have failed so catastrophically that people are saddled with recapitalising and nationalising banks and with the resulting devastation - one need only look at the situation here - how they can be rewarded and promoted. How can their ideology be put at the forefront and those with a different view be sidelined - the views of those who believe in the principles of Keynes that at a time of recession the cycle must be countered and the economy must be stimulated? Remember how Barack Obama, the US President, explained the role of government to his people in clear, cogent terms. In a time of recession, it is the task of government to intervene and try to restore confidence by investing public funds into the economy to get it moving again.

In Ireland and in Europe we are defying economic logic and the policy is failing catastrophically. We have more of the same in this treaty.

Arthur Spring (Kerry North-West Limerick, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are investing in the economy. Some 1,000 jobs are coming to Deputy Adams' town of Dundalk. The Deputy should get behind the flag he is talking about.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Tánaiste knows I am right about this treaty. This treaty is about Angela Merkel's insistence on austerity. She has given the impression to her own people that this was about irresponsible, reckless feckless people in the periphery - the banks and so on, but mostly ordinary people - who now need to be cleansed for their recklessness through austerity and that when the people can prove they are responsible citizens, they can avail of the supports. This is a lie. The core responsibility, particularly of German banks, is evident. I could quote George Soros, the former German Minister for Foreign Affairs, Joschka Fischer, and former British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, on this. This is the reality, yet Germany has not shouldered its responsibility when communicating to its people. However, we buy into this narrative. This is from where this treaty came and this is what it is about.

The Government talks about solutions. There are four key elements to the crisis. There is the investment crisis, the unemployment crisis, the sovereign debt crisis and a banking crisis. On the issue of investment and unemployment, we have a huge resource in Europe, the European Investment Bank, which could be deployed in a strategic fashion to get the stimulus started across Europe. It has a track record of prudent investment and return and provides an intelligent way of redistributing wealth throughout the European area, but in a way that provides a return on the investment.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sinn Féin was opposed to the treaty that set it up.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In Ireland we could deploy our National Pensions Reserve Fund, €5.3 billion of our own resources, in partnership with the European Investment Bank and consider key strategic projects. However, we have decided that capital investment, the low hanging fruit, will be drastically reduced. There is no vision. The emphasis is on always complying with the numbers.

On sovereign debt, we all know there must be a realistic write-down of debt. That is what the markets will respond to. They know that we cannot sustain our levels of debt. We cannot have growth in these countries and in the wider eurozone unless we have a realistic and fair deal for our people. We must also look at the European Central Bank and redeploy its resources and give it the capacity to purchase government bonds in the primary markets. The banking issue is a core issue. The core banks in Europe that engaged in reckless lending-----

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sinn Féin voted to guarantee them.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----are exposed to all of the various vehicles that are proposed. They have not been rigorously stress tested. All of the books across Europe - not just in Ireland - should be opened. The truth should be put on the table. When the rigorous stress tests reveal all the facts about the reality of the extent of this crisis, the banks can deleverage and we can recapitalise them on a case by case basis. Why has that not happened already? Why has the need for truth not been dealt with? I suggest that the core states want to ignore the truth. It is easy to sell a narrative about Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Italy being feckless and to suggest that people in the south of Europe and on the periphery of Europe do not have the same sense of discipline, responsibility and organisation as people in the core states.

Arthur Spring (Kerry North-West Limerick, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Nobody has said that.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This treaty fits the narrative. That is what this is all about. It is completely wrong.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Are you going to say anything at all about the treaty?

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The context of the treaty is very clear.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

You have spoken for 15 minutes without referring to it.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

You tell me and - far more importantly - you tell the Irish people how we are going to get to-----

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy, you are meant to address the Chair. You are not having a conversation with the Tánaiste.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In fairness, the Tánaiste addressed me.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I ask the Tánaiste to allow you to have the floor.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Would you like to make that point to him too?

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am making it. You are entitled to speak uninterrupted.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is fair enough. I am happy to address you. When the Tánaiste asked me a question, I tried to be polite by responding to him.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In fairness, you are always polite, Pádraig.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Of course. I will address the Chairperson because I cannot address the Tánaiste.

Arthur Spring (Kerry North-West Limerick, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

She cannot answer you.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Chairperson is insisting on this process. How does the Government suggest the Irish people can meet the demands of this treaty, such as the 0.5% deficit ceiling and the requirement to reduce the 60% debt to GDP ratio over a defined timeframe? In such a climate, how can we facilitate economic growth and restore confidence to entrepreneurs and people who want to make things happen in this country? All Deputies listen to their constituents. When we get telephone calls, we hear similar stories. As I have said on many occasions, I do not claim to have a greater insight into people's concern or worry.

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

They are very happy in Dundalk and in my area.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The core issue is that this treaty does not offer a solution to our economic crisis. The really interesting thing is that the strongest defence of this proposition that I have heard in the debates on it is that the ATMs will shut down and we will be unable to pay our doctors if we cannot access a bailout.

Arthur Spring (Kerry North-West Limerick, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Who said that?

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That has been the strongest defence of it.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Who said that?

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No economic defence of this proposition can be made.

Arthur Spring (Kerry North-West Limerick, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Who said that?

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is why the Government wilfully tried to avoid a referendum.

Arthur Spring (Kerry North-West Limerick, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We welcome the referendum.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The text was weakened.

Arthur Spring (Kerry North-West Limerick, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is great news.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As Deputy Ross has pointed out, the Attorney General has done the right thing. The Government knows this is a ridiculous proposition that does not offer a solution to our crisis. That is why it will resort to scaremongering again.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is doing a good job of that.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We will hear about jobs and growth. We will be told we will not get any money if we do not support this. We will hear suggestions of "better the devil you know", etc. Fair play to Raymond Crotty for giving the Irish people a chance to have their say on these matters. When the Irish people rejected the Lisbon treaty, that decision was celebrated not only in Ireland, but also by ordinary progressive people across Europe. I firmly believe that if the Irish people reject this proposition, far from being isolated, we will be celebrated across Europe for making a stand against the madness, insanity and lack of political leadership that have dominated in recent times. At last, the people have the opportunity - it is a unique and precious gift - to make such a stand.

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

We are going back to the 1950s.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If one needs any evidence of the lack of collective political leadership, it is the letter that has been written by 12 political leaders. There are 27 leaders in the EU. France and Germany were not involved in the letter. The Government is making it up as it goes along. This proposition is bad for Ireland and bad for Europe. The Irish people have a chance to make a stand and I believe they will make it.

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

All of the fishermen will vote "Yes".

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would like to share time with Deputies Catherine Murphy and Thomas Pringle.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

People probably smiled as they listened to the Minister of State, Deputy Creighton, on the radio this morning. She said that jobs will be jeopardised if we do not vote "Yes". It is a clear case of history repeating itself, first as tragedy and then as farce. When we were voting on the Lisbon treaty, the same people told us we had to vote "Yes" for jobs. We now have a level of unemployment that is worse than anything we had previously. Having attempted to drag its heels and avoid the need for a referendum, the Government is now being forced to put this matter before the people. I am absolutely delighted that this vote will take place. I do not believe the Government spokespeople who are saying they are delighted. I do not think they are. They have every reason not to be. The people of this country will shortly have a huge opportunity to have a say on how we are being governed. We are already seeing the beginning of the outline of the debate. I do not doubt that those who enjoy scaremongering will threaten us that this is about the future of the euro and our participation in the EU. Even though all of that is not the case, it will be thrown in front of us.

This treaty, which requires to be passed by just 12 countries, was designed specifically to enable Ireland and other countries to make a stand without stopping it from going ahead. We have already heard the argument that investment will be jeopardised and jobs will be put at risk if we do not vote "Yes". The experience of previous referendum campaigns demonstrates that such suggestions are utter rubbish. The only other argument the Government has made is that if we do not agree to this measure, we will not be able to access funds in the future. The problem with that argument is that the Government is telling us we will not need any more funds because the loans we have at present are secured under the current arrangements. It claims that its strategy is working and that it will meet our future borrowing requirements by getting money from the bond markets. If that is the case, we have nothing to worry about, but we all know that is not true.

The issue of a second bailout will arise if the Government continues to pay Anglo Irish Bank bondholders and other bondholders. It is inevitable that another bailout will be guaranteed in such circumstances. This treaty enshrines the annual repayment of over €4 billion of principal debt repayments after 2014. It basically amounts to a legal requirement. That is in addition to approximately €8 billion in interest payments on foot of the speculation of bondholders, etc. In that context, the Tánaiste's suggestion yesterday that this will be a blow to "casino capitalism" is absolutely and utterly ironic. Equally, we totally reject the threat of exclusion from the European Stability Mechanism, which is publicly funded by all member states, including Ireland. This is an austerity treaty, plain and simple. I hope the Irish people vote to reject it.

One of the key components of this debate is the whole issue of the structural deficit. If we adopt this treaty, we will enshrine in law an absolute requirement to have a structural deficit of 0.5% of GDP. We all know that the Maastricht guidelines already provide for a deficit of 3% of GDP, with regard to the Government's general level of spending over revenue. The structural deficit requirement will be in addition to that. There is no real clarity on what the figure will be. If we look at the Department of Finance's figures in this respect, as Michael Taft of TASC has done, it is clear that if we accept the principle of introducing extra cuts and additional taxes amounting to €5.7 billion, in addition to the measures that are already in place, in budgetary terms we are talking about an increase of 66% in austerity measures. We can say that with certainty because the Government is already planning to introduce an €8.6 billion package of spending cuts and tax increases over the next three years. If this structural deficit provision is taken on board, another €6 billion will be added to that. When the Government is campaigning in advance of the referendum, I would like it to explain to the Irish people, who are already being bled dry, how we will pay for such continued austerity into the future. That is why we are saying this is an austerity treaty. There is no doubt that it enshrines austerity in law.

This treaty also removes basic democratic provisions from elected Parliaments. I never thought I would quote a Tory MEP, but I would like to refer to the synopsis of this treaty that was given by one of them:

At best it is a distraction from the real economic problems we face. The fiscal compact effectively renders socialist high-spending policies illegal. As a fiscal conservative I should be delighted. However, a nation's economic destiny should be determined by the people through a ballot box, not political elites in a room in Brussels.

That is exactly about robbing the Irish electorate of a right to control their own government and to have the policies they want.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome yesterday's announcement because now the power will truly reside with the people, which is where it should have been. I was always of the view there was a moral obligation to hold a referendum on such a major issue and now there is deemed to be a legal obligation to do so. According to the Taoiseach's statement yesterday, the Attorney General in her formal advice said that the treaty is a unique instrument outside the European Union architecture and on balance a referendum was required to ratify it. This treaty is outside the European Union to which we all signed up and of which we have been a part for so long.

We are being told there is nothing new in what we are signing up to. For example, the criteria for entering the euro enshrined in the Maastricht treaty included that we were not to exceed 3% of a fiscal deficit or 60% of debt to GDP ratio. However, if we were to apply today to become members of the eurozone, our current economic situation would cause us to be refused. I use the term, "bailout" advisedly but even after this bailout we will have a debt to GDP ratio of somewhere close to 120%.

It is not a case of, "we are where we are", rather we must look at how we got here. It is clear there was major political, regulatory and domestic financial failings but I ask if those failings could have occurred if there had not been a failing at the heart of the euro. I refer to the supply of cheap money, of low interest rates, which fuelled the property bubble and an unsustainable lending pattern. We were instructed by the ECB not to allow a European bank to fail. The private debts of the banks were then assumed as a sovereign debt. The instruction of the ECB should have been accompanied by, at the very least, a sharing of the burden by the ECB with the Irish banks.

We are told the fiscal compact treaty and the debt are two separate issues but I cannot agree, they are one and the same. Much and all as I would like to take on board the optimistic tone of the Taoiseach yesterday when he stated that after years of crisis and sacrifice the Irish people now have the basis on which to build a sustainable economic recovery, I ask how can he possibly make such a statement. Signing up to this treaty will mean we are not signing up to the noble goal in theory of fiscal responsibility but rather we are signing up to reducing our fiscal deficit below 3% and as important, we are signing up to reducing our debt to GDP ratio to 60%. This will require to be reduced by one twentieth per year and this amounts to between €3 billion and €5 billion, depending on interest rates and a range of different matters. This will be a continuation of what we have experienced over the past six budgets and it will continue into the long term.

We know the consequences of this approach will be increased taxation, a range of new stealth taxes and significant cuts in public spending. We are already at the point where our domestic economy is in deep trouble and I ask the House to imagine if this were to be continued into the future. If we are being honest in signing up to these terms, we must say we cannot abide by them because our debt is not sustainable. Where is the social Europe we joined? Where is the Europe of equals constructed after the Second World War and over decades? Where is the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights? Without the economics to underpin it, this measure is not worth the paper it is written on.

Our debt to GDP ratio is connected with the euro, as is our budget deficit. While there is undoubted political and economic failures, I do not believe they could have occurred without a failure in the construction of the euro. I ask the Government to outline in detail how the terms of the treaty will affect this country beyond 2015. It is easy to scare people by asking who will pay the pensions, the nurses or the gardaí. Equally the question could be asked that if we are signing up to the terms of the fiscal compact treaty, knowing we have an unsustainable debt, how will we be in a position to pay on the exacting terms laid down? All the taxes we will collect will go to pay nothing but the debt. We might have a lender of last resort but that lender of last resort will be required to pay only debt. I have much more to say but I will contribute at another opportunity.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the ratification of the treaty. In 2011, the president of the German constitutional court said that it would be tragic and fatal if we were to lose democracy on the road to saving the euro. Thankfully, the Attorney General was brave enough yesterday to give the advice to the Government that we must recognise that Ireland is a democratic nation with democratic sovereignty. She advised the Government there would be no choice but to hold a referendum on this fiscal compact treaty. This has been a good day for the Irish people and a good day for democracy. At the very least, the Irish people deserve to have a debate on this issue and to have the opportunity to answer as to whether they agree with the ratification of this treaty.

I will campaign for a "No" vote because I believe that this treaty is wrong, that it is an attack on democracy and that if passed, it will be a tragic outcome in that we will have lost democracy in order to save the euro, in the words of the president of the German constitutional court. This is the fact of the matter because it removes any democratic power of this Parliament or of the Irish people in exercising fiscal control in the future. The treaty sets cast-iron rules with which we must comply, as has been outlined by other Members today. It means we will be in a situation of permanent austerity and that we will be continuously working to fund the reduction of debt and the payment of interest on the bailout and to the troika.

The Tánaiste in his contribution said that this treaty gives us guarantees and protections but I disagree. He argued this treaty contains nothing new, that it merely confirms the six pack and the other agreements made in December at European level. This treaty gives the right to another member state, another contracting party, to take Ireland to the European Court of Justice if that member state is of the opinion that Ireland is not in compliance with the restrictions imposed by this treaty. We will then be at the mercy of the court, regardless of what short-term measures we need to undertake in order to protect our economy and our society.

This treaty also gives the right to other nations who may be viewed by the Commission to have breached the terms and conditions of the treaty, to use their reverse majority voting to ensure that they are not brought before the European Court of Justice. In effect and in practice this means that Germany and France, combining with a couple of other smaller nations, will have a sufficient blocking majority to ensure that they would not be brought before the European Court of Justice and held to account for not complying with the terms of this treaty.

The Government will argue that this is not the case and that it could never happen. The first two countries to breach the Stability and Growth Pact were Germany and France. When it suits their needs in the coming years, when it suits their agenda, they will breach this treaty also, in the full knowledge that with the reformed voting rights they possess, they will be able to combine and perhaps force a couple of smaller member states to join with them in order to achieve that blocking majority to ensure that they will not be made to comply with the terms of the treaty. We can rest assured in this House and the Irish people can be assured, that Ireland will be made to comply with every letter and word contained in the treaty. Therefore, I argue there are new provisions in this treaty which are very dangerous for us, for our democracy and for our sovereignty. Those things need to be discussed and considered very carefully by the Irish people to ensure that we get the right answer. I hope that answer on the day will be a "No" vote.

In the coming weeks leading to Easter, the House will be asked to ratify the European stability mechanism treaty. This treaty is linked in its preamble to the fiscal compact and the two treaties go hand in hand. I call on the Government and the Attorney General to ensure that the ESM, European Stability Mechanism, is also put before the people and that on the day we vote on the fiscal compact, we also vote on the ESM treaty because the two go hand in hand; we cannot have one without the other and we need to put those questions to the people.