Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)

I have taken careful note of all the points Senators made. I will deal with each of them in turn and offer a few thoughts in response.

Senator Joe O'Reilly made the important point that anything achieved by this Government or previous Governments, let alone the Oireachtas, is nearly entirely due to the buy-in of the Irish people. I go a stage further and say it is nearly entirely due to their hard work. Whatever resilience we have in our economy, which I believe is real, is a reflection of a number of things. One of them is the quality of the entrepreneurs and workers within our economy.

The Senator gave his view that it is likely we will keep what we have from an FDI point of view. While I very much hope he is correct, and we certainly are working to represent our country as best we can in the trade negotiations that are under way, to keep what we have is not enough. The success we have had is because our larger companies have managed to win additional investment across the world at each point in their history. What we must consider is how we can prepare ourselves such that if the global economy is changing in the way Senator Keogan suggested, our larger companies will still be in a position to prosper and do well.

I entirely agree with the Senator's point regarding artificial intelligence. There is a lot of focus on data centres and where we are with the grid. The larger factor in how our country will respond to AI is the distribution and dispersion of AI within households and businesses. If I were to do a quick hands-up survey in the Chamber asking how many Members use artificial intelligence every day and how many have AI on their phones, the answer to the question will have a bigger impact on how we deal with AI than will the availability of data centres within our country. It is about the use of the technology, not just where it comes from, in terms of the impact it can have on our country's future.

In response to Senator Keogan, I was at pains in my contribution to acknowledge that the world is changing. She outlined the different reasons for that change and fairly made the point that the theme we are now seeing from a trade point of view from President Trump is one we saw in earlier Presidencies. I think she is right about that but it also fair to say that what is really different is the degree to which the current American President is challenging all elements of the global trading system. Other US Presidents have made the case for their views on the impact of Chinese trade but this is the first time we have seen America consider that nearly everybody it trades with in some way creates a difficulty for it. That is a really big difference.

Senator McCarthy talked about the need not to overreact and to be careful. I entirely agree. Having that tone is right for many different reasons. The Commission, particularly Commissioner Šefovi, has worked hard to maintain that tone at difficult times. It is the right thing to do.

I agreed with much of what Senator Clonan said until he reached the middle of his contribution. He is of the view that the wrong decisions that were made were never made with bad intention. I agree with him. Now that I have had the privilege to hold office, I am one of a small few who know what it is like for those who have gone before me with the many competing demands they faced. When decisions were made that we now know in retrospect were not right for the long term, I am certain that as those people were making those decisions, they did not do so with a view to causing any harm in the future, let alone at the time they were making them. The very best of intentions can still lead to terrible outcomes in the long run. The great responsibility we all have is to try to get that balance right.

Where I totally disagree with the Senator is in his suggestion that any of the decisions made then were made with a deliberate intent to harm people. I am not sure even he believes the idea that any former Minister, including Brian Lenihan and Michael Noonan, who were in the very middle of trying to get our country back to a safer place, made any decision to cause deliberate harm. Those kinds of allegations steadily erode an assumption of good faith in politics and I fear we will all reap a bitter harvest from them over time, even colleagues like Senator Clonan who are making those points for the right reasons.

It is good to see Senator Conor Murphy again and I wish him good luck in his term in the Seanad. He made a point about the vulnerability of our economic model and the need for action in that regard. The point I would make back to him is that approximately two thirds of the jobs within our economy come from the small and medium-sized enterprises sector. At times, we underestimate how many jobs are in the small and medium-sized part of our economy, which we must make further efforts to support.

I entirely agree with his concluding point that the strengthening of trade on a North-South basis will be a cause for economic diversification in the future. I can see that myself, particularly when I meet with owners of small and medium-sized businesses located in the north west of the country and in County Louth. I see the trade that is now happening there and the efforts and collaboration under way between our universities. How we harness that will be really important. I met with the Senator's successors in the Northern Ireland Executive via video conference a few weeks ago. We were trying to understand what would be the impact of the tariff decisions on North-South trade. Since then, I am really pleased to say, particularly with the announcement made between President von der Leyen and Prime Minister Starmer, that we now have the policy tools available to us to make the most of trade on this island. On his point about how we can use the shared island fund to invest in education, this is something to which the Taoiseach and Tánaiste, because of their commitment to higher and further education, are fully committed. Senator Stephenson is 100% right that the situation is changing globally. I agree we need to support local industries if that change happens.

In fairness, the Government's stance on Mercosur has been reasonably clear in that we have grave concerns about it as it is being negotiated and presented. With regard to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, though, the Government has made the decision to bring forward legislation related to it. We do need to have this debate. We cannot on the one hand make the case for the need for greater economic integration and greater diversity and, on the other hand, say that in a free trade agreement with a country such as Canada, which is so aligned to us from a values point of view, we are willing to shy away from looking at how we can deepen our trade. I will certainly make a case for that, along with the Tánaiste, very shortly.

With regard to Senator Cathal Byrne's points, I noted the three priorities he concluded with. On generational renewal, the Minister, Deputy Heydon, has a commission under way on that issue, which he thinks is very important. I completely understand the point the Senator made about the age profile in farming and what that means for the sustainability of farming, so I look forward to receiving that report. In regard to infrastructure, nearly every Senator touched on this issue during his or her contribution. Senator Casey referred to the external threats and how, in many ways, the way in which we can try to build resilience to those external threats relates to how we can invest in our own infrastructure. I support Senator Byrne's final point, on domestic businesses, a subject in which Senator Casey also has a great background. We need to look at ways in which we can make their environment within simpler and try to support them more. That does not just relate to the spending of money. I have never met anybody who has gone into business to maximise or get grants. Anybody who sets up a business wants to stand on their own two feet. We need to step away from thinking about it like that to thinking more broadly about how we can have an environment whereby, if somebody is brave enough to set up their own business to employ somebody else, we help them and recognise them in that work.

I thank Senators for the opportunity to be here. It is always very valuable to be in the Seanad. I look forward to returning to continue this debate and to be back in the Seanad soon with legislation. I thank Senator Kyne for the invitation.