David Cullinane (Sinn Fein)

It was all relevant but what Senator Norris said is correct. The context of this discussion, and the way in which we are being presented with this treaty, and inviolability that goes with it for the fund itself and the members of the board, is that people are fearful of a lack of democracy, scrutiny and oversight in Europe. They know these concepts created some of the problems we have and at a time when there is a greater call for proper accountability. The explanatory memorandum on section 5 states that the section provides that the ESM will be immune from legal proceedings and enjoy inviolability in respect of officials and documents. The Minister of State spoke about the board being free from regulation and control. The Minister of State can appreciate why there are concerns when we are setting up a fund involving massive amounts of money, all of which come from the taxpayer. We disagreed about whether to put money in, although we will be putting money in if this Bill is passed but the board and the fund itself enjoys inviolability.

I agree with Senator Norris's sentiments. At a time when there is a need for more accountability and oversight, we need to see the removal of the immunity granted to the fund itself and its board members. I have not been persuaded at all by the Minister of State's response. When he read the list of things the board is exempt from, it reinforced that this should not be supported.