Rose Conway Walsh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Bill. My party is an internationalist one and believes the State should play a full role in development across the world. Therefore, we support the Bill. It is striking that Ireland is happy to lend to developing Asian economies yet we are so hamstrung here to invest in our infrastructure because of the anti-investment fiscal rules and the choices of Governments over recent years.

We are members of the World Bank and Asian Development Bank which are the American and Japanese-dominated development banks so there would be no reason to shun the Chinese equivalent.

The big question here is why we delayed. Why did we miss out on signing up as founding members and getting the benefits that go with that? This was a question pursued by my party colleague during the Dáil Stages but without any real answer. The agreement is clear that founding members enjoy special privileges in nominating and voting for directors. Most of our neighbours will have that privilege but we will not. We hesitated and dithered and were nearly left behind. By delaying our application for no good reason we have put ourselves at a tactical and perhaps financial disadvantage.

Perhaps the Minister will address the question as to whether American nervousness about this project was reflected in Irish tardiness. American Nobel Prize-winning economist, Joseph Stiglitz, believes that American nervousness should not have been an issue in stating:

In fact, America's opposition to the AIIB is inconsistent with its stated economic priorities in Asia. Sadly, it seems to be another case of America's insecurity about its global influence trumping its idealistic rhetoric - this time possibly undermining an important opportunity to strengthen Asia's developing economies.

What matters ultimately is that the right decision was made. Asia is a huge part of the world with massive concentrations of population. Its economic potential compared with Europe is very large.

Good trade links in agriculture and other areas with China in particular are essential to our export sector. As the Minister for Finance told the Dáil recently:

Bilateral trade has grown in significance and, in 2014, Ireland’s total trade with China was worth over €8 billion. Ireland’s priorities relate to bilateral trade and investment, particularly: higher education; agrifood; tourism; and aviation-financing sectors.

While the economic rationale for joining is clear, it should not be the only consideration.

I note the articles of agreement state: "The Bank shall ensure that each of its operations complies with the Bank's operational and financial policies, including without limitation, policies addressing environmental and social impacts." That is a very weak nod to those of us who argue for investment that respects human rights and environmental protection. We cannot ignore such issues when we are talking about what is effectively a Chinese bank. Many of the countries that are likely recipients of investment have issues with minorities or national rights that must be taken into account.

The European Parliament has noted that: "So far the AIIB’s governance structures do not foresee adequate involvement of shareholders in project financing decisions, and that the publicly available project documentation lacks any detail on the fulfilment of the environmental and social measures that the AIIB requires from its lenders". While we should not shirk away from those questions, on this occasion I believe it is a case of being better off inside the tent.

Dr. Stiglitz stated: "Moreover, the need for environmental and social safeguards in infrastructure investment is more likely to be addressed effectively within a multilateral framework". Irish investment should be monitored to ensure our investment is not being pumped into projects that do not respect social, human and environmental rights.

The policy decision for me is clear, but we should not forget this is not just a matter of signing an agreement; we have to put our money where our mouth is. This is not an insignificant investment for a country our size. It is only right that it is debated here and requires our approval.

When we dealt with the Finance (Certain European Union and Intergovernmental Obligations) Act, which was originally titled the Single Resolution Board (Loan Facility Agreement) Bill 2016, Sinn Féin made the point which was accepted through an amendment that when we sign off on these international agreements it is not good enough to have the Dáil sign off once and then to have changes to what we agreed made without further approval.There is a question of how practical Dáil approval for every change might be, but I would tend to err on the side of caution.

In the Single Resolution Board (Loan Facility Agreement) Act, the issue was that a call on the State to provide more money could be made beyond what was agreed without the Dáil having to approve such a change. We have strict rules over the money that can be spent in Bills, which I believe is an archaic system, yet when it comes to the international agreement a blank cheque can be written.

I note that because of the constitutional limitations, there is much tighter democratic control here, which I welcome. Development banks are good. We should use them more. Our take-up of the European Investment Bank, EIB, funding remains too low, even during a housing crisis, and there is a huge deviation between the current position regarding our capital investment and where it needs to be. Our State investment arms are not necessarily doing the maximum they could be doing, for example, we could be tapping into greater funding from the EIB. However, we support the Bill and welcome it.