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

1. To ask the Taoiseach if he has updated the national risk assessment following the receipt of submissions to his public request. [36043/16]

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

2. To ask the Taoiseach his views on whether the election of Donald Trump means he should revise his strategic risk assessments plan. [36055/16]

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

3. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the national risk assessment for 2016. [37381/16]

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 Department of the Taoiseach co-ordinates the production of the national risk assessment, which is a high-level overview of the strategic risks facing the country. Since 2014, this has been completed on an annual basis. Each year, my Department prepares a draft overview of strategic risks based on input from all relevant Departments. This document is published for consultation to facilitate public engagement about the strategic risks facing the country. Following the consideration of submissions, the draft is updated and finalised by my Department in consultation with other Departments. The final national risk assessment for 2016 was approved by the Government and published in October. It includes information on how all of the submissions that were received were considered in the preparation of the final risk assessment document for 2016. The 2016 national risk assessment highlights 29 distinct risks across five different categories: economic, environmental, geopolitical, social and technological. Certain risks were highlighted as having particular importance in 2016, including uncertainty about Brexit and the UK's relationship with the EU, weakening global economic growth, infrastructural deficits, international terrorism and expenditure pressures. The national risk assessment exercise will be repeated in 2017. This will give the Government an opportunity to consider again and update the strategic risks facing the country in consultation with stakeholders including Members of the Oireachtas.

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

As the Taoiseach has indicated, the national risk assessment identified risks in economic, environmental, geopolitical, societal and technological areas. There are significant risks in all of those areas now. The value of doing a risk assessment can be questioned at a time when the grounds are shifting with such speed and alacrity. The issue of Brexit was very much on the agenda when the overview of strategic risks was assessed. I would like to ask the Taoiseach about another strategic risk that is imminent. I refer to the implications for the stability of the euro and the euro area of the referendum that is due to take place in Italy in the coming days. It is feared that there may be multiple bank failures if the proposal of the Renzi Government in Italy fails. Prime Minister Renzi has proposed a constitutional change to the Italian Parliament's bicameral system that would significantly dilute the power of the Italian Senate. The Taoiseach will know that no risks at all are attached to seeking to dilute a bicameral system by removing a second chamber. If the vote in Italy goes as the opinion polls are now indicating, and if Prime Minister Renzi resigns as he has said he will do in such an event, it is possible that there will be a significant and immediate risk to the stability of the euro. The indebtedness of the Italian banking system is estimated to be €360 billion. The eight most vulnerable banks have equity deposits of €225 billion. What is the value of our national risk strategy when real risks present without much warning? Are there ongoing preparations to deal with the real potential risks that may arise in the coming days?

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know the Taoiseach does not have a crystal ball. None of us has a crystal ball. As we have heard, the draft national risk assessment plan covers some key areas for us. I want to draw the Taoiseach's attention to two areas that are relevant following the election of Donald Trump. There are global concerns about the President-elect's attitude to the issue of climate change in the context of the Paris Agreement. I would like the Taoiseach to tell us whether there is some means of revising the climate change assessment in the risk assessment document, which does not extend beyond the fines we might incur if we do not reach our targets. I remind him that climate change is about much more than fines. Paragraph 2.3 of the risk assessment refers to the "importance of multinational corporations to Irish economy and [the] risk of unfavourable international tax changes". I suggest that the assessment does not look at the risks associated with our fawning over multinationals, our leniency towards them, our emphasis on them and our reliance on providing them with an extremely low corporate tax regime. I believe we need to look at such factors again, in the context of Donald Trump's statement that he intends to reduce the US corporation tax rate to 15% and probably to an even lower level, to ensure they are part of our assessment of risk. We fawn over the multinationals in this country. We do our best to make sure they stay. We have lenient tax laws and workers' rights provisions. We do not tax them properly. We do not want to collect the taxes they are supposed to pay. That is why the State is appealing the Apple judgment.

In addition to Google, Apple and the big pharmaceutical companies, there are multinationals in the finance sector in this country. It is interesting to note that Donald Trump is proposing to appoint the co-founder of Cerberus, Stephen Feinberg, as one of his financial advisers. We learned this week that Cerberus paid €1,900 in tax on profits of €77 million for the sale of Project Eagle. I know the Taoiseach will argue that we have closed off the section 110 tax loophole. If we had collected the effective 12.5% rate on those profits, we would have had an additional €9.6 million in our coffers to deal with mental health, housing and all the issues that we keep saying we are strangled in dealing with because of the lack of fiscal space. It was estimated the other night during the debate on the Finance Bill that the closure of the section 110 tax loophole would probably not yield more than €50 million. That does not make sense, given that an additional €9.6 million in tax should have been paid as a result of the sale of Project Eagle. Many other vulture fund sales could bring in far more tax receipts. I would like the Taoiseach to comment on that. How will the contents of the risk assessment document relating to corporation tax changes be affected by the election of Donald Trump and the appointment of advisers like Stephen Feinberg? We all know he will say "nice one lads, we only paid €1,900 on €77 million, let's keep this going". Such people are going to look at ways of doing this for themselves in other parts of the world like the United States, thereby depriving citizens all over the world of the finance that is needed to deliver decent public services.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to begin by welcoming the First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, who addressed the Upper House earlier today. In my opinion, her visit underlines the importance of the connections between Scotland and the island of Ireland.

The national risk assessment paper identifies Brexit as one of five major risks facing the State in the time ahead.

Each day brings new information about the likely impact of Brexit and, in fact, this further information is changing the very assessment provided almost every other day. I can tell the House, as somebody representing and living within a Border constituency, the impacts of the Brexit decision are presenting every day in the lives of my community and the people I represent.

The British Prime Minister, Theresa May, recently told the Confederation of British Industry conference she is committed to introducing the lowest corporate tax in the world's 20 biggest economies and President-elect Trump has also set as one of his major economic goals a cut in corporation tax and the return of overseas investment and jobs to the US. How confident is the Taoiseach that measures introduced for budget 2017 will protect the Irish economy from both the US and Britain dramatically reducing their corporation tax rates? Has the Cabinet discussed these developments and the specific references I have made vis-à-visTheresa May and Donald Trump?

Notwithstanding the corporation tax announcement by Theresa May, the recently leaked memo from the British Cabinet Office points to serious divisions and the lack of a common strategy within the British Cabinet over how that Government should approach Brexit. Another embarrassing leak from the British Government suggests the British are trying to have their cake and eat it. This has sparked a stern response today from the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, who rejected any idea of cherry-picking on the Brexit negotiations.

All of this indicates a very difficult and challenging situation and I ask the Taoiseach if he is concerned. Last week in Cardiff, at the British-Irish Council, the Taoiseach said the Brexit negotiations would take longer. Will he elaborate on what exactly he means by that statement? Regarding the absence of Theresa May, there has been a lot of criticism that she did not attend or take part in the meeting. Does the Taoiseach agree her absence was not helpful?

I come from an inland constituency but I have had representations made to me from a whole raft of different experiences across the island of Ireland. To take the situation of the fishing industry, it has been decimated since the 1972 negotiations and some Irish vessels rely wholly on British ports to land their catches. Some 27% of the total value of all fish landed by Irish fishing boats goes through British ports. Has the Government examined the likely impact of Brexit on the Common Fisheries Policy and our fishing industry in particular?

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

The biggest potential non-standard shock to the economy that the national risk assessments consider is the Brexit vote. I do not get a sense that the nation is possessed of the grave threat that Brexit poses to our economic model. It fundamentally changes what we have been working with for 50 years in terms of us being with Britain in a European Single Market. The ESRI, with the Department of Finance, has done considerable work in terms of identifying the gravity of the situation regarding reduced national income, reduced employment and reduced public revenues that will flow from all of that down the line. Has the Taoiseach initiated any other long-term macroeconomic analysis of the implications of Brexit, other than the work of the ESRI?

On an issue I have raised previously with the Taoiseach, I believe cyber attacks are a very serious national risk, given what we have seen in other countries, such as Lithuania and the United States. There are ongoing active threats against European democracies. Given connectivity is vital for the modern economy, there is a need to increase investment in the whole area of combatting cyber attacks.

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

Deputy Howlin raised the question of the weakness of the euro. Under the economic heading, the areas identified were weak global economic growth, trading relations with the UK, a loss of competitiveness, the importance of multinational corporations, the risk of unfavourable international tax changes, vulnerabilities in the banking system, turbulence in the euro area debt markets and monetary policy uncertainties. Each of those are dealt with in the report.

We do not know the result of the Italian referendum, which is a on a knife edge, as I understand it. The polls indicate the proposition is behind and Prime Minister Renzi has made his comments on this. It remains to be seen what the outcome will be. Clearly, when the lira applied, Italy devalued and devalued in respect of many of the industries that were there. We will see what happens. There are also uncertainties in other areas, for example, in Austria, where an election for the presidency is pending, and other areas of Europe are quite fragile. These are all potential impacts and risks of one sort or another on the euro and the eurozone. Even with regard to the Brexit position, different statements have brought about fluctuations in the strength of sterling versus the euro, which has had an impact on jobs here already. The purpose is not just to identify the risk, but to allow for proper discussion of people's ideas of how we might deal with these changing circumstances as they apply.

Deputy Smith raised the issue of section 110. There is a €50 million assessment but others say it might be much more than that when it eventually comes through. It remains to be seen what other instruments are out there that may have to be attended to. These things were quite complex in the beginning and were designed for a specific purpose. When they were not being used for that purpose, the Ministers closed them off.

Corporation tax is a national competence of each individual country. What the American Administration does or wants to do in respect of corporation tax is its business. The line of investment and the interest in investment into this country remains very strong. We have had evidence again today of two further investors making serious commitments to Ireland because they see the opportunity to have high quality young people emerging into work in their industries, as distinct from the issue that is always mentioned, namely, corporation tax. The incoming Administration, when it is appointed, will obviously make its decisions in so far as Ireland is concerned. We view the portfolio we offer in terms of our track record, our legal base, our technology capacity, our young people and the fact our corporate tax rate has been static, transparent and accountable right across the board.

The Apple case is being appealed on two fronts, one by Apple and the other by Ireland, on the basis that the Revenue Commissioners have never done sweetheart deals and have been utterly independent, accountable and transparent in the way they have done their business since they were set up. Obviously, the Commission has made its determination and a ruling that some of that money may well be due to other countries. We are only entitled to collect tax here on the economic activity generated here. There are no brass-plate companies here, the double Irish is gone, stateless is gone and we have introduced the new concept of the knowledge box at 6.25%, which is proving very attractive. The investment by one company of its intellectual property here distorted the GDP figures last year. However, this is fully compliant with OECD requirements and there may well be others who find this very attractive for further investment in intellectual property in Ireland, which would mean further research, innovation and development, which would obviously mean higher quality jobs coming on stream.

Deputy Ó Caoláin raised the point about Prime Minister May. Clearly, until Britain actually leaves the EU, it remains a full member. It will accept its full responsibilities and pay its full contributions. When Article 50 is triggered, that does not mean it has left and it will not have left until the exit process and transition process are completed, and it is unclear how long that is going to take. If the Prime Minister decides to change the rate of corporation tax that applies in Britain, that is the British Government's absolute right under the European treaties, as it is ours.

If corporation tax is reduced, that has to be made up for in some other way and that is a matter for the Government. Until such time as the definition of what we have to decide on, borders, the Single Market and economic and customs union - these are matters that have yet to be put up front - we have put several measures into the budget. They will not deal with everything and we are reconsidering matters such as access to low-interest credit, etc. There is a British Supreme Court decision due next week on the question being asked in the UK. Deputy Martin was right to say Brexit is the single critical issue.

With 67,000 cyber attacks against the American Government last year, it might be appropriate to have a discussion here in order that people might gain an understanding of what it is we should be doing. The Minister of State at the Departments of the Taoiseach, Foreign Affairs and Trade and Justice and Equality, Deputy Dara Murphy, will be happy to respond to that. We have given him extra resources. The Data Protection Commissioner has been properly facilitated in terms of remit, staff and so on. She has much better offices here in the city centre, which is good.

Long-term economic analyses are being undertaken all the time but we have not commissioned a Government analysis yet because the point on the horizon for which we should aim will not become clear until movement occurs. The sectoral work is quite detailed and I will brief the leaders as needs be. I have not commissioned a formal long-term economic analysis other than those that show possibilities as to might emerge from Brexit.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Taoiseach answer the question about the Common Fisheries Policy and Brexit? He did not discuss that.

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

It has come to light very much in the past. This will be quite a complex issue. We discussed the matter at the North-South Ministerial Council in part. We did not get into detail about it, other than to say that we need a working, effective outcome. The claims of who owns what for many years have been rejected on both sides. There is a situation regarding fishing rights, volume and stock at stake. There is a great deal of discussion about that in respect of Irish and British waters. The Common Fisheries Policy is part of that. Our situation in recent years has been determined by accurate scientific analysis in terms of the quotas allocated to Ireland. However, there will be much more discussion on this matter in the period ahead.