Niall Ó Donnghaile (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

-----but I do want to get some of this on the record. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit as a bheith linn. Tá fáilte roimhe. I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bretton Woods Agreements (Amendment) Bill. As the Minister of State knows, Sinn Féin supported the Bill's passage through the Dáil and we will support its passage through the Seanad as well.

The purpose of this Bill is to facilitate the State's participation in the International Monetary Fund's NAB and to streamline procedures for contributing to IMF trust funds. The history of the Bretton Woods Agreement dates back to July 1944 at the Mount Washington Hotel in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. Delegates from 44 countries attended this conference in order to create a new international monetary system known as the Bretton Woods system. The idea was to create a new international system after the Second World War that would draw on the lessons of the previous gold standards and the experience of the Great Depression and provide for post-war reconstruction. It was an unprecedented and historic occasion.

The role of the IMF when it was first set up was to ensure exchange rate stability, prevent competitive devaluations and promote economic growth. It is supposed to promote confidence by making the general resources of the IMF temporarily available to members, reducing the duration and severity of balance of payment imbalances. However, it has not always met these objectives. This State joined the IMF and the World Bank in 1957 as part of a process of integration with the global economy. The legislation governing this State’s membership of the institutions is the Bretton Woods Agreements Act 1957, which has been amended several times.

While this Bill in itself is not very controversial, the same cannot be said of the role or reputation of the IMF. The imposition of austerity measures following the crash is not something people in this State will forget easily. The IMF is well known for its structural adjustment programmes that have led to increased inequality, poverty and social breakdown, particularly in lower income countries. That being said, thankfully, in more recent times, we have seen the IMF shift a little - just a wee bit - from its stalwart neoliberal position. We see that in the difference in how it dealt with loans to deal with the pandemic, which is to be welcomed. There has also been some self-reflection and analysis of the impact of those neoliberal policies with its recent article, "Neoliberalism: Oversold?", which concluded that, "Instead of delivering growth, some neoliberal policies have increased inequality". In fact, the research shows support for the introduction of wealth taxes to help recover from the pandemic. It has also produced research demonstrating how taxing the rich is good for growth. This change in attitude is most welcome.

The importance of the role of the IMF is not to be understated. Section 6 of the Bill, in particular, is a worthy provision as it deals with the catastrophe containment and relief trust, which allows the IMF to provide grants for debt relief to the poorest and most vulnerable countries hit by catastrophic natural disasters or public health disasters.

Resources for IMF loans to its members are provided by member states through payments of quotas. Multilateral and bilateral borrowing serve as a second and third line of defence, providing temporary and supplementary resources. The NAB is a second line of defence to supplement IMF resources to cope with an impairment of the international monetary system. Through the NAB, member countries and institutions lend additional resources to the IMF. In January 2021, a reform of the NAB took effect following consent from NAB participants, almost doubling the size of the NAB to $521 billion for the period from 2021 to 2025. Activation of the NAB requires support from 85% of eligible participants. The main provision of this Bill is to allow the State to participate in the NAB facility within the IMF.

I will save my blushes and will not go through all the provisions and sections of the Bill as the Minister of State covered those in his address. I and Sinn Féin continue to support this legislation and wish to see it pass effectively and efficiently through the House.