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

1. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent discussions with the Governor of California; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30900/14]

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

2. To ask the Taoiseach if he had any bilateral meetings while attending the UN climate change conference; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36520/14]

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

3. To ask the Taoiseach the position regarding his visit to Rhode Island; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36522/14]

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

4. To ask the Taoiseach if he discussed the undocumented Irish while he was on his recent trip to New York; if there was progress on the issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36523/14]

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

5. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on meetings he had with other UN leaders during his stay in New York in September 2014. [36527/14]

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

6. To ask the Taoiseach if he met with the Mayor of Boston when he visited here; the issues that were discussed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37646/14]

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

7. To ask the Taoiseach if he met President Obama on his most recent trip to New York while addressing the UN; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37648/14]

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

8. To ask the Taoiseach if he discussed Ireland's corporate tax rate with President Obama or any other leaders during his recent trip to New York to address the UN; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39812/14]

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

9. To ask the Taoiseach if he discussed Ireland's corporate tax rate at the recent Rhode Island event where he met with Governor Lincoln Chaffee and senior public representatives, including senators and congressmen, in his promotion of trade and investment links between Ireland and Rhode Island; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39813/14]

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

10. To ask the Taoiseach if he raised the issue of the undocumented Irish during his recent visit to United States. [39819/14]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 10, inclusive, together.

These questions all pertain to meetings that I have had since June with US political leaders. I have also been asked a number of questions about my recent attendance at the UN Secretary General's climate change summit in New York, which I will answer separately as soon as these questions are reached.

I have been asked about my meeting last June with the Governor of California, Jerry Brown. As I have already detailed in written answers provided on 17 June last, I travelled to San Francisco and the Silicon Valley area of San Francisco on Wednesday, 4 June for a three-day programme of work to enhance existing trade and investment relationships, and to develop new opportunities for job creation and inward investment from the US west coast into Ireland.

In the course of that visit, I met with Governor Brown. Our discussion focused on strengthening the links between Ireland and California, particularly our bilateral economic, trade, investment and tourism relationship. The Governor and I also discussed the issue of undocumented Irish immigrants in the United States and the prospect of immigration reform. Governor Brown is a strong supporter of immigration reform, and during his tenure in office has introduced a number of progressive legislative Bills aimed at improving conditions for the undocumented in California. Following our meeting, Governor Brown and I both addressed an audience of Irish and US companies, including a significant number of US investors looking to this country for business opportunities.

More recently, I met briefly with Boston Mayor Marty Walsh at Croke Park during the replayed All-Ireland Hurling Final on 27 September. Mayor Walsh was in Ireland for the first time since his election earlier this year, primarily to visit his ancestral home in Connemara. We discussed his visit to Ireland and economic developments in Boston and Ireland. Mayor Walsh is the first Irish American Mayor of Boston in over 20 years and has been very proactive in seeking to further develop the political, economic and tourism links between Boston and Ireland.

I also met recently, on 29 September, with the Mayor of Seattle, Mr. Ed Murray, who called to Government Buildings while he was visiting Dublin. Mayor Murray, whose four grandparents come from Ireland, is a frequent visitor here, and we took the opportunity to discuss the strong links between Seattle and Ireland. Mayor Murray commented upon issues in Northern Ireland because he was an active personality in Northern Ireland quite a number of years ago.

As I stated, I intend to make a separate reply to questions about my attendance at the UN Secretary General's climate change summit in September. Apart from attending and addressing that summit, I used the opportunity during my visit to New York and Rhode Island to promote stronger political, economic and trade links between the US and Ireland. In New York, I met briefly with President Obama and his wife during a reception that he and Mrs. Obama hosted for the heads of delegation attending the United Nations events. I did not have bilateral meetings with any other UN leaders during this visit.

In Rhode Island, I met with senior political representatives at state and federal level, including Governor Lincoln Chaffee and Senators Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse. This was an important opportunity to engage with political, business and community leaders in Rhode Island to encourage ever-closer trade, investment and tourism links with this country. I also had the opportunity to meet with members of the Irish-American community from Rhode Island, when I attended an event at the Irish Famine Memorial in Providence, Rhode Island, a very worthy monument. I did not have any discussions, either in New York or in Rhode Island, concerning Ireland's corporation tax rate.

I raised the issue of immigration reform and the plight of undocumented Irish in the US at a number of events in New York. This included an event at the Irish Consulate where I met a group of young Irish representatives from a range of business and cultural networks, and indeed from all over the island of Ireland. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has recently been in the United States to continue our engagement with US politicians on the issue. It is our intention to keep the US Administration, and politicians on both sides of Congress, fully aware of Ireland's expectations as efforts to reform the US immigration system continue.

As I stated, I will make a comprehensive reply in the coming weeks in response to a separate group of questions regarding my attendance at the UN Secretary General's summit on climate change.

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

When the Taoiseach met Governor Brown of California in June, the Governor felt at liberty to indulge in a bit of knockabout comedy at his expense and at the expense of the corporation tax policies of the Irish Government. He said that if California could have Ireland's corporation tax rate, it would become an independent country. He said he used to think the Apple corporation was a California company but now realised it is an Irish company. He made other comments such as those, which were greeted with great guffaws apparently by hundreds of chief executives who were present at the occasion.

Is it not the case that in terms of the taxation policy the Taoiseach's Government, and Fianna Fáil Governments before it, have engaged in with regard to giving multinational companies huge concessions to abuse the taxation system, to save billions in profits that should otherwise be going into the public sectors of not just Ireland but other countries, where they siphon funds from this country, which is clearly a tax haven for them, the Taoiseach has been found out abroad, having denied it again and again when we made those assertions over the past period of time? How long more does he believe the Irish Government can continue to deny the obvious in this regard? In particular, against a background of him attempting now to shake down ordinary people, including poor people, for €300 million in a water tax next year when every 1% extra in corporation tax could bring in €500 million, based on an 8% effective tax rate, and it is generous to acknowledge that they would pay that amount, does he not see the major contradiction in that regard?

4 o’clock

When elements of big business in California laugh aloud in derision when the Governor of California speaks, is it not time for the Taoiseach to at least admit at home the truth of the situation? Is it true, as alleged in Finfacts, that on that occasion in California some chief executives were reluctant to be photographed with the Taoiseach because they did not want to draw attention to the very favourable tax deals they have in this country which might put them under scrutiny at home?

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

I met Governor Brown when he called here a couple of years ago and we had a discussion about the changes taking place in California and the economic difficulties he faced as Governor, not for his first time in office. He had to make some very difficult decisions about the economic position of his state, one of the strongest economies in the world.

The Governor is very well versed in Ireland and its situation. He is acutely aware of the number of American companies that have invested here and what that means, particularly those from Silicon Valley and other locations in his own state, which have substantial workforces here, as distinct from the perception that they are brass-plate entities. He did make his comment, as the Deputy says, in a knockabout fashion about the extent of US investment in Ireland. That was repeated by some European leaders at various meetings I have attended recently about the attractiveness of this country as a location for foreign direct investment.

The well-known case that was the subject of some discussions in the US Senate concerning Apple, which employs over 4,000 highly-paid skilled workers in Cork, with a strong innovative ethic, was what highlighted this matter in the beginning. On 11 June this year the European Commission opened formal state aid investigations into certain multinational companies in several EU member states. In respect of Ireland, the House is aware that the Commission focused on advanced opinions provided to the Apple corporation several years ago which addressed the calculation of the taxable base of profits in the company. That was a perfectly normal procedure. More recently, the Commission published the formal letter it had issued in June to the Irish authorities, setting out the opening decision in this case. This is the next routine procedural step in the state aid investigation. It is intended to give interested parties the opportunity to submit their comments directly to the Commission.

The Commission has not formally decided that state aid is involved here. It is formally examining the case. The State responded to the detailed letter and addressed the concerns and a number of misunderstandings that were contained in the opening letter of decision issued by the Commission. The Irish response clarified several important issues about the applicable tax law in this case and explained that the company concerned did not receive selective treatment and was taxed fully in accordance with the law.

The inquiry relates to a technical tax issue in respect of one company. It does not relate to Ireland’s corporation tax rate or to the Irish corporate tax system generally. The Commission is not investigating the Irish tax system, the 12.5% corporation tax rate or that there was a special tax rate deal done with the company involved. Last year the Government abolished the stateless concept in the budget because of perception and reputational damage and has followed through this year with the abolition of the so-called “double Irish”. The Government has set out its position which has been accepted by countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD, area, by the American Chamber of Commerce, many of the financial houses and entities here as being the right and proper thing to do and will now move to the next step, the consultations necessary to set up an appropriate information box which would allow for the incorporation of intellectual property here at an appropriate rate of tax. That will be of benefit to Ireland, making it an even stronger location for investment, an even more competitive entity and therefore more attractive for investment from abroad.

These are some of the areas I discussed with Governor Brown. He is well-versed in the history of Ireland and the Irish connections with the United States and California. It might be some time before the European Commission makes its decision on the question of state aid. The Government is very happy to defend this and it is happy that no state aid applies in the case on which the Commission has issued its formal opening letter.

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

I tabled five questions in this group of ten. They cover climate change, the undocumented Irish and meetings with the various US mayors.

Governor Brown is out of order. I do not accept the American position on this. We live in a globalised society. We do not control it from Ireland. We are not responsible for the global order that now exists, in the free market economy and the prevalence of massive multinational companies that control a great deal of manufacturing and services. The greatest manufacturing base for Apple is in China, where Foxconn does most of its manufacturing. In Cork we are fortunate that there is a manufacturing centre, the only one in Europe that manufactures computers and so on. It also advises the manufacturing entities on processes and so on around the world.

America seems to have a view that if a company originates there, no matter where it creates its presence around the world and no matter how large that presence, which is huge in China, no matter where it sells its iPads and iPods, all its taxes should go into American coffers only. That is a mistaken view. When we consider this objectively there is only so much we can influence and develop. We need to be very careful because there are 160,000 jobs in foreign direct investment in this country. The corporate tax rate is very important in securing those jobs, as is certainty about it. The skills base of the economy is important too and so is the reliability of the workforce, particularly in pharmaceuticals and life sciences for winning Food and Drug Administration, FDA, approval, without which we would not be as strong as we are now.

The tax issue has been central, together with the fact that we are an English-speaking eurozone country. When others start to knock it or complain about it there may be merit in some of the complaints but fundamentally they are looking after their own back yard. It was Timothy Geithner who said the bondholders of Irish banks could not be burned. That was not in our interests. It was in the interests of other people and corporations. We need to go into this with our eyes wide open to the various agendas.

We need to remember that the patent box we are now introducing has been in place in Britain for a number of years. It has been a significant factor in Britain now being much stronger in attracting inward investment, particularly on the research and development side, compared with ten years ago. In order to facilitate "inversions", as they are known, a number of mergers have been proposed recently. This has irked the United States more than anything we have ever done. A similar patent box is in place in the Netherlands. Irish companies have availed of Dutch tax laws. We know that Luxembourg has its own financial services regime. France also has its own regime.

I am open to transparency across the globe. I would prefer if global agreement could be reached before we start beating ourselves up incessantly. I suggest we should be more critical and analytical about what is going on in other jurisdictions across the globe. I remind the House that many of the jurisdictions with which we are competing are not even democracies. At least we can have this debate. Having served as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, I know about the kind of kinds of state aids that are being given to prospective companies outside of Europe. Massive inducements are being given to companies to try to locate various utilities and factories in certain locations. As a small island nation, we are competing against significant players with significant resources. We need to have some perspective on the debate. Thousands of households are depending on a particular form of investment in Ireland. We should not depend exclusively on it. Some of the growth of small and medium-sized enterprises has been borne out of foreign direct investment. In other words, many small and medium-sized companies have developed on the back of foreign direct investment by supplying into companies and developing expertise in areas like project management. For example, there is a whole range of service companies supplying the life sciences sector.

I am all for a broad debate on this issue, but I am not in favour of the unilateral beating up of Ireland by ourselves. We should not be oblivious to the reality of what is going on across the globe in democracies and non-democracies. By the way, these issues need to be factored into the transatlantic trade deal between Europe and the United States. We are putting forward the ideal of free trade across the globe as part of a world free trade agreement, but free trade on whose terms? We need to consider basic issues like wages, which are $1 a day in many countries. This contrasts with the basic living standards we provide for in areas like health and welfare. These are very big issues. According to some analysts, most developed democracies are now going through a low-wage era. Middle classes are shrinking in societies with developed economies. This is putting the whole concept of democracy under threat as well.

I appreciate that the Ceann Comhairle has been tolerant as I have been raising these issues. Does the Taoiseach accept our concerns about a unilateralist approach to this issues? Does he agree that there needs to be a global agreement? We have seen how difficult it is to get global agreement on the climate change issue, which is the subject of my first question. We have had all the rhetoric and all the analysis on climate change. Some significant players, like the United States, were very slow to come to the table and do what they should have done ten or 15 years ago on the issue of climate change. I salute previous UK Governments, particularly those led by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, that embraced the idea of developing a policy on climate change and energy. They were very effective in creating a vision around how they could reorganise society in line with the realities of climate change and energy policy. It took China, the United States and the other big players a long time to realise the impact of climate change, greenhouse gases and low carbon footprints.

I mention all of this to explain why I am sceptical about the capacity of the international order to reach agreement on tax. On a much more existential issue - the survival of the planet - they have failed to come anywhere near a deal on climate change. The result has been a worsening of the situation. That is why I am putting it to the Taoiseach that the Government has been quite lax on climate change over the past three and a half years. I get no sense of enthusiasm or vision about how we want to reorganise our society in relation to climate change. I think people are worried about the politics and the electoral consequences of it. The Government has not adequately engaged with the public on this issue. There has been an absence of engagement on the transport issue, for example, over the past three and a half years. That is one of the biggest Achilles heels we have in this country in terms of reaching our targets. The Taoiseach might let me know when the climate action and low carbon development Bill, the aim of which is to underpin national climate policy, will be introduced. We have been at it for a long time now. What level of consolidation will take place after the publication of that Bill?

I would like to conclude by asking two questions about the undocumented Irish. It seems to me that this issue has gone into the sand. When Senator Schumer was appointed three or four years ago, there was much hope that great things would happen with regard to the undocumented. As we approach the mid-point of President Obama's second term in office, I do not get any sense that a multilateral change in migration policy that would affect everybody is about to happen. Has the Government considered pursuing a limited bilateral approach to certain schemes, along the lines of the Australian scheme? We could have a reciprocal arrangement with the United States that would allow citizens of that country to come here and vice versa. I managed to negotiate one stage of a working holiday agreement with Mr. Negroponte. This scheme allowed Irish people to go to the United States legitimately to work for a year, and vice versa. It seems to me that this relates entirely to American politics. I am not blaming the Irish Government or anybody. We can all say we will go out there to lobby for the undocumented Irish, but the bottom line is that there will be change if the American domestic political situation dictates that there should be change, and there will be no change if the American political situation dictates there will be no change. From what I am reading at the moment, I am fairly pessimistic about the prospect of change. I ask the Taoiseach to comment on that.

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

I thank Deputy Martin for raising a number of important issues. I have referred to the circumstances in which Governor Brown made his comments. He is well aware of the situation that applies here in Ireland. I have been in the Apple plant in Cork on a number of occasions. It is a huge operation with a workforce of 4,000. It is at the leading edge of technological development globally. As I have often pointed out before, the iPhone that comes from Cork, which is where the workers pay their tax, might be sold internationally, where VAT or other taxes might apply. The intellectual property is vested in California.

When the European Council discussed the situation that has arisen in recent years, as the technological and digital world has moved so far in advance of the legislative world, there was genuine agreement and enthusiasm about the need for a global response to this problem. The OECD was mandated to deal with that. A number of European countries that were reluctant in the past to come on board regarding the global response to base erosion and profit sharing - these countries are well known to the Deputy - are now enthusiastic about doing so. As the Deputy knows, Ireland is not the only country that is being investigated in an opening position by the European Commission. A number of other European countries are being investigated. We are not being picked out here. Some cases have been publicly highlighted.

I agree that it is very important for there to be certainty about the rate of tax. When discussions have taken place at the European Council, at the European Commission and at OECD level, there has never been any mention of any requirement to change the rate of tax. As has been pointed out by the Government, including by the Minister for Finance in his Budget Statement, there will be no change in the rate of corporation tax here. It remains at 12.5%. That is the position. The Deputy correctly pointed to the need to provide certainty to the workforces of the companies that are here about the longer-term future of investment and the continuation of employment. Clearly, when something goes off-patent in the pharmaceutical area, it might not be manufactured to the same extent in the plant for the future. That is why there is always a conveyor belt under the FDA regulations for the approval of new drugs and new products.

That is something that goes on all of the time. I would point out that, for instance, Intel as a global company has been here in Ireland for a very long time. It is only in the past couple of years that it mandated or challenged an Irish engineering group within the plant to develop a chip, which was what it called the Quark chip, which was developed and produced, as distinct from being manufactured, in Ireland. The intellectual property is obviously vested here in respect of that particular item.

The Government, in making its decision in respect of the ending of the double Irish, had a lot of discussion about this. Quite a number of companies had already come to the conclusion that this was what should be done and what would be the best thing to do. By doing so in the budget recently, Ireland has again taken up a leading position, and not just a position that leads us into an area of uncertainty or confusion. We have set out with great clarity the period to 2020. From 1 January, incorporation for new companies coming here will be required to register in respect of where the company is registered.

Obviously, Government has considered also the question of the information box, or patent box as it is called. Deputy Martin is well aware that there are a number of these that apply in different countries in Europe. Some are more successful than others. Some are not wanted by other countries, but the Deputy is quite right, in that Great Britain is now competing, and has been competing for some time, with Ireland for particular industries. We need to be able to adapt to that in a competitive sense, and we will. There is a requirement that there be public consultation and quite a deal of discussion about the particular form of information box and the rate at which tax should apply to it for incorporation of intellectual property or whatever here. That will be led by the Minister for Finance and the Department of Finance. I think that is an important discussion for the next future phase of development in Ireland.

I would say that, having dealt with all of this, having got rid of the stateless concept and having dealt with the double Irish, and when looking at Ireland's position and the advantages that we have, we have our 12.5% rate. That will continue to apply, but in addition, we have the advantage of our track record, as Deputy Martin is well aware, over very many years, we have the advantage of being able to measure up to whatever are the technological changes and technological requirements, and over and above both of those we have an extraordinary talent pool when challenged coming through the business world, the academic world and the college of technology world. Young Irish engineers, as one example, have been able to create and change even the most sophisticated level of engagement by multinationals. That is something that will continue to make us a very attractive and even more competitive location for foreign direct investment, with the opportunity to create jobs and services to supply those industries.

The climate change issue is the central point of the European Council meeting on this Thursday and Friday. There will be, in addition, references to dealing with the Ebola crisis and the financial difficulties that apply in some countries. I would say that we have had quite a deal of discussion about this at different Cabinet sub-committee meetings. For me, it is a fact of life that, whatever sources put together the information package that the previous Ministers had to go and deal with in Brussels, it left us and leaves us in a position where the 2020 targets are very difficult to achieve. If that sort of position were to continue between 2020 and 2030, it would leave whatever Government is here in a very unenviable position of having targets that were set on the basis of, in my view, incorrect or not comprehensive information and would be very difficult to achieve. The first fine, as the Deputy knows, is €500 million and the second one is €1 billion. The situation that we were discussing all of last week and this week before we get to the European Council meeting is how can one deal with this in a way that will give Ireland achievable targets up to which we can and want to measure.

One of the problems is the problem of success. For years in this country, we were constrained in what we could produce from the dairy sector in terms of milk and the products that come off that. Quotas go in 2015. That will mean a very significant increase in output from the dairy sector in Ireland. Money has already begun to move through the system for land purchase. The decision last week to allow longer term leases, the investment in different paddock arrangements for young dairy farmers and the backup for the agricultural colleges mean that people see real opportunities here. There are real opportunities here. Investment of €100 million by Kerry Group in Naas and something similar on the Carlow-Kilkenny border by Glanbia mean this is an opportunity, but it brings with it, naturally enough, a higher emission content.

The argument being made internationally is that Ireland is a country that is already carbon-footprinting the majority of our dairy sector, one of the first in the world to do so. We want to continue that. We are producing high-quality food with great integrity, and we can produce so much more. We should not be restricted by virtue of the emissions argument from so doing to the detriment of that volume of food, which is produced in other countries with lesser standards and no regard for emissions at all in some cases. It means that, if one applies the targets to be set on a per capitaincome basis, Ireland would be measuring up in the context of the highest achievers - Germany, Denmark and so on - which would leave us in a very, very difficult position. What we need is a recognition that, in a country like Ireland, where so much of the percentage of our GDP is produced from the agrisector, this is a part of the process of dealing with food production on the one hand where there is a food shortage internationally and, on the other hand, wanting to meet targets that are practical and achievable for us.

That is why the Minister of State and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine have had a lot of discussions about the forestry sector, which, as the Deputy knows, can act as a sump in terms of carbon emissions, and whether it is possible to have that rolled into the process of determining what Ireland's targets for 2020-30 can be. That is a very difficult argument to get across to other countries and other leaders, in that we produce so much from the agrisector. I am glad to say some progress has been made on it in the past number of days. The "agriculture" phrase is coming more and more into focus as to what it can actually mean for a country like Ireland.

I do not want to go to the European Council meeting the next day and have real difficulties in the knowledge that the traditional and current progress would land this country in a very difficult position from 2020 to 2030. I hope the discussions over yesterday, today and tomorrow before we get to the European Council can bring about some clarity on where we can arrive. We want to measure up to targets, but they have to be targets that are practically achievable. Given what we can produce for the future from the agrisector, particularly the dairy end of it, we should not be inhibited from being able to continue to produce high-quality food that is very necessary for other nations and millions of people and that Ireland can supply to the very highest standard.

Sorry for the long reply, a Cheann Comhairle.

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

Deputy Boyd Barrett tabled Questions Nos. 8 and 9 and Deputy Adams tabled Question No. 10.

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

My questions relate to the issue of corporate tax. Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour and Sinn Féin have all made it clear that they are committed to retaining a low corporate tax regime, supposedly to lure in investment, as a key part of the State's economic strategy. As the Taoiseach knows, a small minority of Deputies question this attitude.

I wonder how the Taoiseach will respond to allegations that are now circulating widely regarding the much-trumpeted ending of the so-called "double Irish". When its ending was first mooted in the finance committee, members initially were told this could not be done because Ireland could not act unilaterally but the Government is now trumpeting the fact that it has acted unilaterally to close off this tax scam. However, the allegation now circulating widely internationally is that the Government is simply replacing one tax scam with another in the form of the so-called patent box. I subscribe to this view but would like to hear the Taoiseach's response. For example, Nicholas Shaxson, the well-respected expert on the area of corporate tax avoidance has described the United Kingdom as a rogue state for its deployment of the so-called patent box system and has described it as an instance of naked capitalism in which states do everything they possibly can to reduce the tax burden on enormously profitable corporations. I put it to the Taoiseach that he is right. The "double Irish" was a scam that centred critically around the way in which profits were allocated by multinationals in the area of intellectual property. The Government reportedly closes off the "double Irish" and then sets up a new mechanism for corporations to reduce their tax obligations, precisely in the area of intellectual property. What is to stop such companies doing exactly what they have been doing up until now, that is, allocating vast amounts of their profits into this area of intellectual property, thereby artificially inflating its value to reduce their tax liability? This is what they have done thus far and there is no reason to believe they will do anything different under this patent box system. The evidence is this is precisely what they intend to do.

Is the Taoiseach aware The Irish Timesis now reporting on a discussion that apparently has been going on in the French media for a few days to the effect that Google is now thinking of closing its Bermuda operation and moving everything to Dublin? This is extraordinary when one considers that Google's Bermuda operation is a brass plate designed to avoid tax. Its response to the so-called closing off of the "double Irish" is to recognise that Ireland is a better tax haven than Bermuda under the proposals the Taoiseach has now outlined.

Extraordinarily, these proposals in the first instance give four years to multinationals engaged in massive tax avoidance in which to work out new schemes and scams to avoid paying tax and after that four-year period, when they have been able to re-engineer their tax avoidance plans and policies, there will be something akin to treasure at the end of the rainbow in the form of this patent box system, which yet again will allow them to use the value of intellectual property to avoid paying tax. Does the Taoiseach not accept this is extraordinary, in the context of meeting President Obama and so on, when at the heart of the world's capitalist system even they are demanding that multinationals pay a bigger contribution from their enormous profits in tax while Ireland is being embarrassed and humiliated at an international level for acting as a tax haven?

Moreover, instead of responding seriously by following an ethical policy in this matter and agreeing that Ireland should join in the increasing chorus of voices who find it obnoxious and obscene that vastly profitable multinationals should pay a lower proportion of their profits in tax than do ordinary workers, who pay approximately three to four times as much of their incomes proportionately in tax than do such multinationals, and five or six times as much in some cases, the Government, joined by the main Opposition parties, appears to be seeking and up to now has sought to continue to facilitate such corporate tax avoidance. Is this not shameful when Ireland, at the very least, should insist that such corporations pay something approximating the proportion of their profits in tax as does the ordinary worker? I believe they should pay more but would even this not be fair? Instead, the Government is facilitating further tax avoidance and is giving them the chance for four years to work out how they can avoid tax again under the new regime and at the end of that period is providing a new scheme for them to do precisely that, namely, the patent box. Is this not shameful?

As for the climate change discussions, in his response to Deputy Martin, the Taoiseach mentioned the issue of forestry and its role as a carbon sink and in ameliorating climate change. I have had lengthy discussions with the Minister of State, Deputy Hayes, on this matter because I strongly believe - and the Minister of State agrees - that to date, the State has underperformed spectacularly in terms of afforestation. This is a State in which the conditions for growing trees are more favourable than anywhere else in Europe but in which each year, we miss our afforestation targets by a long mile. These targets are missed when afforestation could be critical in helping us to meet climate change targets and to generate employment in spin-off industries, as well as deriving all kinds of value from tourism and amenity value and in developing renewable and sustainable energy. Although this is the case on so many different fronts, we are underperforming spectacularly in this area. It appears to me to be a matter of urgency, from every point of view, that something be done about this. Did the Taoiseach discuss this matter during his discussions on climate change and what are his views on it? For example, the McCarthy report identified that Coillte has half a million acres that it cannot afforest and which are doing nothing but gathering dust. The company states it either does not have the resources to invest in this land or that it would not be commercially viable from the narrow commercial model that Coillte operates. However, there are communities, co-operatives and environmental groups that would be very glad to get hold of some of that land to grow their own trees with all the positive benefits for local communities, climate change and all the rest of it. Is the Taoiseach thinking about this issue seriously, because this area has not being taken seriously to date?

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

In response to Deputy Boyd Barrett, I do not accept that the country is either being embarrassed or humiliated in respect of corporate tax or corporate investment here from foreign direct sources for the creation of employment. What did embarrass us was the mess into which we got a number of years ago, where potential foreign direct investment had neither clarity nor a horizon against which it could plan. It took a great deal of effort to restore some sense of integrity and credibility to that-----

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

That is not true.

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

-----as Deputy Martin is only too well aware.

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

That is rubbish. What is the Taoiseach talking about?

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

It was a different story when Deputy Martin was in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment himself, when he buzzed around the world and had a deal of success.

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

Yes.

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

However, much of that then faded away because of the economic situation-----

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

No, it did not.

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

Please.

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

-----with the cheapest bailout in history here, as he is aware.

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

It did not. It was the most resilient sector during the recession.

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

Deputy, you had your spin.

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

I do not accept at all the suggestion from Deputy Boyd Barrett that the Government is either embarrassed or humiliated in respect of our corporate tax rate. The Deputy should talk to those concerned and they will tell him that despite the fact that Ireland has a solid rate of tax, other matters are added on to this, particularly the talent pool available to multinational companies coming in here. However, the Deputy has been clear and consistent in his arguments in this regard.

There is no question of Ireland being involved or wishing to be involved in tax scams or tax havens. Last year, the Government abolished the stateless concept because of reputational damage and at the behest of the Government, Ireland now has taken the decision to end the "double Irish", to have clarity until the end of 31 December 2020 and to have a new regime of incorporation for new companies from next year.

We must also consider the nature and appropriateness of what kind of information patent box we put in place here. Some of those that apply around Europe have different characteristics and what we want is one that is appropriate for our needs. That means we want to continue to be attractive for companies which may well wish to incorporate their intellectual property facilities here as well as their headquarters. As I have said to the Deputy on many occasions previously, we like to see that the plates that announce the name of a company are backed by a substantial number of workers who pay their tax here and if companies wish to avail of incorporating their intellectual property here also, we will have an appropriate information patent box that applies in that regard. That consultation, public discussion and otherwise will take place and will be led by the Minister for Finance. The Deputy will also be aware that we abolished the research and development credit base year, as it is called, and we enhanced the special assignee relief programme for companies which wish to bring in people of a specialist nature here.

I completely agree with the Deputy that we have absolutely under-performed in terms of forestry and the plantation of trees in this country for very many years. I come from the location where the first Minister with responsibility for forestry, the late Joseph Blowick, came from and he started off little forestry locations for seedlings, small trees and all the rest of it. God knows there is much ground in the far west that cannot grow forestry because of either the salt content or the poor quality of the soil. The Deputy may be aware that many of the forests that were planted in an attempt to grow spruce or whatever other species failed because of a lack of depth of soil and other geographical circumstances.

The Government decided not to sell off Coillte. The Minister of State present is actively involved in discussions on an enhanced forestry programme, which will be published before too long, and which will include many incentives for people to get involved in forestry and to plant land that might not be beneficial for high quality dairy produce or whatever. We hope that can improve the position. Real incentives are being provided by Government to help individuals or companies with ground that might be suitable for planting. It is not commercially viable in many cases to plant ground that has very poor potential for tree growing. That is an issue that is the focus of some consideration here.

The closing down of the double Irish concept will not raise any additional Irish tax here. The decision was made genuinely to protect and enhance Ireland's international tax reputation. As it stands, an Irish registered, non-resident company is already taxable in Ireland in respect of any activities that it undertakes in Ireland through a branch or an agency. The discussion will now move to the point of what is the most appropriate information patent box that can apply to Ireland. As Deputy Martin rightly pointed out, we need to be able to compete for the incorporation of intellectual property or whatever with other countries and it is important that we have clarity and certainty about that, and that discussion will take place in the future.

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

An Teachta Boyd Barrett asserted that the main Opposition parties had a tolerance for corporation tax avoidance and I want to put it on the Dáil record that Sinn Féin is against corporation tax avoidance. If my recollection is correct, it was first raised here by our finance spokesperson, Deputy Pearse Doherty. I have raised it with the Taoiseach many times, not least because it robs people in the developing world of much needed tax revenue as well as citizens in this State.

The question I wish to raise relates to the undocumented Irish in America and what the Taoiseach has been doing about that. With the Ceann Comhairle's indulgence, I want to tease out the relationship between this State and the Irish abroad. I am glad the Taoiseach raised the issue with Governor Brown and made remarks on this issue in New York, which I noted at the time. Any time I go there, and I am sure the same is the case for others, including especially the Taoiseach, I meet the undocumented. Most of them are people who were forced to leave here and those who want to stay there want to be able to pay their taxes. They are law-abiding. They want to contribute to society and they also want to be able to travel back home when they need to, whether it be for an all-Ireland final, the tragedy of a family bereavement or for a more joyous occasion such as wedding or a christening, but they cannot do that. Despite the efforts of Ciaran Staunton and others and the whole constituency of activism around emigration reform, it has stalled in Congress. I was present at the Speaker's Lunch when the Taoiseach raised this issue in a very upfront way. What plans does the Government have to progress this issue in the upcoming period?

I note from the Taoiseach's remarks that he met a wide range of young people from all over Ireland. In terms of the notion of developing a relationship with the Irish abroad, and in this case in the USA, did the Taoiseach raise with those young people, for example, the fact that the Constitutional Convention has voted in support of granting a vote to the Irish diaspora as well as to people in the North? The Taoiseach will know that An Teachta Crowe and myself have introduced a constitutional (amendment) Bill 2014 to give legislative form to the Constitutional Convention recommendation. Did the Taoiseach have a chance to explore this? We have a duty of care to these people and they are mostly young people. It is not their fault that they are where they are.

I want to acquaint the Taoiseach with what I found to be an interesting experience. I visited the direct provision centre in Mosney. Some people have been there for ten years. It is a pitiful existence, no matter how attractive the accommodation may be or any of the rest of it. It is a very inhumane system. It institutionalises people and it damages their mental health. It forces idleness upon them. Seanadóir Ó Clochartaigh, Councillor Eimear Ferguson and myself met a wide range of people. Quite a few of them said that if the Irish in America were being treated the way they are being treated here, we would be raising that issue. They said that they just want to work and they want to contribute to Irish society. One young woman told us that she had her status but could not leave the place. She had been there for so long that she could not go out into the community and develop herself because she had been stuck in that place for eight or nine years of her life. Those people raised a pertinent point. They said that if our people were being treated in the United States or anywhere else in the way they are being treated here, we would be raising this issue to the high heavens.

I know this is an issue close to the Taoiseach's heart. As we campaign for rights for our folks in the US and other countries, will the Taoiseach commit the Government to finding a resolution for the new Irish who are living in direct provision centres? Mosney is one of the better ones; in the hostels people do not have much privacy. Will the Taoiseach undertake to protect their humanity? The very rights we are seeking for our folks in the United States should be afforded to people who have come here for exactly the same reason as our people have gone to the United States of America.

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

I take the Deputy's point that his party is opposed to corporation tax avoidance. Believe me, where the Government wants to be on this is absolutely upfront with a regime that is understood to be completely transparent and accountable. That is why we have dealt with the stateless concept with the ending of the amendment in regard to the double Irish out as far as 2020, and consultation will take place on the information box and so on

I forgot to mention the question of the undocumented in respect of Deputy Martin's question, and I will deal with his question and the question raised by Deputy Adams now.

This matter has become very challenging. More than likely, nothing will happen before the elections in America in the next couple of weeks. We had all believed there was an impetus on both Republican and Democrat sides to do something about this before the mid-term elections but it will not happen now.

In the very brief engagement I had with President Obama, I wanted to say it was imperative that people have an opportunity to travel home. The Deputy pointed that out. There will either be renewed impetus from Congress or there will not. The US President has said he intends to take executive action himself. If he decides to do so, as is his right as President, it may not be as comprehensive as people would wish. From an Irish perspective, however, it is fundamental that people who have decided to live in the United States have an opportunity to travel to Ireland and back again.

I opened a family hospice room in a local hospital in the west yesterday. One facility it has had to install was a big screen for people Skyping people in America who cannot come home when someone is dying or has passed away. This was an unfortunate thing to have to do. A choice must be made between coming home for a funeral, with the result that one cannot go back, and talking on the screen to family and loved ones. These are the choices that are being made every day. Some 30,000 people die in Ireland every year and, obviously, a number of their families are undocumented in the United States. This is a very sensitive and personal issue for Irish people. If the US President decides to take executive action, central to this from an Irish perspective should be the opportunity to travel home.

The President and I did not get to talk about bilateral arrangements, such as the ones Deputy Martin mentioned before in respect of Australia-----

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

The E-3.

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

-----because the belief was that we might be able to have agreement between both sides to do something about it.

I met the new ambassador, Mr. Kevin O'Malley, whom I wish well in his ambassadorship here. He is very interested and understands these matters. His ancestors on both sides come from Ireland and he has a deep understanding of it. Obviously, he is encouraged to do what he can to assist us here. Ambassador Anderson is very active in Washington with the immigration reform groups in dealing with public representatives on both sides on Capitol Hill. We commend all those who do this work.

I spoke to young people at an event in the Irish Consulate. There were approximately 100 present from the North and South. I was most interested in hearing their views on why they went to the United States and whether it was their intention to stay there. Opinion was evenly divided among them. Some said they have been in the United States for three years and while they have got on very well and gained a lot of experience they are going back. Others said they believed they would choose to stay there as they like what they are doing and have many opportunities and the ability to travel to and from Ireland as they please. Deputy Adams should note that some in this group were undocumented. Obviously, there are others in the United States who have a very different view from them. Those from both the North and South were excited about a job in America and the opportunities that country can bring, yet some said they would just spent two or three years there and go home.

Minister of State Deputy Deenihan is working on a paper on the diaspora, as is the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government arising from the report of the Constitutional Convention on this subject. Let us see what both papers will produce.

Minister of State Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin is dealing with the question of direct provision. This has come to my door. I have encountered a number of protests and letters were handed in. One matter that really needs to be dealt with is the question of how long it takes to make a decision on an asylum request. Nobody should be here for ten years waiting for an answer. The group set up under Mr. Justice Bryan McMahon, including all the relevant representatives, is to produce a report, and I look forward to seeing it. The Minister for Justice and Equality has commented on this and Minister of State, Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, is interested in it. Central is the question of how one makes an expeditious decision on an asylum claim. It can be very difficult with claimants from some countries because of language, corruption and such matters. I have dealt with a number of these matters in the past. It is an interesting concept but the Government has responded, including through Mr. Justice Brian McMahon and his group and the interest of the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Minister of State, Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, in particular.