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

1. To ask the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on EU affairs met last. [39244/13]

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

2. To ask the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on EU affairs last met. [42215/13]

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

3. To ask the Taoiseach the number of times the Cabinet committee on EU affairs has met since the summer recess. [45920/13]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.

The Cabinet committee on EU affairs met last month on Wednesday, 23 October in advance of the October European Council meeting in Brussels.

During Ireland's successful Presidency of the Council of the European Union in the first half of this year, the Tánaiste and I met Ministers daily to discuss a range of EU policy areas. The full calendar of Presidency events and meetings, and the need for rapid responses to EU policy questions daily, meant it was not always possible to maintain the regular structure of meetings of the Cabinet committee.

Now that we are in the post-Presidency period, with a focus on capitalising on the goodwill and expertise that was generated in the first six months of this year, a more regular schedule of meetings was resumed. In total, the Cabinet committee has met four times in 2013. I chaired meetings on 5 May, 13 May, 14 June and 23 October.

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

The role of the Cabinet committee on EU affairs is to oversee our preparations for Council meetings and ongoing negotiations with European Union partners. Given what the Taoiseach said last week about the decision on conditional funding emerging from what were called intensive discussions with EU institutions and governments, we must presume the Cabinet committee was involved.

The Taoiseach will recall that on 6 September, in advance of a meeting of EU finance Ministers, the Irish Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, told the Irish Independent that he would be seeking a conditional credit line of €10 billion. The chairperson of the Eurogroup welcomed this and the Taoiseach confirmed it. He went as far as to say how appropriate the figure of €10 billion was and how it represented the responsible thing to do.

Since 6 September, the eurozone economy has weakened significantly. Can the Taoiseach explain why he and his colleagues reversed the position adopted in September? What changed on the agenda of the Cabinet committee that saw it completely reverse its position in the past two months?

We were promised last week the background information used by the Government to justify its decision not to seek any conditional credit line. Where is it? Why has it not been published yet? Will that material be published? Could the Taoiseach indicate the role of the Cabinet committee in the decision, given that it met four times - twice in May and also in June and October?

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

This is a fairly simple question, asking when the Cabinet committee on EU affairs last met. We are straying into territory that is not included in the question. However, it is up to the Taoiseach to respond.

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

I answered the question on when the committee met. I chaired the meetings myself. I must say, for Deputy Martin's general information, that from January to the end of June, the number of meetings involving the diplomatic services, Ministers, Ministers of State and civil servants at many different levels ran to a couple of thousand. From my point of view, Ministers were really active, both here and in Brussels, at various meetings. It was just not feasible to have regular, set meetings of the Cabinet committee on EU affairs. I spoke to the Tánaiste daily. Ministers were involved in various elements of their negotiations. We were in very regular contact in that regard.

With regard to the decision to exit the programme on 15 December, there were three options: a precautionary credit line; a precautionary credit line involving the EU and IMF or the IMF; and no credit line at all. The Minister referred to the fact that Ireland would have to borrow approximately €10 billion next year, and that this would be considered. However, the answer to the Deputy's question is that no formal request was made for any precautionary credit line from a European point of view.

The background information relevant to exiting a programme is already on the websites of the ESM and the IMF. We did not make a formal request for an exit with a precautionary credit line. One does not have volumes of information about any of that. The background to the exit, in its various dimensions, is already published on those websites. We requested that the Minister for Finance go to Brussels, Frankfurt and Washington. The Tánaiste spoke to his counterparts and I spoke to mine. Putting all the information together, the Government made a very clear, straightforward and decisive decision to ensure certainty rather than a drift into uncertainty and consequent confusion. Stability is very important to government. Certainty is very important in our decision for Ireland and its people. The Deputy should bear in mind the background to these developments, including interest rates, buffers for the NTMA and the eurozone buffer of €500 billion. All of these things led to the Government's clear decision about what will happen when the programme ends on 15 December. The barrier will be removed and we will stand again as a full member of the eurozone, with the opportunities, constraints and securities that it offers. The decision is clear and straightforward and, I hope, very decisive, so there will be no confusion for anybody.

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

The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin-----

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

We are not getting involved in that. It is a simple question.

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

The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, did promise last week that he would publish all documentation that informed the Government's decision not to apply for a credit line. He said he would publish that documentation and that he would have no difficulty in doing so. Will the Taoiseach confirm that it will be published?

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

A question to the line Minister would be better.

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

It is a very basic question.

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

It is a very basic question but it is not the question on the Order Paper.

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

We are very restricted in what we can ask.

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

I know and appreciate that, but it is up to the Deputy to change the rules. I call Deputy Higgins.

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

We cannot, because the Taoiseach-----

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

The Deputy, having been in Cabinet himself for a long time, will know that the matters discussed at Cabinet committees are not to be discussed here.

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

I am not talking about that.

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

On what date did the Taoiseach say the Cabinet committee on EU affairs last met? There was a lot of noise at the time he was responding.

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

The dates were 5 May, 13 May, 14 June and 23 October.

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

Does that not mean that the Cabinet committee on EU affairs was in no way involved in the Taoiseach's decision not to seek a precautionary credit line on Ireland’s exit from the troika-led bailout? What does that say about how the Cabinet, or the Taoiseach, deals with crucial issues affecting our economy and our people in regard to the number of Departments, or Ministers responsible for Departments, that the Taoiseach involves or does not involve in the making of crucial decisions? Is it not the case that the Taoiseach's decision not to seek the precautionary credit line was to make big men, mar dhea, of the members of the Cabinet on leaving the troika behind? Is it not the case that this was a political decision to allow the Taoiseach and EU establishment to posture based on the fiction that three years of bitter austerity was somehow good for the Irish when it was, in fact, a disaster?

Is it not the case that the Cabinet committees the Taoiseach set up, supposedly to provide more effective government for the Irish, are really a charade?

What we have is the dictatorship of the Government politburo, known as the Economic Management Council, EMC, which makes all decisions. Members of the European affairs sub-committee include the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and the Minister for Education and Skills. These Ministers are in charge of Departments for which decisions the Taoiseach makes on this issue have enormous implications, particularly regarding jobs. What is the purpose of Cabinet sub-committees if the new politburo makes all of the decisions?

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

The troika programme in which we were involved for the past few years was a programme of the IMF, the ECB and the European Commission. The Ministers mandated to deal with the troika were the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. We were included in this programme a number of years ago and were determined to exit it. That exit would depend on a recommendation brought to the Cabinet by the Minister for Finance, in particular, following his analysis of the information, advice and comhairle from a lot of sources. The independent, respected Governor of the Central Bank was very clear on this issue. While the director of the NTMA might have had a preference in the beginning for a precautionary programme, he was very happy, following analysis of the bond markets, that this was the right thing to do. The NTMA has already confirmed that it intends to set out its schedule to the markets for returning to normality from next January. It is very clear from the comments made by representatives of the NTMA that the buffer built up by the agency while we were technically still in the bailout programme gives us sufficient resources to fund the country until the end of quarter one or quarter two of 2015.

Of course, the Ministers to whom the Deputy referred are impacted on by this decision, as is everybody else. I have to say as a citizen and a politician, as distinct from the position I hold in this House, that the reaction across the country has generally been very favourable. I do not accept Deputy Joe Higgins's assertion that members of the Cabinet want to go around the country like "big men", as he put it. Nothing of the kind is the case. We have a long way to go. The Deputy has never heard me refer to the much abused terms that were bandied about by too many people for a number of years, nor will he ever hear me use these terms. We have a challenge. We must get the deficit below 3% by 2015. The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation is in India negotiating further investment in this country, with the potential to create new jobs. The line of investment into the country is very strong; exports are at unprecedented levels and interest rates have fallen to 3.6% or 3.7%. These are strong indicators, but they do not negate the challenge we face. The scale of debt in the country is enormous. The national debt is still exceptionally high. Because of our sovereign rating and the scale of our debt, we have spoken to German colleagues about officials from the Department of Finance working with German officials in respect of the triple A-rated KFW bank. I hope we can put in place a structure to provide access to credit at much lower rates for small and medium enterprises which would have a direct impact on job creation. Officials will be in Berlin for the next few days to discuss this very matter. It was for all of these reasons that the decision was made.

The Deputy has asked me what the sub-committee on European affairs does. Clearly, for the first half of the year the committee and its members - various Ministers - were focused on their own responsibilities in Dublin Castle, negotiating with Commissioners and their colleague Ministers and Ministers of State. I had to travel to Brussels on a number of occasions with the Tánaiste to discuss difficulties that had arisen in the drafting of the European budget. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Simon Coveney, was involved in very intensive discussions about CAP reform. We were able to hold on to 97.5% of the funding, despite predictions that it would drop by 20% or 30%. The Minister was also involved in the reform of the CFP. These activities were assisted in various ways by the sub-committee on European affairs. However, it was not a function of the sub-committee to make the recommendation to the Cabinet about the circumstances in which we would exit the programme, which will close on 15 December. That was a matter for recommendation by the Minister for Finance who was assisted by every other Minister, as well as by the Tánaiste and me in terms of advice and the contacts and consultations that we had had with other leaders. As I said to Deputy Micheál Martin, we made a clear decision which we announced with certainty. It is a statement of confidence about Ireland. While we recognise that we still have many challenges ahead, we are not constrained by confusion about what might or might not apply in other circumstances.

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

It is very clear from the Taoiseach's answers that the sub-committee on European affairs was not directly involved in the decision not to seek a conditional credit line. I repeat what I said earlier, that the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, did say to the Irish Independent in September that he was seeking a €10 billion credit line. This was not general talk about what the Government had to spend or would need to secure. It was said very clearly that the Minister was seeking a €10 billion credit line, which the Taoiseach publicly supported at the time. The Taoiseach and the Minister have changed their positions since, as they are entitled to do. In changing that position the Taoiseach, the Minister and others weighed up the pros and cons of the decision, with the key issue being the impact of any credit line on the cost of borrowing in the next few years. The simple question was whether the impact would be positive or negative and how it would affect our debt levels.

The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, said last week that he would publish all of the documentation that had informed that decision, that is, the decision taken by the Government. I am not talking about general memoranda or documentation pertaining to what Europe or the EMS has. I am talking about the analysis the Government undertook to inform its decision not to seek a credit line. The Minister said on Sean O'Rourke's radio programme that he would publish that documentation. He said he would have absolutely no difficulty in publishing it. I ask the Taoiseach to confirm that the Government will publish it.

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

Obviously, if the Minister made the comment, here or elsewhere, I am quite sure he will follow through on it.

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

I beg your pardon.

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

I am quite sure he will follow through on it. If he said he had information that he wanted to publish-----

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

It was not his decision. It was the Government's decision.

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

The Minister, Deputy Brendan Howlin, made the comment to which the Deputy is referring. I have said-----

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

He is on the EMC.

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

I am sorry, Deputy, but this is not Leaders' Questions.

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

If Deputy Brendan Howlin made a comment as Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform that he would publish information on this issue, I am quite sure he will do so. Information on the nature of an exit from a programme like ours has already been published on the EMS website, as well as on the IMF website. This country did not make a formal request for a credit line.

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

I did not suggest that we had.

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

Nor did the Minister for Finance bring a recommendation to the Government that we seek a €10 billion credit line. It was not a case of the Minister changing his mind at all. The time had come to make a decision, based on an exit date of 15 December. The Government stated it would make its decision before that date. Make your mind up time had arrived. The Government was very clear. We said that, on the basis of all the evidence, including independent reports and independent commentary that was favourable, as well as on the basis of all that had been achieved through the decisions taken by the Government and with the people, it was the right time to make the decision and that this was the right decision for the country, rather than leave confusion.

As the Minister pointed out, if precautionary lines were used, they last for 12 months with the possibility of an extension and a second extension plus the European response to bank stress tests being carried out in the autumn of next year. One does not know the answers to all these things yet.

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

Is anything clear?

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

We know where we stand now. We were clear and decisive. It was "make your mind up" time. The Government did so clearly, decisively and with certainty about where we are headed.

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

Is it not the reality that the Taoiseach's choice was between the sharks in the financial markets who will gouge the Irish people for all they can get over the next few years on the one hand and, on the other, falling back on the piranhas that are the EU establishment and the ECB who represent the financial markets as well, as they have demonstrated in forcing Irish people to carry massive private debt that had nothing to do with them? Will he recognise that either going back to the cesspool of the markets or relying on the neoliberals of the EU and ECB is not the way forward for the economy and the people and it is a question of repudiating this massive debt that is destroying the economy and provoking the horrific austerity the Government is imposing, which will continue for years to come to destroy the livelihoods of our people and the future of young people? The Taoiseach should recognise those realities at least.

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

As I understand it, the role of the Cabinet committee on European affairs is to provide the Taoiseach and the Government with strategic direction, coherence and co-ordination on European affairs. That is obviously an important function. In preparation for today, I went on the website of the Department of the Taoiseach and the members of the committee are listed. Lo and behold, it includes Minister of State, Deputy Lucinda Creighton. I thought I would inform the Government that she has left the Government and a new Minister of State is in place, Deputy Paschal Donohoe. Clearly, a committee charged with such an onerous responsibility to co-ordinate and give strategic direction should at least have that right.

The Taoiseach will also recall that prior to the last EU Council meeting I raised with him the issue of surveillance of member states by the US National Security Agency. He never answered me. He ignored my question and then it became a huge topic at the meeting on the back of the revelations by Edward Snowden. Has the issue of surveillance, which clearly goes beyond security concerns as it deals with business and financial matters, been discussed by the Cabinet committee? Has the Taoiseach established whether the surveillance and bugging that have been going on include him, Ministers or agencies of the State?

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

I remind the House once again that it is not in order to ask what is discussed by Cabinet sub-committees nor is it in order to give information as to what is discussed.

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

The information I have refers only to the Cabinet sub-committee that was the subject of the questions. As a matter of general observation, I said to Deputies Martin and Adams previously that perhaps a change in the way Taoiseach's Questions are structured might give each of them a priority question or two relating to specific matters they might wish to raise and I am willing to do that. These kind of questions leads to generalities all over the place.

They are important obviously but the question of the exit from the bailout is the subject of a response to a recommendation from the Minister for Finance because this was an issue between the Departments of Finance and Public Expenditure and Reform and the troika.

Deputy Higgins asked a question about the markets. He will be aware that this is the place where we have to raise money and he will also be aware that we have been blocked out of them for a considerable time. That is why the troika came in here. Interest rates were 14.5% and Ireland was blocked out completely. Some people might want us to continue in a bailout situation and others might want us to continue in a semi-bailout position. Taking all the factors into account, the Government made its decision for Ireland and it was clear, strong and decisive. It has been commented on favourably by other countries, institutions, ratings agencies, the Central Bank and the NTMA.

The decision in respect of the ESM from 29 June last year still stands and those discussions and negotiations are still for the future. That decision has been referred to repeatedly since last year and holds out the possibility of a variety of ways of recapitalisation in respect of banks.

The surveillance issue was raised at the European Council meeting, in particular by Germany and France. It was referred to by a number of other countries and Spain, for instance, had a particular view. Clearly the US has responded to this. I am not aware of the detail that has followed in respect of Germany and France in so far as the US is concerned. The Tánaiste referred to the situation in so far as Ireland was concerned and the information that apparently was out there in the public domain was that there was no listening post in Dublin. Are we being watched? Is that somebody listening? The fact of the matter is these days if one makes a call on one's iPhone or whatever and it is associated with electronics or satellites, somebody will always be able to track it. That appears to be a fact of life these days. I am not aware of surveillance being placed on Ireland or on members of the Opposition or the Government.

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

The Taoiseach can take it that it is.

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

I do not know but I have had a view for a long time that if one wants to say something to somebody, one should say to his or her face. Perhaps it should not be shouted out loud.

The Tánaiste has raised this issue with the US authorities. I understand there never was a listening post in Ireland and I hope that, as Chancellor Merkel pointed out, while this has been a serious blockage to discussions and negotiations, we want to move on to the future. I hope that can be ironed out.