David Norris (Independent)

This is the provision about which I feel strongest, as it is the most undemocratic element of the Bill. I am glad it has been included, as it brings into the local arena all of the conceptual arrangements that are made and, curiously enough, immunised in the main article. I received a message from the Cathaoirleach to the effect that my amendments were ruled out of order because agreements scheduled to Bills were not subject to amendment by the Parliament and, as such, we do not have the power. A large section of this text is immune from debate, scrutiny or amendment. That is regrettable, but I must accept the legal position.

Luckily, the principle is enshrined. We have an opportunity to debate and vote against section 5, as I shall. The Minister of State must be committed to it because he is committed to the entire package and I will not expect him to accept my opinion.

The section incorporates the series of immunities and inviolabilities that are rehearsed in this article of the international agreement. They are matters of concern. Section 5 reads, "The ESM shall have within the State the legal status, privileges and immunities referred to in Article 32 of the Treaty". Let us consider the article, which reads, "The ESM, its property, funding and assets, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of judicial process except to the extent that the ESM expressly waives its immunity". It also reads:

4. The property, funding and assets of the ESM shall, wherever located and by whomsoever held, be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation or any other form of seizure, taking or foreclosure by executive, judicial, administrative or legislative action.

5. The archives of the ESM and all documents belonging to the ESM or held by it, shall be inviolable.

Its premises shall be inviolable. In other words, no one, from lawyers, accountants, politicians to police, need have access to the ESM. Where is the accountability and transparency? We are creating a sealed unit, the "Euro Slush fund Microwave oven" - the ESM - because we will use it to cook the books. No one can open the door to see how it is doing or what is happening. Speaking as an academic and former chairman of the Friends of the Library in Trinity, how can we understand what mistakes have been or will be made unless people have access to its archives? Although it is fantasy money, it is still ours. This provision will land us in our individualised island pool of manure. We are entitled to access to information.

I am unsure about whether I made my next comment in this Chamber, but I certainly made it somewhere. Imagine Mr. Berlusconi as one of the ESM's board members. It could have happened and still could. One never knows; politics is strange.

We are giving away a great deal under this section. I do not know what damage would be done by removing that provision. I shall vote against the section. I did not contribute on the previous two sections because they were identical to the immediately preceding section.

As I had made all the arguments, there was no point in making any more. I will contribute again when I know the response of the Minister of State, but I will not delay the House long.