Feargal Quinn (Independent)

The Minister of State is welcome back to the House in which we served together for a number of years before he was demoted to the Lower House. I always refer to moving from the Upper House to the Lower House as demotion.

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak in this debate. Whether someone is running a family home, a business or a government, the books must be balanced. We all know this. We also know that if we do not balance the books, we will have to go back to the banker to ask for help to get through this difficult period. We do not throw away the keys to the bank door and say we will never need them again. For some years to come we will need the European Union more than it will need us. In that respect we must not throw away the keys. We are spending approximately €7 billion a year more than we are earning. We must get the figures right. If we are to achieve a solution, we must make sure we keep the doors open to get through these difficult times.

As far as I can see, the fiscal treaty states that if a country is going through a difficult time economically, it can spend a little more than it is bringing in. When we were going through a very good period, as we were for ten or 15 years, and earning far more than we were spending, we should have put funds aside for a rainy day. That is what the treaty seems to be indicating.

It was interesting to listen to two trade unionists speak about this matter on radio yesterday. Mr. David Begg spoke in favour of the treaty, but he has been on the board of the Central Bank for some time. When he was appointed to it, I considered it made sense because he knows the real difficulties, about which he spoke logically in that regard. Later I heard Mr. John Douglas of Mandate speak and he was asked the reason he wished to vote "No". He replied that voting "Yes" would not lead to the creation of additional jobs. He was asked if voting "No" would to so and replied that it would not. I do not understand this. We must find a way to ensure the treaty works.

I have a number of queries. An amazing statistic was reported last week, namely, that it would take Ireland 15 years to get back to where it would have been had the economic and financial crisis not hit us. Our growth rate is forecast to be reasonably strong at 2.6% per year on average, but our pre-crisis growth rate was so high it will take us that number of years to catch up.

It was interesting that Mr. Barroso floated the figure of €380 billion for the assistance given to Greece compared to the figure of $13 billion for the Marshall plan in the 1940s. Some 83% of that $13 billion comprised grants, but the Greek bailout figures - €110 billion in 2010 and €130 billion this year - are loans which are contributing to that country's debt. We must find some solution and a way to handle this crisis, but we have a much better chance of being able to do this and negotiate better deals when we are in, rather than out.

Questions remain about how EU institutions such as the European Commission and the European Court of Justice can be used to enforce what for now is, essentially, an international agreement among sovereign nations. Will the Minister of State explain how that will happen? Many questions arise regarding what will happen to countries that fail to ratify the new treaty. Some believe the future of these countries, as eurozone members, could be put into question should they fail to ratify. This is why we must consider all the ramifications of rejection. Other countries in trouble, including Greece and Portugal, have ratified the treaty. Portugal ratified the treaty by a commanding majority. Some 204 of its 240 Members of Parliament were in favour of it. This has probably weakened the position of François Hollande competing for the French presidency.

Some believe that rejection of the fiscal compact could have serious financial and economic consequences and I am certainly of that opinion. It means qualification for the European Stability Mechanism. A return to the bond market would be made much more difficult. We must consider having the full range of tools available if we are to be on the path to recovery. Ratifying the treaty, along with other changes, will enhance our ability to recover.

The Government and the major Opposition party are taking the right path. They are saying we really do not have a choice and must ratify the treaty. We can improve our negotiating position afterwards; we cannot do so if we do not ratify the treaty.