Rónán Mullen (Independent)

I find the debate about European Union co-ordination of our economic policies fascinating. Article 136 of the treaty envisages greater co-ordination. Will it be compulsory? Will there be penalties if individual member states in the eurozone wander off the reservation, so to speak? The co-ordination of budgetary policies comes down to two issues, that of the tax take and the way it is spent. Presumably, there will be a limitation on the way money is spent. It is legitimate for Deputy Bruton to ask whether there will also be interference with the way tax revenue is raised. It is not fair to descend to accusing people of being Eurosceptics simply because they ask this very necessary question. Our corporation tax rate is a very live issue of concern to many. We should be debating whether Deputy Bruton is right, rather than seeking to accuse people of being Eurosceptics simply because they raise questions that might be legitimate. It has been said that in 1973 the Constitution arguably gave much greater power to European treaties. It was the Labour Party which expressed most concern about this at the time and it is a debate we need to have.

I commend Senator Walsh on the issue of the tribunals. I know you have concerns about Members commenting on court decisions, a Chathaoirligh, but I respectfully say the concept of the separation of powers does not mean we cannot comment on Supreme Court decisions and certainly does not mean we cannot comment on the tribunals, on which we need to have a debate. There are two issues involved - how the tribunals have been conducted based on the recent judgment of Mr. Justice Hardiman, in particular, and costs. Who is auditing the cost and expenses sheets? Senator Buttimer has said the Government sets the fees, but it does not complete the claim forms. We need an examination of that issue. Senator Walsh is to be commended, as it is certainly within the remit of the House to ask the hard questions publicly.