Seanad Éireann

Vol. 220 Thursday, No. 5 24 January 2013

DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES SEANAD ÉIREANN

TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised)

Insert Date Here

Business of Seanad ��390 Order of Business ��390 Address to Seanad Éireann by Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP ��392 Water Services Bill 2013: Second Stage (Resumed) ��418 Adjournment Matters ��426

24/01/2013Y00075Industrial Development ��426

24/01/2013Z00250 430 Bank Branch Closures ��428 Schools Building Projects ��430 SEANAD ÉIREANN

Déardaoin, 24 Eanáir 2013

Thursday, 24 January 2013

Chuaigh an Cathaoirleach i gceannas ar 10.30 a.m.

Machnamh agus Paidir. Reflection and Prayer.

Business of Seanad

24/01/2013A00200An Leas-Chathaoirleach: I have received notice from Senator Thomas Byrne that, on the motion for the Adjournment of the House today, he proposes to raise the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation to outline the reason no IDA Ireland site visits took place in County Meath in 2012.

I have also received notice from Senator Kathryn Reilly of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Finance to review the restructuring of banks to ensure that, as they deleverage, they do it in a way that does not disaffect local communities and leave them without vital services.

I have also received notice from Senator David Cullinane of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Education and Skills to outline the current situation with regard to capital funding for the development of Gaelscoil Philib Barún, Tramore, County Waterford; if further developments have taken place in that regard since the Adjournment debate on the matter in March 2012; the prospects of the school receiving such funding in the coming years; and the timescale for any such funding being released.

I regard the matters raised by the Senators as suitable for discussion on the Adjournment and they will be taken at the conclusion of business.

Order of Business

24/01/2013A00400Senator Maurice Cummins: The Order of Business is No. 1, address to Seanad Éireann by Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, to commence at 11.45 a.m. in accordance with the arrangements set 390 24 January 2013 out in the motion passed by the House on Wednesday, 23 January; No. 2, Water Services Bill 2013 - Second Stage (Resumed), to be taken at the conclusion of No. 1 and conclude not later than 2.45 p.m., with the Minister to be called on to reply not later than 2.35 p.m.

24/01/2013A00600Senator Marc MacSharry: We agree to the Order of Business.

Will the Leader ask the Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, to attend the House for a debate on mental health? She has issued a statement on the matter. It is the seventh anniversary of the publication of A Vision for Change, yet there is no current public plan to review its implementation. The Government and the various agencies acknowledge the slow pace of the implementation of that plan in moving the system away from the institutions to community care. Senator White and others will talk about the national emergency that is our suicide rate and the fact that as a nation we are failing to implement the policies that could have the biggest impact on our effort to deal with that issue. It is important that we deal with that issue as a matter of urgency.

I ask the Leader to arrange for the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Deenihan, to make a statement to both Houses of the Oireachtas on the process followed for the selection of members of the board of the Heritage Council. It appears from recent media reports that following an application process that saw some 76 people apply to become members of the board, the Minister moved to select two individuals who had neither applied for the particular job nor, arguably, had the suitable qualifications necessary for it. In a small country it is probably possible to trace political lineage to any individual but it is ironic that one is a former press officer for the Labour Party and the other was a campaign activist for President Higgins. In the interests and integrity of the people involved and the work of the council, it is important that the process followed is highlighted, particularly for the 76 applicants who were not successful and who I am sure wonder how two people who did not apply and do not appear to have specific qualifications appropriate to that board would be appointed to that position. It would be useful if we could have that clarification.

On a day that our Special Olympians are in Leinster House I am sure everybody in the House wish all our athletes the very best of success as they head off to South Korea on 25 January.

24/01/2013B00300Senator Ivana Bacik: I join Senator MacSharry in wishing our Special Olympics athletes well. That is an important message to send.

It is hard to take lectures from Fianna Fáil on cronyism. On a more collegiate note, I thank colleagues for the positive and thoughtful debate in the House last night on the Labour Private Members’ motion on measures to improve quality of life in local communities. While a large part of our motion and the debate was about policing it also contained quite a number of important measures and initiatives and I am grateful to colleagues for taking the time to contribute on all those issues which we will follow up with the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government.

I ask the Leader for a debate on the patronage of secondary schools. We had a debate in this House in conjunction with the initiative of the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, on greater diversity and patronage of primary schools. We also had a very good debate on the report of the National Forum on Pluralism and Patronage in the Primary Sector. That process is ongoing and we hope to see transformation of patronage occurring to reflect the greater diversity of the population in the very near future.

391 Seanad Éireann There is another important debate to be had about patronage and ownership of schools at second level. Last night, with many other political representatives and hundreds of people, I attended a public meeting organised in Wynn’s Hotel by Educate Together calling for the establishment of a multidenominational, co-educational secondary school in Dublin city centre. There is a huge energy and momentum behind this campaign. Very large numbers of children now graduating from primary schools run by Educate Together throughout the country, and particularly in Dublin, have no equivalent school to attend at second level, the vast majority of second level schools still remaining under religious patronage. There is a real momentum behind this campaign and it would be welcome if we could debate it here. Political representatives from every party and from the Independent groupings attended last night’s meeting and spoke in support of the principle of a multidenominational second level school in Dublin. It should be noted also that for the first time Educate Together will open three secondary schools in the State this September but none in Dublin city centre where there is a clear demand for such a school. I ask the Leader that we might have that debate in the very near future.

24/01/2013B00400Senator Cáit Keane: I join Senator MacSharry in paying tribute to the Special Olympians who will be in the House today. They are being supported by members of the Garda and the Police Service of Northern Ireland. As a member of the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, I believe that support is welcome and hope all Members will support them today and all the great work they do, not only during the Olympics but also throughout the year.

I refer to the memorandum of understanding signed today by the Minister for Communi- cations, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, and his counterpart in England to allow the export of wind energy to England. This is an important day for the industry here because the signing of this memorandum of understanding will allow surplus energy to be ex- ported from Ireland. We are all in favour of renewable and sustainable energy and as the Irish Wind Energy Association stated, the Minister has stayed true to his word and finalised the terms of the memorandum of understanding as promised by both Governments. This demonstrates an unwavering commitment and the faith both parties have in the renewable energy sector to deliver jobs to the economy. When delivered, this will create up to 30,000 indigenous jobs and, in addition, will boost the rate base of local authorities in the area coupled with investment of over €18 billion by 2020. That is quite an investment.

I ask the Leader to ask the Minister to come into the House to discuss this issue. The Irish Wind Energy Association has asked for the establishment of a Government and industry implementation group. The Irish Wind Energy Association states it would ideally consist of the relevant experienced parties, public stakeholders and agencies, as well as private capital investors, and maximise the opportunities available in Ireland. I support that call. We spoke here about the Government, agencies, communities groups and everybody working together and it is only when we get the industry, the Government and all the parties on the same stage that progress will be made. In that regard Senator Maurice Cummins and I are helping to organise a con- ference on renewable energy that will be held here on 21 and 22 June which all the European MEPs will attend. When we have all the details we will circulate them, but I ask the Leader to ask the Minister to come into the House to discuss establishing that group as soon as possible because it is important that the same stakeholders are singing from the same hymn sheet. I would add one more stakeholder to that list, namely, the energy regulator which I acknowledge is an independent body, but we must ensure we are all singing from the same hymn sheet. As the Minister said this morning, we do not want to see wind turbines in every corner of Ireland because we have a beautiful landscape, but if they are well placed, it will be welcome in terms

392 24 January 2013 of 40% of our energy being generated by renewable energy sources by 2020.

24/01/2013B00500An Leas-Chathaoirleach: The Senator’s point is well made.

24/01/2013B00600Senator Sean D. Barrett: I agree with Senator Keane. I ask the Leader to invite the Min- ister, Deputy Rabbitte, to address the House on these issues in his erudite way with which we are all familiar. However, some economic concerns have been expressed by the National Com- petitiveness Council and the Irish Academy of Engineering, while Senator Clune stated that this was an expensive form of energy. Currently, it is subsidised on one’s electricity bills from other sources. We need to discuss the economic aspects of it and also the environmental aspects as expressed by Senator Kelly; I refer to No. 11 on the Order Paper. We need to know the full implications of the memorandum of understanding lest Ireland ends up paying more for its electricity and having the type of environmental costs about which Senator Keane expressed fears.

I avail of the opportunity to thank the Leader for his exquisite sense of timing in having a debate on the future of the European Union after the Order of Business. I look forward to further deliberations from the Leader, our MEP and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. This is a very appropriate time to have that debate.

24/01/2013B00700Senator Susan O’Keeffe: In the light of the continuing bad news about suicide, I welcome in advance the working group on bullying set up by the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, which I understand will report this afternoon. We have had debates on bullying already and I am sure the Minister would be pleased to come to the House after the working group has reported to allow us to discuss its findings, the bigger picture in terms of bullying and, specifically, how it relates to suicide. I ask the Leader if we could organise a group of Senators to meet Fiona Doyle, the woman who was raped by her father, as a gesture of support from the Seanad. I ask the Leader to consider the issue and how that might be done.

Yesterday I called for the Minister for Health to come to the House to tell us why appoint- ments had not been made to the board of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland. I continue to ask that he come to the House. Even though the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine has done all it can in respect of the presence of horse DNA in beef burgers, the time has come for the companies to say what has happened. In the absence of their comment and information and explanation, I call on the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to come to the House and update us on what is happening as there is more uncertainty now than a week ago.

24/01/2013C00200Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh: Ba mhaith liom gach deaghuí a ghuí ar na hiomaitheoirí ar fad a bhéas ag glacadh páirte sna Cluichí Oilimpeacha Speisialta, grúpa iontach de lúthchlea- saithe. Déanann siad sár jab dúinn agus is iontach an grúpa daoine iad. Ba mhaith liom tacú freisin leis an moladh atá déanta go dtiocfadh an tAire Cumarsáide, Fuinnimh agus Acmhainní Nádúrtha, an Teachta Rabbitte, os comhair an tSeanaid le plé a dhéanamh ar ghnóthaí éagsúla. I note this morning that the exploration company, Providence Resources, has stated tests show that there is a significant oil potential at its Rathlin Basin prospect off the coast of Northern Ireland. There are suggestions it could contain more than 500 million barrels of recoverable oil. This is the third needle in the haystack that has been found in the past couple of months. We were told by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, only a couple of months ago that prospecting for oil off the coast of Ireland was like finding a needle in a haystack. They must be very lucky as they have found three in recent months and there is a substantial amount of oil there.

393 24 January 2013 It is important that we have a debate on the way in which we are handling our natural resources, one of which is wind. I would be concerned about the privatisation of wind energy and the fact that the State is not getting the best return from the potential wind energy, wave energy and tidal energy. We have had a joint committee report on the licensing regime for the oil and gas industry but I am concerned that we have not seen legislation to amend the legislation which regulates this area. According to those who are knowledgeable in this area, the legislation which regulates this issue is extremely favourable to the oil companies. The Government’s role in this issue is to represent the needs of citizens and of the State and at times of economic crisis, such as this, many people consider that we could get a much better return from our oil and gas resources. A serious debate is needed to ensure new legislation is introduced to ensure that these oil finds reap the benefits for the people.

The wind energy issue is also important. I note we do not yet have a national strategy on wind energy. I am concerned that we are giving away licences in the wind energy area in the same way as we give away the oil licences. As it will be too late to regulate the industry when all the licences are given away, we certainly need a debate on the issue as soon as possible to ensure the best return for the State on all these assets.

24/01/2013C00300Senator Paul Coghlan: I welcome the return to State care of the paintings which were stolen from somewhere in storage in the State, particularly that of Valentine Browne, the first Earl of Kenmare. These paintings which hung in Killarney House, not Muckross House as was inaccurately reported, have been recovered, having been offered for auction at Adams. They were stolen and sold in London at Bonhams. It is thanks to the Brownes that we have today the full 26,000 acre Killarney National Park, our foremost national park. Major reconstruction work is taking place at Killarney House. The Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Jimmy Deenihan, intends that a room in that house will be dedicated to the memory of the Brownes, the Earls of Kenmare. That is part of our history. That is where some of the paintings hung and I hope they will be returned to the house with some of the other furniture which belonged in that house when it is reopened, I hope, in 2014. I commend everyone involved in the recovery of the paintings. I do not know when or from where they were stolen but they have been recovered, thanks to good detective work on the part of some good State servants whom I commend because the paintings are an important part of our treasure.

24/01/2013C00400Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú: One of the most important challenges facing us, as legisla- tors, and all people is to create an environment where armed hostility is not seen as a solution to any problem. When we have to reflect on armed hostility in any part of the world, we realise how difficult it is to stop once it has started. With that in mind, we sometimes forget what the European project was all about. Of course, it had economic elements to it but it was also to ensure that we would never return to a war situation between nations in Europe. Therefore, in any debate on that issue we will all be disappointed by the statement by Prime Minister David Cameron that it is his intention to hold a referendum on the future of Britain within the Euro- pean Union. As he does not intend to hold it until after the next election, he may be pushing out the boat a little for comfort. It is a pity he made the announcement at a time when we are celebrating and embracing the European Presidency here.

I do not think any of us could imagine a European Union without Britain. It plays an inte- gral role and has done this at all times. At times it seeks better conditions for itself; so do we all, but we do not threaten to consider leaving the European Union if we do not get our way. My hope is that during the next six month we will use every opportunity with Prime Minister Cam- eron to ensure he reflects and considers what has been done by his statement. Unfortunately, 389 24 January 2013 the fact that he has made the statement, it is no longer his call to withdraw it. He has started a momentum which he will not be able to control. Looking at the polls in Britain, we should also realise that it is possible that such a referendum would decide to withdraw. The environment has to be created in the coming six months to get a message across to the people of Britain that without Britain in the European Union it will not be effective. As it is our nearest neighbour, we have a particular vested interest in Britain remaining within the European Union to ensure there will never again be a need for hostilities to solve any problem with which we may be faced.

24/01/2013C00500Senator John Kelly: I had not intended to speak about wind energy until Senator Cáit Ke- ane raised the issue. I would welcome any discussion with the Irish Wind Energy Association on how it will move forward with the delivery of wind energy here as it appears to be all hot air rather than wind. When the project in the midlands was first announced - I have the newspaper clippings to prove it - Eddie O’Connor announced 66,000 jobs. When the sod was turned two weeks ago the number of jobs was reduced to 55,000 and today I note the number is down to 30,000. I doubt very much if 10,000 jobs will be created through this project. I would welcome an explanation from the Irish Wind Energy Association on how the proposed number of jobs has decreased from 66,000 jobs down to 30,000 shortly after turning the sod on the project. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, told me and said on “Morning Ireland” that he does not envisage the wind turbines being at every crossroads in the country. However, unless minimum distances are introduced by way of a Bill that I have brought forward or a Bill that Deputy Willie Penrose has brought forward in the other House, they will be located at all crossroads throughout the country. As we speak the minimum distance that applies is 500 m.

11 o’clock

The Irish Wind Energy Association is saying that if there are any changes, it will be possible to produce only 4% of the target. It is a clear indication that we will see windmills at every crossroads in the country. The United Kingdom is moving away from wind energy because electricity bills have increased with its introduction. They will turn to this country and ask us to destroy our landscape to provide electricity for them at cheaper prices. We need a substantial debate on wind energy before the entire landscape is destroyed.

24/01/2013D00200Senator Mary M. White: I raise again a matter about which we spoke yesterday, which is suicide among young men. In 2011, 525 people died from suicide. I ask the Leader to think of the reaction if an airplane crashed in Ireland with 525 people on board. What would be the Government’s reaction? It would wipe out a village. This is happening on an annual basis and my research indicates that the figure is higher than 525. The Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, failed to hold on to the €35 million she was allocated to deal with mental health last year. I was very disappointed. I am a fan of hers, but I was shocked that the money was not retained. It was allocated but not spent.

24/01/2013D00300Senator Ivana Bacik: It is being rolled out.

24/01/2013D00400Senator Mary M. White: Make no mistake, there is a national crisis of suicide. The rate of suicide has increased due to a lack of employment for young men and others. Mental stress has increased substantially because of the economic situation and particularly because young people do not have jobs. When I co-founded Lír Chocolates in 1987, I saw the transformation in a person who got a job. The person’s self-confidence changed completely. The increasing rate of unemployment is breaking the hearts and souls of young and middle-aged Irish men who 389 Seanad Éireann cannot find a job. The Government must stop merely writing reports and spend the €35 million it said it would last year. Stop writing action plans for jobs and create more jobs.

24/01/2013D00500Senator Michael Mullins: I make a plea for real patriotism in the context of the rightful public outrage at the size of the pensions being enjoyed by some retired Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas at a time when people are trying to recover from the wreckage of the so-called Celtic tiger. The people who were central to the crash rode into the sunset with enormous pensions and severance packages. I call on those people to reflect, in the context of the times in which we are living and borrowing to pay their pensions, on whether the size of those pensions is justified. I call for a real act of patriotism whereby they gift part of their pensions back to the State, perhaps not permanently, but for a number of years until such time as the finances of the State improve. They should reflect on what the founding fathers of the State would do in similar circumstances. There is only one answer. They would gift part of those enormous State pensions back to the State. I ask every retired Member of the Houses of the Oireachtas who is on a very large pension to consider doing that in the national interest.

24/01/2013D00600Senator Catherine Noone: I raise the issue of food labelling. I do not want to get caught up in the issue of horsemeat which has been raised recently; I want to make a general point. Food labelling must be addressed. We can have chicken product from Thailand, for example, which can be labelled as “Irish” if it is processed in some form in this country. It is a significant problem. We all wish to buy Irish and to know that the produce itself is Irish rather than merely produced here. It would be useful to have a meaningful debate in the House with the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine or whoever the Leader can find. It is unacceptable that I can buy a product in a supermarket which is labelled as Irish but which actually had to travel for two or three days to get here. At a time when producers like other businesses find it difficult to survive, this could be one way to ensure that people are buying Irish and know what is in their food.

I join Senator Michael Mullins in raising the issue of retired Members’ very large pensions. To say it gets on everyone’s nerves is to put it mildly. That retired Members of whatever political party, but especially those who had a hand in the downfall of the country, have such large pensions, is wrong. They are on three and four times the average industrial wage. It is completely unacceptable. I find it frustrating that we cannot do something about it. The Attorney General should examine whether there is a way to row back or make adjustments to provide that those involved in the downfall of the country do not swan around on three to four times the average wage.

24/01/2013D00700Senator Maurice Cummins: The acting Leader of the Opposition, Senator Marc Mac- Sharry, raised the question of mental health and asked about progress on A Vision for Change. It is regrettable, as Senator Mary White said, that the €35 million allocated last year was not spent. I understand there is a roll-over of the money and that €70 million will be spent this year, which will certainly help to address mental health issues. We cannot dismiss the effect of the economic downturn. There is, however, no quick fix solution to tackling this extensive and complex problem. The National Office of Suicide Prevention has developed a range of initiatives aimed specifically at supporting young people who are suicidal and assisting their peers to recognise and respond appropriately to signs of emotional distress and suicidal thoughts. The annual budget for suicide prevention measures has increased this year to more than €13 million, of which €8.1 million is administered by the National Office of Suicide Prevention to fund voluntary and statutory agencies to deliver prevention, intervention and research services. The balance of €5 million is available regionally to fund resource offices for suicide prevention 390 24 January 2013 services. Action is being taken and I assure Members that it will continue to address this most serious national problem.

Senator Marc MacSharry also asked about the membership of the Heritage Council. We will certainly raise the matter with the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Jimmy Deenihan. I join the Senator in welcoming our special Olympians to the House. All Members wish them well and success for the future.

Senator Ivana Bacik raised the matter of the patronage of secondary schools. We will certainly arrange for the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, to come to the House to discuss the topic. I note the points the Senator raised.

Senators Cáit Keane, Sean D. Barrett, Trevor Ó Clochartaigh and John Kelly referred to the memorandum of understanding between Ireland and the United Kingdom on wind energy and the prospect of assembling all stakeholders. I am sure the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, will be quite willing to come to the House to discuss the matter at the earliest possible opportunity. In that regard, Senator Sean D. Barrett expressed concerns about various bodies, in respect of which a cost benefit analysis should be undertaken.

Senator Susan O’Keeffe raised the question of bullying and asked the Minister for Educa- tion and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, to come to the House to discuss it. We will certainly invite him to do so. The Senator also asked that we invite, or get a group to meet, Ms Fiona Doyle. The Taoiseach is meeting her and if we can be of any assistance, I will have no objection to representatives of the House also meeting her. I assure the Senator that the positions on the Food Safety Board will be filled very soon. I note her points on the contamination of burgers and we will invite the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to come to the House to outline the exact position.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh raised the question of commercial quantities of oil being found and mentioned the needle in the haystack. We have found some, but whether it is in commercial quantities and can be brought ashore is another problem. I assure the Senator that the Government will at all times represent the interests of citizens in this matter.

Senator Paul Coghlan spoke about the return of valuable paintings that had been stolen and told us about their historical significance and the Earls of Kenmare and so on. We welcome their return and I am sure the Senator will be to the fore in ensuring they are hung again in Killarney House.

24/01/2013E00200Senator Paul Coghlan: I will ensure they are hung properly in the right place.

24/01/2013E00300Senator Maurice Cummins: I have no doubt that the Senator will do so.

Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú spoke about the British Prime Minister’s intention to hold a referendum on EU membership. As Senator Sean D. Barrett mentioned, Gay Mitchell, MEP, is to come to the House and I am sure that question will be put to him and that we will have a lively exchange of views. During the Irish Presidency the Government will have many discussions with the Prime Minister. Like the Senator, I believe it is in our interests, as well as those of the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe, that Britain is actively involved in a strong European Union.

391 Seanad Éireann I have addressed the question raised by Senator Mary White about suicide.

Senators Michael Mullins and Catherine Noone spoke about pensions for former Ministers. Senator Michael Mullins called on some of them to gift part of their pensions to the State. We await their response.

Senator Catherine Noone also spoke about food labelling and said it was unacceptable for goods to be marked as Irish which had not originated but had only been produced here. That is a problem and we will try to bring the relevant Minister to the House in early course to discuss it.

Order of Business agreed to.

Sitting suspended at 11.15 a.m. and resumed at 11.45 a.m.

Address to Seanad Éireann by Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP

24/01/2013F00200An Leas-Chathaoirleach: I have great pleasure in welcoming Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP. It is a great honour that he has come to the House. I would like him to address the Seanad. He has 20 minutes in accordance with the order of the House.

24/01/2013F00300Mr. Gay Mitchell: It is a great honour for me to be invited to speak in the Upper House of our national Parliament and I appreciate the opportunity. In the European Parliament we are used to getting straight to the point because usually we do not get to speak for as long as 15 or 20 minutes, but I have some comments to make and have condensed them. I hope to address the role of the European Union, with particular reference to economic affairs, Third World issues and marking the 40th year of Ireland’s membership.

In speaking about the role and history of the European Union I hope to show that there is cause for optimism, not pessimism, that solidarity is essential and that inter-dependence is the key. I acknowledge that there are many people in Ireland who are being left behind and others who cannot make ends meet. This is something we must put at the centre of our concerns. We will get out of our predicament, but there will, naturally, be economic downturns in the future. The difference next time will be that the European Union, including Ireland, will have put in and will continue to put in foundations that should have been put in place in the past. Future recovery which is well on the way will be more sustainable. Therefore, recovery will last longer and future challenges will be capable of being met. Europe stared into the abyss of economic instability and has pulled back from the brink. We are managing the crisis but much work remains to be done to sustain the momentum and prevent slippage.

The reality of that progress is not immediately evident in an overview of the current state of the economy. Ireland’s debt-to-GDP ratio should be a maximum of 60% and it was, at one time, as low as 25%. It is now almost 112%, some of which is due to socialising bank losses and some to long-term spending commitments set against short-term cash inflows which dried up. The interest we pay on this debt is enormous, but we were given some protection from the market rates by EU assistance and paid a considerably reduced rate of 3.3%. In addition, the European Central Bank supplied up to €160 billion in liquidity funds at an interest rate of 1% or less to keep the economy afloat. We in Ireland continued, in 2012, to spend €15 billion more 392 24 January 2013 than the Exchequer took in, thus adding to an already unsustainable debt. By moving to bring our annual budget into balance, we stop adding to debt and this, in turn, restores international confidence in order that recovery will follow, the economy will grow and the debt-to-GDP issue can be solved by growth, as it was in the 1990s. Furthermore, to help get our budget into balance, Ireland must and I believe will get a rescheduling of the Anglo Irish Bank-Irish Nationwide Building Society promissory note. Clearly, we have much to do to make society a better and fairer place. While looking to greater solidarity within the European union, which is a two-way street, we also need greater solidarity at home. What is truly shocking is the fact that many people remained dependent on the Society of St. Vincent de Paul at the height of the Celtic tiger years.

As the Second World War came to an end, there was general revulsion at the damage that war had wrought on the continent of Europe and the way in which Europe’s rivalries had em- broiled the rest of the world with appalling results. A number of national statesmen realised that Europe could not be rebuilt the way it had been. Europe was losing its colonies and its world standing was reducing as the United States of America became ever more dominant in the world order. This was happening against the immediate backdrop of a threatening, armed and belligerent Soviet presence in half of the continent. The instigators of European integration all shared the same desire for the pacification of Europe, not through a system of power balances but by the reconciliation of European nations.

Today we are marking the 40th anniversary of Irish membership of the European Union. As those of us who were around then can recall, the debate about accession transfixed the country - I might mention in passing that I was only a baby on my mother’s knee at the time. Why did Ireland join the European Economic Community, EEC, as it then was, in 1973? As with all such events, there are a number of complex reasons. Ireland was extremely dependent on agriculture, with more than 30% of its working population engaged in farming and many others depending on the food processing industry. Both agricultural and industrial exports were dependent on the British market and when the United Kingdom decided that it would seek to join the Common Market there was concern in Ireland that access to our principal market could be cut off. Equally, the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, offered a structure to Irish farmers with guaranteed prices for farm produce and given the importance of agriculture and the numbers engaged in farming, this was an attractive option. There was a recognition among policy experts that Irish industry was not in a strong enough position to compete on the basis of free trade but since the Lemass-Whitaker reforms of the late 1950s there was also a sense that the ongoing protectionism which had characterised the early economic orthodoxy of the new State was not working and that Ireland needed to take the risk of entering into a free trade arrangement. At the same time, there was a sense among many that membership of the Common Market would enable Ireland to open out intellectually. The inevitable post-colonial dominance of London could be challenged and Ireland could be opened up to wider influences as it had not been since the 18th century.

In 1983 Greece became a member and in 1986 it was followed by Portugal and Spain. The most significant changes came at the very end of the decade. As the grip of the Soviet Union weakened across central Europe, it was clear that the final days of the Second World War had played themselves out. Enlargement of the European Union to include the countries of central Europe was a fulfilment of the objective of the founders of the European project. The new member states were, in particular, the countries which had been caught up in the wars which had raged through Europe over centuries. The fact that they could be integrated into a function-

393 Seanad Éireann ing, prosperous and democratic structure such as the European Union was a truly historic, if not miraculous, achievement. The Iron Curtain is no more and we have built stability on our continent through interdependence.

Based on the report of the committee chaired by the late Senator Jim Dooge who also contributed so much to this House and the European Commission’s White Paper on Completing the Internal Market, the Single European Act was negotiated and agreed so as to reduce remaining protectionism. It is based on four freedoms, namely, the free movement of people, goods, services and capital, all of which are underpinned by a strong competition and consumer policy.

The introduction of the euro was the logical consequence of the development of the Single Market. No market of this nature could function without the elimination of the risks and costs involved in variable exchange rates. The need for stability of currencies is central to the success of a Single Market. The free movement of capital, people and goods is hampered if currencies can be devalued from one day to the next, leading to unfair advantage and trade distortions. The euro brings strengths and opportunities arising from the integration and scale of the European economy and maximises the advantages of a Single Market.

When the euro area was struck by its first serious financial crisis in 2008-09 it was hit twice, first by the level of huge pre-crisis public and private debt overhangs and, second, by an in- adequate institutional design that prevented the kind of rapid and nimble responses required. More broadly, the crisis exposed the problems in the structure of the eurozone, which escaped notice in the good times. Measures had to be introduced to strengthen economic governance. It is in our response to the crises that we are building more sustainable progress for the future.

Soon there will be a new form of bank supervision in the European Union, accompanied by bank recapitalisation measures. Ireland must and will benefit from bank recapitalisation. However, if debt as a percentage of GDP is the measure used to monitor all member states, we must have both debt and GDP measured in the same way in every member state. We cannot measure by litres in one member state and by metres in another, so to speak. All of these actions are helping to restore confidence and pave the way for recovery. There remain structural problems in southern Europe and these need to be addressed in a sympathetic way. Solidarity across the European Union is key.

I will now turn my attention to the global situation. Most, though not all, people in economically and politically advanced countries can take for granted those material goods that were once the constant preoccupation and anxious concern of every man, woman and child, namely, adequate food, safe and comfortable shelter, sufficient clothing, basic medicine, productive work and opportunities for leisure. However, progress has created new problems such as the proliferation of nuclear weapons, economic crises, civil wars, ecological disasters and environmental threats. There are also many potential causes of international instability. What is to be the future of Russia, for example? Will it become a social market economy and democracy or an oligarchy? About one third of the European Union’s total gas, crude oil and coal imports come from Russia. Approximately 80% of all Russian oil exports go to the European Union.

12 o’clock

What will happen in China? Will a middle class grow? Will democracy take root? Will the economic miracle continue? What is the future of India and Pakistan? What is the future of the Middle East after the Arab spring? What will happen in Latin America? The European Union

394 24 January 2013 is respected in these and other regions. It has a role to play in building international stability and interdependence. Interdependence is the strength and the objective of the entire European project.

Some 23,000 children die every day in the developing world. The good news is that there used to be 36,000 such deaths every day. The European Union is investing as much as the rest of the world added together to tackle this obscenity. The European Union and its member states are the biggest contributors of aid to the developing world. They provide over 50% of official development assistance. While this is the right thing to do for selfish and selfless -rea sons, more must be done. By 2050, there will be 2 billion extra people on the face of the earth. Approximately 90% of them will have been born in what is now the developing world. Should we invest in such countries to help them develop? Should we make them our trading partners, or simply our partners? Should we leave a terrible inheritance of potential mayhem and global instability to our children? The European Union, in partnership with developing countries, is striving to address these issues through its assembly with the African, Caribbean and Pacific Assembly and various agreements. Even if this is imperfect and insufficient, it is the just thing to do. There is progress to report. Many developing countries are charging ahead. People are being lifted out of poverty at the fastest rate ever recorded. Mercifully, the death toll inflicted by war and natural disasters has also decreased.

Europe needs to put more emphasis on justice. The social market economy is based on a number of elements. It is not geared towards performance only. It is based primarily on respect for human dignity, free from unwarranted control. Incentive systems that decouple risk and liability contradict the spirit of the social market economy. A market economy which serves exclusively the interests of capital cannot be called social. Global GDP increased by a factor of seven over the first 1,800 years of the common era but has increased by 70 times since. This indicates that the social market economy can bring extraordinary benefits for the common good. This success has been possible because the free economic system has reformed constantly to meet the challenge of the day. It must reform again. It is time to put “social” back into the social market economy.

In his most recent book, Finance and the Good Society, Robert J. Shiller, a professor of economics at Yale University, argues that “it appears that [stock market] price changes in the United States have been mostly due merely to changes in moods or attitudes or something else unrelated to the actual changes in real underlying value”. He also points out that US companies fared much better in the Great Depression than is commonly suggested by embellished stories; for example, none of the 30 companies in the Dow Jones industrial average went bankrupt. In general, large US companies did well by lowering their dividend payments for a few years before resuming the trend. Professor Shiller claims that “most financial writers have apparently never heard of excess volatility” and suggests that they continue to write their stories about the day-to-day fluctuations in the stock market “as if the market were dominated by traders with razor-sharp minds and fast computers who have a deep understanding of the economy and grasp the import of every nuance in today’s economic news”. While he accepts that many traders “do indeed have sharp minds”, he contends that “the game they are playing is not generally to involve themselves in macro-economic forecasting” but instead involves “playing a game against each other - a game of guessing each other’s psychology”. He also suggests “the decline in the partnership structure on Wall Street may have contributed to the severe financial crisis that began in 2007, as it would appear to have reduced the incentives to manage long-term reputation and long-term risks in favor of a structure that encourages rapid growth of the firm”. Lehman

395 Seanad Éireann Brothers was a partnership until 1984, Goldman Sachs was a partnership until 1999, Bear Stea- rns was a partnership until 1985 and Merrill Lynch was a partnership until 1971. According to Professor Shiller, the “ultimate collapse” of firms such as Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and others and the economy as a whole may be related to the changes wrought by the end of the partnership structure.

Putting our economies back in shape is not entirely the responsibility of politicians. Busi- nesses and others must also step up to the plate. The markets invested against the euro expect- ing to make profits and they lost. They invested against individual member states and lost. Italy, for example, is now getting 15 year money at 4.8% from the markets. There are very few places for the markets to go. It is time they went back to investing in reality. The euro is here to stay. Member states will not be left abandoned. The ECB has the firepower to take on the currency gamblers. Most EU member states need cashflow and confidence. It is essential that we bring our budget deficits under control, rather than continuing to add to our bloated national debts. This approach is bringing and will bring confidence. By contrast, in the 1930s it was every country for itself and beggaring one’s neighbour was of no concern.

Despite the recent economic crisis, the European Union has been a great success. Never in our history have many so countries had such a continuous time of peace. Never in our history has the average wealth of each European country been so high. Never in our history has Eu- rope had such good relations - internally and with our neighbours and partners. The manner in which we act now will determine our stability and prosperity into the future. In the first half of the 20th century, approximately 60 million Europeans killed each other in two world wars that started on our continent. In the 21st century, Europe is at peace, the Berlin Wall has disappeared and ten former Soviet-dominated states have joined the European Union.

Two political scientists, Professor Bruce Russett and Professor John Oneal, have examined statistical data on wars around the world from 1886 to 1992. This research, which was done for their book, Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence, and International Orga- nizations, concludes that three variables help to explain how likely it is that a country will or will not go to war: economic interconnectedness, democratic traditions and membership of international organisations. All three factors help to prevent wars. When all three are present and at their most favourable, the probability of war is reduced by 71%. Professor Russett and Professor Oneal have found that economic interconnectedness is the most important of the three factors. The fate of the former Yugoslavia shows what can happen when this interconnectedness breaks down. The European Union which is still a work in progress has shown remarkable resilience in dealing with the economic crisis to date. We have some way to go, but we should acknowledge the progress that is being made. Together we can build what Professor Shiller calls “the good society”. This requires intent and tenacity. It also requires institutional capacity. Of course, markets are important, but traders do not have disinterested razor-sharp minds. Psychological games are best ignored.

When Ireland joined what is now the European Union, our per capita income was a little over half of the average per capita income of the nine member states at the time. Based on 2011 figures, ourper capita income - €35,455 - is three times that of Estonia, which is a fellow EU and euro member state. When we joined the Union, there was a waiting list of up to five years for a telephone. Our biggest export was our people. At one point, our population dropped below 3 million. We now have a diversified economy in the information technology, financial services, agriculture and food, pharmaceuticals and manufacturing sectors. We have one EU Commissioner, just like Germany and Britain. The Secretary General of the Commission is 396 24 January 2013 Irish, as was her predecessor. We are disproportionately represented in the European Parlia- ment. We have one Minister at the Council of Ministers, like all other member states.

This month, we commenced our seventh Presidency of the European Union. I believe we became sovereign the day we joined the Union. I sometimes think that if those people who were in the GPO in 1916 could have looked forward to Ireland running the European Union in the way we have in our sixth and now our seventh Presidencies, they would have been very proud. We should be very proud too. Joining the Union gave us a real say in the world and the possibility to shape an agreed, peaceful and prosperous future. Up to then, our interest rates and the value of our currency was decided by Britain. In the euro area, they are set by a Central Bank into which we have input. The European Union is not perfect - it is, as I said, a work in progress - but it has served Ireland and Europe well. It won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012 and we might well reflect on why that was. As we mark 40 years of Irish membership, we should reflect on the remarkable achievements that have blessed Europe and Ireland.

Yes, there is a need for solidarity in Europe, but it is also much needed at home. We do not just need solidarity among member states; we need solidarity among people. There is more than enough to go around in Ireland. It is time to stop cursing the darkness; each of us can light a candle. There is a job to be done in repairing the economy. However, let us not mistake economy for society. We can build what Schiller calls the good society. We have the tools; we can do this job in solidarity.

24/01/2013J00200Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú: Cuirim fíorchaoin fáilte roimh Gay Mitchell anseo inniu. Níl aon amhras faoi ná go raibh sé thar a bheith éifeachtach agus misniúil i gcónaí mar ionadaí na hÉireann san Eoraip. Thug mé faoi deara gur sheas sé an fód go minic ar ár son. Is mór an phribhléid dúinn í go bhfuil sé in éineacht linn anseo inniu.

I would sincerely like to welcome Mr. Gay Mitchell who has been an exceptionally effective and courageous representative of Ireland in Europe. He has been consistent in his views during the years and he took a stand whenever it was necessary. He has shown great personal courage, as did his brother before him. For that reason, we owe him a debt of gratitude. We thank him very much for being with us today to share his views on the European project and, at the same time, give us an opportunity to make our own comments in the hope that he might be able to keep our views in mind when he returns to Europe.

It is interesting that Mr. Mitchell made reference to 1916. If one looks at the Proclamation of 1916, one can see that we make reference to our allies in Europe and throughout the world, which in many ways was visionary because, at that time, the patriots of Ireland realised that it was only through working together in a common cause that we could be respectful of everyone’s right to independence and freedom.

One of the greatest and most important elements of the European project is the fact it worked towards creating and sustaining an environment in which war will never again be seen as a solution to any problem. The fact that millions have lost their lives in war is one of the greatest obscenities I can think of. When it is all done and finished and the millions are buried while further millions suffer from their injuries, we have all of the hate that goes with it and the decades required to get some normality back to human conditions. When the European Union was first set up, its founders were conscious of what war had done to Europe. It is interesting that those who were hostile towards each other, who had a terrible history of hostility and animosity, were prepared to work together for the common good because they realised there was no other solu- 397 Seanad Éireann tion. They realised that all we would have was a continuity of armed conflicts, such as we see happening in other parts of the world.

While the United Nations has its own specific role to fulfil, there are times when we in Eu- rope could also state clearly that we are totally opposed to the sale of arms to any other country. It may not be our role but we are capable of having an influence on the actions of other people. It is very sad, when I see the changing of the guard in one country or another - whether it is in Iraq, Libya or Syria - to realise that although we may have sold arms to that country, we are then going in to remove that same regime from power. There is something very sad about that because it tells us the bottom line is the bottom line of the balance sheet. That has to be removed from any consideration we have into the future.

It is evident currently, given the austerity measures we all have to suffer, that people will make arguments against the European project. In Ireland, there will be those who are sup- portive as well as the detractors, but we must be careful not to have a knee-jerk reaction at any specific time. We must look at the totality of what we have at our disposal and the good the European Union has done, first, in keeping war out of the equation, and second, in ensuring there is free trade and free movement of people. There are so many pluses to be considered.

I was very sad and disappointed, particularly as we were embracing and celebrating Ire- land’s seventh Presidency of the European Union, that the UK Prime Minister, Mr. Cameron, chose that very time to reactivate the issue of whether Britain should stay in or remove itself from the Union. If we are to look at that in clear-----

24/01/2013J00300Acting Chairman (Senator Marie Moloney): The Senator has just 30 seconds to conclude.

24/01/2013J00400Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú: It is a sad situation. This leads me to the question I have for Mr. Mitchell. Was he disappointed that the suggestion was even made that a referendum should take place on such an issue? We must bear in mind that a referendum very often only reflects the mood of a given time. If we look at the bigger picture, we know we will be dependent in some ways on our interaction and influence. Can we hope during the Presidency to interact with Prime Minister Cameron, not just with him? My honest belief is that he will at that stage have lost control of the momentum he has started. However, we must use this six months to get a message across to the greater population of Britain that there are bigger issues involved than the conditions they may enjoy. There is the issue of saving lives, the issue of being fair, the issue of equality and all of those other issues. I cannot imagine a European Union without Britain. It is as simple as that. I hope Mr. Mitchell will be able to respond to us today on how we can play a role in ensuring that will not happen.

24/01/2013J00500Senator Michael Mullins: I join the words of welcome to Mr. Gay Mitchell who has made an outstanding contribution to politics at local level as Lord Mayor of Dublin, as a Deputy, as a Minister of State and as an MEP. We are honoured to have him in our presence today and I thank him for a most thought-provoking speech.

As we mark 40 years of EU membership, it is worth looking at the benefits the European Union has brought to all of us here in Ireland. It is necessary to look beyond the benefits we all see in our localities. The European Union is a global player and Ireland, as part of it, plays a crucial role in all aspects of EU policies, whether they are aimed at the local economy and environment or the global stage. Ireland has received in excess of €68 billion in financial supports in the past 40 years. This funding ranged from a meagre £47 million in 1973 to when

398 24 January 2013 it peaked at €3.2 billion in 1997 to financial supports worth just over €2 billion in 2011. The majority of this has gone to support our farmers through the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP. It is significant that our MEPs are fighting to ensure the interests of Irish farming are protected when the current reform of the CAP is considered and voted upon by the European Parliament.

We have seen that Ireland is now the home of eight of the ten largest global technology companies in the world and 15 of the top medical device firms. We ask ourselves why we have benefited more from US investment than China, Brazil, India or Russia combined. The reason is because we are part of the European Internal Market that guarantees multinational firms access to the European marketplace. Yesterday, Bill Gates visited Ireland and Microsoft is a perfect example of the benefits that flow to Ireland as part of our EU membership. Ire- land’s membership of the European Union has been good for business and jobs. It is not just the multinationals which have benefited. Irish firms have built on the opportunities presented by the European Union and the role of the Internal Market and have forged significant markets for Irish goods and services in the Union. No better example can be seen than our indigenous food and drink companies. It is striking to consider that Ireland is the largest producer of beef in the European Union and the fourth largest producer in the world. I will cut my speech short because of time constraints.

Another example is the infrastructural improvements supported by the European Union. We have completed motorways throughout Ireland from Dublin to Waterford, Cork, Limerick, Galway and Belfast with the assistance of the Union. We had no motorways in this country in 1973. Obviously, investment in infrastructure such as water treatment, landfill site management systems and recycling schemes, all of which are supported by the European Union, are helping to improve our infrastructure. Climate change is one of the environmental problems of great concern to us here and is not something that can be tackled by individual countries. The European Union leads the world in seeking to combat this significant problem.

The EU Social Fund has benefited Ireland and created training and educational possibilities for many young people that would not have arisen had we not been members of the European Union. A special mention must be made of the Erasmus programme that has enabled thousands of Irish students to study abroad as part of their university studies. In the past ten years, 20,000 students in Irish universities have studied abroad and twice that number have chosen Ireland as the location for their year of Erasmus studies. That means that 40,000 students have come to Ireland over that period.

The European Union’s role in helping the developing world is of particular importance. As the largest provider of development aid in the world, the European Union is crucial in helping developing countries emerge from poverty. Mr. Mitchell referred to this. These are just a few examples of how Ireland has benefited from EU membership in the past 40 years.

I have a few questions for Mr. Mitchell. Where does he see Europe’s place in the world 20 years from now and how does he see the EU project developing? Will he give us an update on the status of countries seeking EU membership? Something that is very much in the news is rising Euroscepticism in Great Britain. How is the European Union dealing with this issue? I again welcome Mr. Mitchell to the House and look forward to further discussion.

24/01/2013K00200Senator Mary Ann O’Brien: I extend a warm welcome to Gay Mitchell and thank him for coming to the House and for his wonderful speech in celebration of the 40th anniversary of our membership of the European Union. Like the previous speaker, I will mention some wonderful 399 Seanad Éireann commercial developments that have benefited the country. A total of 60% of our exports go to Europe, with 79% of our food exports going there. A very controversial development, on which I would welcome Mr. Mitchell’s comments later, is the fact that one in five Irish beefburgers is sold in European branches of McDonald’s every day. One in every pack of Kerrygold is sold here in Ireland while seven are sold in Europe. A total of 80% of our visitors come from Europe, which I cannot believe, and €40 billion of our turnover comes from European-owned companies in Ireland.

These are wonderful positives arising out of EU membership, but I will move on to things that might not be so positive. I am due to travel to Germany this Friday to attend a big global fair in Cologne which exhibits all the chocolates, biscuits, crisps and sweets of the world. Ev- eryone probably wants to come with me because it sounds like good fun. It is so wonderful to be an Irish company over there with the 100 other Belgians who are making chocolates, the Germans and the French, although we must remember we are from an island; therefore, sometimes there is a slight disadvantage to this. It is a wonderful opportunity for a small Irish company to be able to travel to elsewhere in Europe. In respect of euros and dollars,12 to 15 years ago when we had the punt, it was very hard to get one’s head up and be taken seriously as a woman making chocolates.

In saying this, some laws made in Europe simply do not suit this small country. There are so many EU laws. Will Mr. Mitchell comment on this and tell us how we could be better watchdogs in making sure something does not slip through that does not suit us? I would like him to look at and possibly champion the labelling of alcohol. The former Minister for Health, Deputy Micheál Martin, did this with regard to cigarette smoking and this development spread throughout the rest of Europe. The European Union could be the leader in the world. I remind the House that the Union allows 60 additives to be added to wine. One would say this is fine, although one would like a label on one’s wine bottle. I am sure one would like to know that protease, which is derived from porcine or bovine stomachs, is in wine. Other additives in wine could include gelatine, which the House will be glad to learn is food grade; a different type of protease called pepsin, which is derived from the bovine pancreas; or possibly isinglass, which is one of my favourites and derived from dried swim bladders of fish. Mr. Mitchell will be talking to a very strong lobby of vintners but, we need alcohol to be labelled. He has seen what has happened-----

24/01/2013K00500Acting Chairman (Senator Marie Moloney): The Senator has one minute left.

24/01/2013K00600Senator Mary Ann O’Brien: I beg Mr. Mitchell to keep an eye on genetically modified foods. We made a wonderful start in 2003 by saying no to genetically modified foods and should be the world’s watchdog in respect of genetically modified ingredients. Slowly but surely, however, it is beginning to slip. We are allowing a little bit of corn and some animal feed in and there is much more pending. If one looks at the satellite image of Ireland, one can see we are on the edge of Europe. This is a beautiful green country. It is not a case of my just saying it; that is what we look like. Let us stand out, protect our niche and not fall in step with Europe if it allows genetically modified foods to take over without scientific research and before we know that it is safe for the planet, as did the United States. We are talking about more than human health; we are talking about climate change.

Will Mr. Mitchell comment on fishing? We are surrounded by wonderful seas and know we have probably given away too much. What is the future of our rural communities which are still devastated by the effects of being a member of the European Union? 400 24 January 2013

24/01/2013L00100Senator Lorraine Higgins: I welcome Mr. Gay Mitchell to the House. It is always a welcome departure to have guests address the House, especially those of his experience in local, national and European politics. It is great that he has shared Europe’s history and experiences with us and I enjoyed listening to him.

This is a timely visit given that Ireland is holding the Presidency of the European Union and many Ministers and officials will visit the country during the next six months. This is the seventh time we have held this responsibility and it is an honour for the country. The 2013 Presi- dency comes as we celebrate the 40th anniversary of our accession to the European Economic Community in 1973 and it is rooted in our continuing commitment to the European project since we joined.

As we mark the 40th year of our membership, we should reflect on the remarkable changes that have taken place in the country in terms of infrastructure, as well as culturally, politically and economically. Let us look back to 1973. Senator Mullins has outlined several changes since. At that time Ireland’s wealth level stood at 60% of the European average, while today, despite the effects of the economic crisis, Ireland’s level of prosperity is above the EU average. In the early 1970s, more than 50% of our exports went to our nearest neighbour, the United Kingdom, but today we trade advanced goods and services globally. In particular, EU economies such as Germany have become increasingly important for Irish exporters. These have been some notable and welcome points in our development and change since we became a member of the Union.

I wish to focus on our priorities and aims for our EU Presidency which will help to shape and contribute to Europe’s growth and recovery priorities and serve to highlight the importance of Ireland’s debt situation and any proposed debt deal coming to manifestation. Ireland’s priorities can be found in the words stability, jobs and growth. As a country we have gone through financially turbulent times exacerbated by a world recession. However, in great adversity opportunity knocks and now is the time that the European Union can display its strength and stability and show that we have the ability to foster growth, even in these much-maligned times. We must show that once we secure steady growth we can then foster employment opportunities and contribute to the welfare of each of our citizens.

The best example of Europe’s ability to confront such trying and testing issues is that of this country. Undoubtedly in the recent past Ireland has gone through peaks and troughs in terms of growth. In the 15 years preceding 2008 we were the envy of Europe with our unprecedented economic growth fuelled by too many resources being devoted to the property sector. Irish banks had adopted a flaithiúlach approach to lending which culminated in the Government of the day guaranteeing their borrowings, thereby inextricably linking bank debt to our sovereign debt. The cost - economic, human and otherwise - of rescuing our banks and their creditors was vast. In 2010 we were obliged to seek support from the European Union and the IMF when the door was closed on the international financial markets. There is no doubt whatsoever that the European Union was there for us at a time of great adversity for the country, but by taking the steps we took as a country we also ensured the stability of Europe’s banking sector and that should not be forgotten.

As a consequence of the decision made by Ireland, its people have suffered to the tune of €64 billion. We have taken a hit and played our part in the economic malaise. Taxes have increased and expenditure has been curtailed in the country. The size of the public sector has been reduced with salaries cut by an average of 15%. The measures we have had to take have been 401 Seanad Éireann difficult and there have been no easy choices. Now, we need to be shown the daylight at the end of the tunnel which should manifest itself as relieving the burden of our bank-related debt. We have shown that there is a path back from the crisis. It is not an easy path and undoubtedly it has been and will be a long path. It is in Europe’s interest that we can be the poster boys of Europe and show that other countries can come through an austerity programme successfully, gain the confidence of international lenders and take back fiscal independence while remaining within the Union. As a citizen I yearn for the day that the term PIIGS, referring to Portugal, Italy, Ire- land, Greece and Spain, becomes PIGS and I acknowledge that Mr. Mitchell, our Government and all other representatives in Europe are striving to achieve this goal.

My next point relates to Europe’s aid agenda and our simple mantra that we must help others to help themselves. Europe has been to the forefront of this issue for many decades. The EU member states have always made a healthy contribution towards countries in development programmes. More than half the money spent on helping poor countries comes from EU member countries, making it the world’s largest aid donor. Three of the world’s five largest donor countries are EU members and four of them already donate 0.7% of their gross national income to development aid. By way of corroboration, in 2010 EU development aid totalled €53.8 billion, a significant sum given what was taking place on the continent at the time. I had hoped to develop this point further but it appears I am out of time.

24/01/2013L00200Acting Chairman (Senator Marie Moloney): I am sorry, Senator. Other Members are waiting to get in.

24/01/2013L00300Senator Lorraine Higgins: I accept that. I thank Mr. Mitchell for coming to the House and addressing us today. I thank the Acting Chairman for being given the opportunity to put my point across.

24/01/2013L00400Senator Sean D. Barrett: I welcome Mr. Mitchell. Members have referred to his late brother who made a practical contribution to greater contacts between Europeans. I remember when it used to cost £650 to fly from Dublin to Brussels. He played a major part in opening up that market with his friend in the Commission, Peter Sutherland, against Civil Service advice. That was a real tester of bringing Europeans together. I endorse everything Mr. Mitchell has said about the harmony and friendship that has been generated by the European Union and the benefits of free trade. They have all been great success stories.

Where I might diverge with Mr. Mitchell, however, is on the issue of the euro. It seems to have been a remarkably badly designed currency that has resulted in mass unemployment in countries such as Greece, Spain and so on. Our problem was that we sleep-walked into it. There should be a duty to examine policies which might seem like a good idea at the centre but which do not work at the periphery.

While I appreciate all the good things to which Mr. Mitchell has referred, there is a crisis, part of which was illustrated by Mr. Cameron’s speech yesterday. By the way, I hope people will read the speech. It is far easier in today’s media to get comments about the speech rather than read what he actually said, which is far more important. Perhaps we could debate what he actually said rather than what commentators thought about it.

We have problems due to the lack of bank regulation and should have seen them 15 years ago. There is a problem with the lack of an exit mechanism. I cannot see Greece recovering under the present arrangements and that issue will have to be addressed. The loss of exchange

402 24 January 2013 rates and interest rates as instruments of economic policy is a problem. Our labour mobility does not go to Germany but rather Australia, Canada and so on. It was our own fault for sleepwalking into this. We should have played a greater part in designing a better common currency to what emerged. We must address the unemployment problem.

What do people look for in Europe? More humility, less bureaucracy, less jargon, more accountability, less sleepwalking into badly thought out policies and more respect for parliament. Following what Mr. Cameron said yesterday there was a headline to the effect that he cannot have à la carte meals. Is the alternative to à la carte meals to be force fed? There is a legitimate issue for us to discuss in this regard. All layers of government, including this House, which may face a referendum, should justify themselves.

There is a lack of confidence in Europe. Pro-market employment rules have been referred to and we need more of them. France, in particular, is always more interested in employment legislation for those who already have jobs, but it is indifferent to the mass unemployment which Mr. Mitchell and the other Members of the European Parliament have addressed.

The principle of subsidiarity is another issue. There may be items that should be returned to member state governments. I used to hear Mr. Delors talking about this, but I do not think he ever gave any powers back to the nation states. Are there functions of government that are better carried out by nation states? Why is the traffic in this area all one-way?

Mr. Mitchell has written about the problem of bureaucracy. People find the Brussels bureaucracy annoying and intimidating. I welcome Mr. Mitchell’s analysis of Professor Schiller’s book. There was a reference to Wall Street versus main street. Main street is suffering, while we have been cowed by the financial markets that Mr. Mitchell described in his fine account.

We must address several questions for the future. We must investigate how much unemployment is due to the fixed exchange rates regime. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, referred to feta cheese recently. Some in the media thought it was a joke, but how can Greece recover at a fixed exchange ratevis-à-vis Germany? The democratic deficit must be addressed also. That is a serious problem which citizens hold strong views on, as is the principle of subsidiarity.

I hope Mr. Mitchell will refer to the unemployment problem, the democratic deficit in Eu- rope and the powers that should properly reside with the nation states.

24/01/2013M00200Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh: Ba mhaith liom aontú leat, a Chathaoirligh, agus fáilte a chur roimh an Uasal Mitchell. Céim dearfach é seo. I propose to the Seanad that a similar invitation be extended to the three Irish MEPs from the northern end of the country to engage with us during the course of the Irish Presidency of the European Union.

Earlier in January the President of the European Commission, Mr. José Manuel Barroso, visited Dublin. During his visit he made a remarkable statement. In response to questions about the role of the European Union in the financial crisis he argued that the “crisis was not created by the European Union.” He went on to blame “unsustainable public debt created by national governments and by irresponsible financial behaviour tolerated by national supervisors.” This is truly a remarkable statement. Clearly, he is right that member state governments, regulators and banking chiefs played a central part in the financial crisis that hit in 2008. However, to sug- gest EU institutions or EU policies played no part in the crisis is simply untrue. The role of the European Central Bank and its monetary policy were central to the economic collapse. Low in- 403 Seanad Éireann terest rates provided a powerful incentive for both banks and governments to run up unsustainable debts. These rates were set by the ECB, not in the interests of the sustainability or stability of the eurozone but in order to serve the interests of the then stagnant eurozone economy. There is scant evidence of the ECB or the European Banking Authority expressing alarm when the inevitable lending and borrowing spree started to spin out of control. Likewise, deregulation of financial services, a policy actively pursued by the European Commission, undermined the power of regulatory authorities to police banks effectively. The sins of member state governments were also the sins of the Commission and the European Central Bank. They were also the sins of some parties then in opposition, including Fine Gael which engaged in what can only be described as auction politics in the run-up to the 2007 general election, adding even more fuel to the speculative fire caused by policy decisions in Dublin, Frankfurt and Brussels.

Since the onset of the crisis, what has been the role of the European Commission and the European Central Bank? Has their approach been defined by the solidarity alluded to by Mr. Mitchell? Unfortunately, it has not. The same hawkish approach has prevailed, with devastat- ing social and economic consequences for ordinary people, particularly in programme countries such as Southern Ireland. The ECB remains the single biggest obstacle to a meaningful deal on the banking debt. This means it is the single biggest obstacle to our exit from the troika programme and a return to the sovereign bond markets. At the same time, the Commission has been the engine of the anti-growth and anti-citizen policies of austerity that are hurting hundreds of thousands of families and blocking our social and economic recovery.

Just as the European Union played a central role in creating the financial crisis that engulfed us all in 2008, it is playing a key role in the perpetuation of policies that have failed and will continue to fail to tackle the causes of the crisis.

24/01/2013M00300Mr. Gay Mitchell: I thank Members for their contributions which I found very interesting. I also thank them for their very warm welcome. Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú was particularly kind to me, which I very much appreciate. I agree with what he said about the 1916 Proclama- tion and that we should remind ourselves about it more. I know he has had a lifelong interest in the Irish language. I, too, have a great love of it. All of my children were educated through Irish and my schoolgoing grandchild is also attending a gaelscoil. That opportunity would not have been available had we not joined the European Union. That resulted in many people de- ciding that they wanted to save the language. It is not just a matter for Gaeltacht areas. There is a huge demand for all-Irish primary and secondary school places, which demand was created when people saw the country being part of the European Union. The European Union is not about assimilation but about integration, whereby Catholics, Protestants, Germans, non- believers, people of different sexual orientation and backgrounds can learn to live together in peace and stability.

I was asked whether I was disappointed with the UK reference to holding a referendum on European Union membership. It is very difficult to interfere with the rights of another member state and I agree with Senator Sean D. Barrett that we should listen to what Mr. Cameron has said. I do not think he has said anything that was not anticipated, but there are very deep issues involved that may not have been fully thought out. There is a tendency in some quarters in politics to look at what the focus groups are saying and then repeat it, but politics is meant to be about more than this. What will happen, for example, if the British do get themselves to a position where a referendum will be held? As we all know, the result in a referendum can go either way. I believe it was Charles de Gaulle who said the terrible thing about referendums was that people never answered the question asked. One asks a question on a specific issue and 404 24 January 2013 they say they do not like the Government and so forth. That is the difficulty. A referendum is not a perfect instrument.

I do not know what effect such a referendum would have on the future of Scotland or North- ern Ireland, for example. In the context of a future Border poll in Northern Ireland, if the United Kingdom was outside the European Union, would voters in Northern Ireland decide they would rather be in the Republic of Ireland and inside the European Union rather than outside? A Brit- ish citizen living in Ireland e-mailed me yesterday to say he was British but wanted to keep his EU citizenship and passport. He asked me to raise with the Irish Government the possibility of fast-tracking Irish citizenship applications from British citizens living here. That demonstrates the fear being created unnecessarily in this regard.

I have listened to what Mr. Cameron said last night and understand why he said it. He is under a lot of pressure, not just from the UK Independence Party, UKIP, but also from his own backbenchers. However, I also heard interviews with passengers travelling on the Eurostar, business people and others, who were shocked at the idea that there would be a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union. I know from discussions I have had with British civil servants that they are fearful of where this will take them. Having said all that, Britain is a democracy and its people must decide for themselves. I mention in passing that the Lisbon treaty specifically allows for a member state to leave, if it so wishes, but I hope Britain will not leave. It is not only that we export a lot to it. If memory serves me, we import more from it than from Latin America and Japan added together. It is a two-way relationship. There are social ties and special relations between our two countries, about which the Taoiseach and Mr. Cameron spoke recently.

Senators asked if the Irish Presidency could promote greater understanding on this question and I believe it could. Ireland is one of the countries in Europe that understands Britain best because of our exposure to the British media and our close ties with our neighbour. When one sees the British MEPs in action, particularly those from the mainstream parties, it becomes clear that they are some of the best contributors in the European Parliament. Britain has a great tradition of public service and excellent public administration. I would prefer if they took a leading role in the European Union, alongside the bigger member states, instead of being so recalcitrant.

I thank Senator Michael Mullins for his comments. It seems strange now and when I mention it to my children, they think I am talking about ancient history, but I remember the five-year waiting lists for a telephone here. I also remember that if one had a sick child, for example, one had to get a ministerial directive in order to have a telephone installed in one’s house. That is the way it was, not in ancient times but the 1980s. I had the signatures of 1,000 people in the parish of Crumlin alone who were waiting for a telephone. The best road in the country was the one running from Newlands Cross to Naas. The country has changed dramatically since. People are now much more mobile than in the past, something on which we need to reflect. Also, as the Senator said, because of our commitment to the European Union, the level of foreign direct investment here increased by 30% in 2011, the last full year for which we have statistics. That was the second highest increase in foreign direct investment in the European Union after the Netherlands.

The Senator asked where we would be in 20 years time, a very interesting question. Within a generation, the population of the world will have increased by 2 billion, 90% of whom will have been born in what is now the developing world. As things stand, the European Union has 405 Seanad Éireann 9% of the world’s population but accounts for somewhere between one quarter and one fifth of the world’s GDP. If memory serves, it is nearer to one quarter than one fifth. Within the timescale mentioned by the Senator, Europe will only have 6% of the world’s population. Population growth is occurring in the east and south. People in these countries have mobile phones and computers and their children know how to use them better than I do. I hope I will not bring criticism down on my head for saying this, but it is very doubtful, for example, that Britain and France will continue to be entitled to a seat on the UN Security Council in such circumstances.

It is not just a question of what we want within the European Union but also of what role the Union will play in the world and how we will look out for its interests. I recently read some interesting research that was circulated by the European People’s Party. We all know about the future of Brazil, India, China and Russia - China will continue to be powerful - but we might not have noticed some countries that are coming up, such as Nigeria and Colombia. While they might not be on our radar now, research shows they might be very powerful in the world of the future if they get their acts together. Europe cannot afford to speak with 27 or 30 different voices. I will come back to the issue of democracy, which is relevant in this context, when I respond to Senator Barrett’s comments.

I thank Senator Mary Ann O’Brien for her welcome. It is true that many laws are coming through the European Union. Many of them are replacing existing laws. Many of them are being introduced because national governments or parliaments have asked for them. Some laws start off in national parliaments, perhaps as questions to Ministers, before making their way through. There is a process of scrutiny in all of this. I have served as Chairman of the Joint Committee on European Affairs and the former Oireachtas Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny. I understand that the Seanad intends to take a better role in the area of scrutiny. That is really important. It is very dry work. If we did not have our Judiciary, we would be living in a jungle and the law would amount to no more than the survival of the fittest. The only judges one reads about in the newspapers every day are those who deal with murders, serious crimes and things of that kind. All of the other judges are doing vitally important work as well. The same has to be said of Deputies, Senators and MEPs. Their work might not be covered by the media, but that is not the measure of their success. The role of a parliament is to scrutinise these things. The Upper House of the Oireachtas could play a particular role in this regard. I welcome the Seanad’s plans to expand its role in this area. I think it would be pushing an open door as far as co-operation from Europe is concerned.

I was also asked about fisheries. As I mentioned, the economy is very diversified now. One of the things we sacrificed was our fisheries. Approximately a year ago, I attended an interesting seminar on where our future wealth will come from. It will not come from fisheries as much as it will come from beneath the sea. The maritime sector is a crucial part of our long-term future. All sorts of wealth can be found beneath the sea. We have not given away our rights in that regard. We need to safeguard them. My colleague, Pat the Cope Gallagher, is involved in negotiating the fisheries agreement.

I was also asked about the labelling of alcohol. I am glad that Deputy Martin was mentioned. Two reports recommended a smoking ban. One of them was written by the Minister, Deputy Shatter, and I wrote the other one. We never got any credit for it until someone found themselves in a tight corner and tried to blame the Minister, Deputy Shatter, and me. I agree fully with the ban. My family has been devastated by cancer. I also agree with what was said about the labelling of alcohol. These issues are being examined. The European Parliament is being vigilant about genetically modified food. 406 24 January 2013 I would like to mention in passing how the legislative process works in the European Par- liament. We do not have the right to introduce Bills in the way that Senators and Deputies do. The Council of Ministers does not have that right either. The sole right to introduce legislation lies with the European Commission. The European Parliament and the Council of Ministers can ask the Commission to introduce legislation, just as the Oireachtas does. When legislation is introduced, it is decided on jointly by the Parliament and by the Council. Just as the Council meets in various formats, such as the Agriculture and Fisheries Council and the Economic and Financial Affairs Council, the Parliament has more than 20 committees. The Commission’s reports go to those committees. A member of each committee is appointed as rapporteur, using the d’Hondt system. The biggest group gets the most reports, and the second biggest group gets the second most reports, etc. If one is the rapporteur, one is put in charge of that file. A shadow rapporteur is also appointed. What happens in the European Parliament is different from the adversarial British system that we inherited.

Proinsias De Rossa put it very well when he said that in the Dáil, people in opposition get up every day wondering how they can wrong-foot the Government and people in government get up every day wondering how they can prevent themselves from being wrong-footed by the Op- position. We do not have the same system in Europe. Nobody has a majority in the European Parliament. There is no government in the European Parliament. We have to reach agreement. When one gets out of bed in the morning, one has to think about how to reach agreement with the other parties. That is how we make legislation. It is very imperfect. The 500 million people who live between Malta and Finland and between Ireland and Poland are very diverse. The miracle of the system is that it actually works.

The bank sovereign debt issue was one of the matters mentioned by Senator Higgins. The European Council, in particular, is exercised about this issue. Proposals will come forward as part of a new supervision mechanism for banks. I do not think the European Union will end up supervising every bank. Some sort of matrix will probably be used whereby the European Central Bank will have a role if certain criteria apply and it will be a matter for the national leg- islator if those criteria do not apply. When that comes, it is proposed that the ESM will be open to dealing with the recapitalisation of banks. That is not finalised yet. I cannot force anybody to share my personal view on this matter, which is that I do not see how that cannot be made available to us if it is made available to some banks. If we are comparing debt-to-GDP ratios across Europe on the same basis, we cannot have something on the balance sheet of Ireland’s national accounts that is not on the balance sheet of other national accounts. One has to compare like with like. My understanding is that if we get this approval, which I am optimistic we will get, the Government might never draw it down. If we have it, the markets will probably say “they can get this money, so we will invest in those banks ourselves because we can still get a good rate”. That will be the important part of it.

The Senator also asked whether there was light at the end of the tunnel. Not only do I think there is light at the end of the tunnel, but I also think our future is extremely bright. The last question I asked the president of the European Central Bank, Mr. Draghi, at the last meeting of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee before Christmas was whether he shared the view of the German finance Minister, Dr. Schäuble, and a British banker who was speaking on behalf of what is called the Lisbon Council, which was that as recovery comes, the West will do well and Europe will be the strongest part of the West. Mr. Draghi, who as a central banker is not particularly known for making exuberant statements, said he absolutely agreed with that view. We are putting in the foundations for a sustainable recovery in the future. I heard Mr. Bill

407 Seanad Éireann Gates say yesterday that Ireland and Europe are getting their act together.

I was also asked about development aid. This is not all selfless stuff. It is not all about the fact that 28,000 children are dying every day, but it is to do with that fact. At the end of the Second World War, this country had an infant mortality rate of approximately 48 per 1,000. That might have been pretty typical of poorer countries across Europe at the time. I led the European Parliament team that attended last year’s UN review of the millennium development goals. I was part of a group of people from many countries. As we sat down, the Assistant Secretary General of the World Health Organization mentioned in a matter-of-fact manner that there is a range of mortality rates for children, the lowest being in Ireland and the highest being in some other country. I cannot remember what country it was. As I said earlier, the current rate is 26,000 children per day. Although it is a horrible and horrific figure, at least it represents a reduction on the previous level of 38,000 per day. An additional 13,000 children are living every day because we are working with people in their countries to assist them, as opposed to telling them what to do. The current rate is 68 per 1,000, which is not that far beyond the rate in this country at the end of the Second World War. One can see how we can achieve these goals. It is not all selfless and humanitarian. The future is going to be in some of these countries. We have to look to that. When I sat beside the Rwandan economic affairs Minister at a meeting in Brussels, she asked me throughout the meal how the financial services sector operates in Ireland because that country has ambitions in the same sector. The future is there. These countries can be our trading partners. We will not have massive migration if we deal with it humanely, properly and wisely.

I thank Senators Barrett and Ó Murchú for their kind words about my late brother. I noted the things that Senator Barrett agreed with me about. I agree with him that the euro was badly designed.

1 o’clock

That is accepted in the European Union. However, in 1989, when the Berlin Wall suddenly came down, we were left in a situation in which Germany wanted reunification whereas France, in particular, and Britain - perhaps more sceptically - were very fearful of a united Germany in Europe. Would Europe become a Germanic Europe or could we make Germany a European Germany? That is why, for political reasons, they decided to go ahead with the euro, even though we had not put in the proper foundations. We are now putting in those foundations and those foundations are going in very well.

In regard to increased accountability, the Senator has put his finger right on the button. This is something that is exercising not only Senators but also MEPs and, in particular, the President of the European Council, Mr. Van Rompuy. He has published a document which states that because we are doing all of this, we must have greater parliamentary accountability, not just to the European Parliament but to national parliaments. He states that what is done at a national level must be accounted for to national parliaments and what is done at European level must be accounted for to the European Parliament. He goes further, however, and points out there are provisions in the Lisbon treaty for the European Parliament and national parliaments together to oversee some issues.

In passing, I will come back to the issue of development aid. The European Commission produced a report stating that if there were greater coherence between what is spent nationally and what is spent Europe-wide on development aid, the saving would be an extra €6 billion per 408 24 January 2013 year. In the lifetime of a parliament, that is €30 billion. The House will know what we could do with that money. Why are not we not doing that? We are not doing it because national governments are holding onto it. If we could get national parliaments and the European Parliament working together, we could put the pressure on national governments to do more. There is a case for this. We are exercised about how we can do this more easily.

It is true that if we do not have the exchange rate capacity to devalue, we have structural problems. I do not know where one would draw the line on that issue. Northern Ireland is a poorer place than London, yet it uses the same currency. We have done the unthinkable - we have made ourselves more competitive. When we look at Greece, it has some problems which it brought upon itself and it has problems of confidence because some of the figures it generated did not stand up to scrutiny. However, real progress is being made in Greece and the Greeks are taking very difficult decisions. It will probably be easier after the German election in Sep- tember for a more sympathetic view to be taken of the southern economies.

We must bear in mind that the European Union does not have its own source of taxation. All of this comes from national taxpayers. Although Ireland has been in the European Union since 1973, we are not yet a net contributor to the budget; therefore, we cannot always rely on others to put their hands in their pockets. There is a determination that Greece will not be al- lowed to exit and whatever it takes will be done. However, some of that may happen later in the year rather than in the earlier part of the year.

24/01/2013O00200Senator Paschal Mooney: I welcome Mr. Mitchell and echo all that has been said in laud- ing and complimenting him on his outstanding contribution not only to national affairs but also to European affairs. I wish him well in the future.

Inevitably, given that Mr. Mitchell has covered such a wide variety of subjects, there will be some overlap in the questions. Nonetheless, I am concerned by some elements of the Lis- bon treaty that relate to the power of national parliaments. Ireland is a former member of the Western European Union, which has now been superseded by a new committee in Europe. However, even though the Warsaw declaration in March this year signed off on the decision that where there was a bicameral parliamentary system, there would be representatives from both Houses, unfortunately, the situation is that the three representatives from Ireland are all chairs of committees, are all members of the Government and are all Deputies. This flies in the face of the attempts that have been made to have a more inclusive participatory democracy vis-à- vis Europe. I am curious to establish whether Mr. Mitchell is disappointed that, in some elements, the Lisbon treaty, which clearly stated there would be more openness, transparency and democratic accountability among the Commission, the Parliament and national parliaments, has failed. It has failed in the context of this House, which should be used more effectively to scrutinise European legislation.

My final question is on a point on which I am curious to know Mr. Mitchell’s opinion. Is he concerned about the continuing stability of the German-French alliance, particularly in light of the election of President Hollande? Moreover, while Chancellor Merkel is personally very popular in Germany - as the Acting Chairman will know, given that we discovered this on the recent visit of the agriculture committee - her party, the CDU, and its coalition partners, the liberals, could possibly lose the election. What implications does Mr. Mitchell believe this will have for the wider European area?

24/01/2013O00300Senator Colm Burke: I thank Mr. Mitchell for taking the time to attend. I also thank him 409 Seanad Éireann for his help and assistance when I was a member of the European Parliament. He was always there to give good advice on how to deal with particular issues.

To follow on from the last speaker, my question concerns the role of the Seanad in dealing with EU regulations. I was at a meeting of the Joint Committee on Health and Children this morning, at which a presentation was made in regard to a new regulation on medical devices. The first question I asked was whether we have consulted the industry here, given that some 160 companies are making medical devices in Ireland. I asked that we inquire with them to find out whether they are happy with the regulation. This emphasises the point about our need to watch what is coming down the line. There are 12 Irish MEPs and I know we have good civil servants working at the Brussels level, watching regulation. From a ground level here in Ireland, however, we do not have enough mechanisms in place. This is why I have been pushing hard for the Seanad to take a role by setting aside two days a month to deal specifically with EU regulation. From Mr. Mitchell’s experience - and he has a lot of experience of working in the Dáil, the Seanad and the European Parliament - what is his view of the way we monitor EU regulation? Does he consider we have enough mechanisms in place to deal with this at present? How does he see the Seanad using its role to make sure this is copperfastened and improved upon?

24/01/2013O00400Senator Jillian van Turnhout: I welcome Mr. Gay Mitchell to the House. I ask my question in light of the fact that Mr. Mitchell has twice won the title of MEP of the year for development. I did not necessarily know that he was the leading figure who successfully negotiated the development co-operation instrument in 2006. While that may sound like nothing much, that co-operation instrument has a budget of €16.9 billion between 2007 and 2013 and ensures scrutiny by the Parliament in development work. I also point to his more recent report on establishing a financing instrument for development co-operation and the lessons learned from that.

My question is in light of a Seanad debate in November on sexual violence in conflict and rape as a weapon of war. I spoke about Burma, Sudan’s Darfur region and, in particular, the Democratic Republic of Congo, DRC. I am very concerned about the escalating conflict in the DRC and the lack of attention it receives here. Given Mr. Mitchell’s role and experience as vice chairman of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly, I would like his advice on the positive role we could play in highlighting what is happening. While we know the DRC has had many wars, the current war has claimed 3 million lives, both as a direct result of the conflict and as a result of disease and malnutrition. As Mr. Mitchell’s speech today showed, there is a clear link between conflict and poverty. What role can we play?

24/01/2013O00500Mr. Gay Mitchell: I thank the three Senators for their kind comments. Senator Mooney asked about the powers following the Lisbon treaty. There are real powers following it. A number of parliaments recently made a submission and, while the Seanad was not one of them because it was not elected in time to do that, it could have had a real influence on how matters were decided. My one and only book is called By Dáil Account and is a history of the Commit- tee of Public Accounts and the Comptroller and Auditor General. At the end of that book, I talk about the Dáil and the Seanad. It is a purely personal view but since it has been asked about, I will give it. I think the more the Seanad divorces itself from the Dáil, the more people will see its real importance. It always sounds very good saying we need a triple lock, UN approval and ratification by the Dáil and the Seanad but the Seanad is not directly elected, as is the Dáil. There is an understanding that if the Dáil passes something, the Seanad should not frustrate it. The Seanad needs to divorce itself from that and could on its own through a select committee do more than just scrutinise legislation. For example, a number of Commissioners are coming here during our Presidency. I asked a few of them whether they would come to a meeting or 410 24 January 2013 meet with a group and they said would love to do so. When they come here, it should be an opportunity to get them to speak either to the Seanad or a select committee. It does not have to be in formal session. In the European Parliament, we use breakfasts, lunches and dinners. It would inform Senators and give them a chance to have their say. One would be stunned by the willingness on the part of the European institutions and the European bureaucracy to do this. I welcome the fact that the Seanad is organising to do that. I am a fan of the Seanad, which has the opportunity to do what adversarial politics prevents the Dáil from doing.

Mrs. Merkel is very popular. The two governing parties lost the recent state election but she will be leading the Christian Democratic Union into the general election. Nobody knows what will happen as the election is not until September but there is an expectation that she will be back as Chancellor, be it at the head of a grand coalition or the same government. She has shown herself to be more accommodating than people give her credit for.

Senator Colm Burke mentioned the role of the Seanad and what I said partly covered that. I welcome the fact that the Seanad is calling MEPs to have this exchange. It is very useful for me to get some feel for the issues Senators really want to raise. Everybody is trying to set one’s agenda by raising issues but it is really important for us to hear what Senators have to say. If one looks at the House of Lords and the House of Commons, one can see the House of Lords has a very powerful European committee which is quite separate from the House of Commons. The committee issues reports and visits the European Parliament quite regularly. Much of this is in the hands of the Seanad and I wish it well in respect of it.

Senator van Turnhout very kindly mentioned my role on the development committee. I am glad somebody noticed. I give it a lot of my time and am the European People’s Party co- ordinator on that issue.

24/01/2013P00200Senator Jillian van Turnhout: He is the expert.

24/01/2013P00300Mr. Gay Mitchell: I was the rapporteur for the development co-operation instrument which merged 16 regulations into one. It was the mother and father of all negotiations. The reason for that was because there was an effort by the Commission to grab power. It does not normally do this but it thought this was an opportunity presented by the advent of a new High Representative for Foreign Affairs. The European Parliament organised itself, said that it was not agreeing to it and across party lines, was able to stop it. For the first time, we put in targets, namely, that 20% of the budget would be spent on basic health and education. We organised ourselves to call that into account.

The real problem with the Democratic Republic of Congo is that it does not have a government. When we give aid or assistance to the developing world, it comes with some obligations. They do not involve telling people what to do but are obligations of good governance, gender issues and the targets are set. There is a foreign affairs committee and a development committee in the European Parliament, both of which have had exchanges with Baroness Ashton on these issues. She has been very active in respect of it. It is a very worrying situation. Rwanda has a particular interest in it. It will take a lot of time on the part of the European Parliament. Baroness Ashton is a very busy woman and is drawn all over the world in her position as Vice President of the Commission and High Representative for Foreign Affairs. In that role, she chairs the foreign affairs Council but she will come to Ireland from time to time. It would be very useful for this House to identify when she is coming and to ask her to attend and discuss these issues. She is very disposed and receptive to those sorts of suggestions. I hope I have 411 Seanad Éireann dealt with the issues.

24/01/2013P00400Senator John Gilroy: I welcome Mr. Mitchell. In his address, he referred to the notion of sovereignty and how it is his opinion that ascension to the European Union has strengthened and achieved a real level of sovereignty. It is an opinion I share. Each succeeding treaty we passed has strengthened that level of sovereignty. Sovereignty is about much more than the ability to say “No”. It is about partnership and making decisions. Decisions are best made in the context of relations and networks of relationships. That is what my question is about. Does Mr. Mitchell think the perceived damage to our national reputation through broken or neglected relationships has been fully repaired in Europe? That is not necessarily a simple question. I spoke yesterday to a very serious commentator on European affairs who told me he was surprised by the negativity at home among certain elements of our commentariat about our position. This is in marked contrast to the view held by large sections of the European commentariat who see Ireland in a rather positive light. Is he right?

24/01/2013P00500Senator Rónán Mullen: I welcome Mr. Mitchell and thank him for his excellent speech. His responses to questions showed his mastery of the brief for which I congratulate him, in particular for the work he is doing in development. Almost every time we have had a referendum on a European treaty, the issue of abortion has come up and has been a very controversial and sometimes complicating issue, sometimes not for very good reason when one considers that the Maastricht Protocol has been there since 1992 and the EU does not have a competence in an area like that, yet there are interconnecting issues, for example, in the area of development and the European Union’s engagement with the developing world. I have often wondered whether enough is done by the Irish Government or MEPs to ensure our distinctive values on that issue - we have a Constitution that honours the equal right to life of the unborn and mothers, notwithstanding current controversies at home - are brought to bear on the European Union’s international humanitarian and other engagements. I brought forward a motion on gendercide with others in the Seanad which was very well received for the most part across the floor of the House. I know that is an issue in which Mr. Mitchell takes an interest.

Notwithstanding the good work done at EU level, people still wonder about the massive wastage that occurs every time the European Union moves lock, stock and barrel to Strasbourg once a month and whether something can be done to reassure people at home and outside the Union that it is not a gravy train.

24/01/2013P00600Senator Eamonn Coghlan: I welcome Mr. Mitchell to the Seanad. When we think of celebrating 40 years of membership of the European Union, some people might think that is quite a long time ago but when one is of our vintage, it seems like it was a very short time ago. Ireland has gone through a huge transformation in those 40 years in terms of the economy, the infrastructure to which Mr. Mitchell alluded such as the roads around the country and, in particular, the peace process. When I look back over 40 years, I can see that Mr. Mitchell and I have had a lot in common. We grew up in the same areas of Drimnagh, Crumlin and Inchicore. We did a bit of running together. He ran around the streets of Drimnagh and Crumlin-----

24/01/2013P00700Mr. Gay Mitchell: Knocking on doors.

24/01/2013P00800Senator Eamonn Coghlan: -----knocking on doors trying to build his political career. The success of his political career has been referred to. I ran around the streets of Drimnagh and Walkinstown for other reasons but I was not successful at that whatsoever.

412 24 January 2013

24/01/2013P00900Senator Rónán Mullen: The Senator is still running.

24/01/2013P01000Senator Eamonn Coghlan: Our lives have come full circle.

Mr. Mitchell mentioned the solidarity among the member states and their people. Where there may not be solidarity among the member states is on the issue of our corporate tax rate of 12.5%. Is there a great difference among the rates of all 27 member states? Ours is the lowest. Mr. Mitchell referred also to the disproportionality of our representation in the European Union. Will this force us into harmonising our corporate tax rate?

24/01/2013Q00200Mr. Gay Mitchell: I thank Senator Gilroy for his kind words. I agree with him that sovereignty is about taking responsibility and making decisions in those areas for which we have responsibility. In the European Union we can only do what we are committed to do by the treaties, as the people have permitted us. If something is not contained in the treaties, we cannot do it; it is a matter for national parliaments. The Parliament in Ireland can do whatever it wishes provided it does not contravene Bunreacht na hÉireann, but we are in a different position. Sovereignty is a real issue. With all my heart I believe we became truly sovereign the day we joined the European Union and found ourselves a role in the world. We tend to eulogise the United Nations, rightly, especially because we have supplied many UN peacekeepers and have given a great deal to the United Nations, and many of our people have died. However, we have never had an Irish Secretary General of the United Nations, or anything like it, whereas we have a real say in Europe.

I refer to the perceived damage. I was Minister with responsibility for European affairs from 1994 to 1997, during Ireland’s then Presidency. In a general sense we could more or less get whatever we wanted done because people had a great disposition towards Ireland. After the first Nice treaty there was a kind of disbelief that Ireland had voted “No” - not among the older member states, which know that things can go wrong in a referendum, but among newer member states. These countries did not have a great tradition of democracy, which was new to them, and they wanted to emulate Ireland. We were the country they wanted to be. Then they got the idea that Ireland was against the European Union. We had to explain that this was not the case but that people had concerns about the treaty. Things recovered, but then we took another knock after the first Lisbon treaty referendum. People asked what had gone wrong, because Ireland was doing well in Europe, was respected and had a real role there. Things changed dramatically again when the question on the stability pact was put to the people’s vote. It was not clear whether a vote was needed. As far as I recall, the Attorney General decided it would be safe to have a vote and people then voted “Yes”. That was the single thing that changed the mood in Europe. Most people said “That could not have been easy for the Irish people.” That was when respect for Ireland began.

There was a question about the commentariat here and there. In Europe, in private con- versation, people ask why other countries do not look to Ireland. In addition, Europe wants a success story; it wants Ireland to succeed. We are very much pushing an open door. I do not know why this does not enter the minds of the commentariat here. I presume that if one goes on the radio and says only nice things one is not invited back. Perhaps the reason is that polemics work, but in my view, something is out of balance. It is right that people should criticise and question; sometimes it gives us strength in the Parliament when we can say we are under pressure at home. There is nothing wrong with that, but it must be balanced by reporting the good things and not being carried away by the negatives.

413 Seanad Éireann I thank Senator Mullen for his comments. I refer to gendercide and I am glad there is agreement across the House on the issue. There is a rapporteur on gendercide on the development committee. I became interested in this subject after reading an article in The Economist which began with the premise that across the world there were 100 million women missing because of gender-based abortion and infanticide. However, the real figure is likely to be 200 million. The disproportion between numbers of men and women in certain countries is horrific and shocking, and research has shown this is the case. Recently the BBC produced some articles on this subject, which for whatever reason does not get much coverage here. Everybody would agree that the idea of terminating the life of either an unborn or a born person because of her gender is totally unacceptable.

There are differences in the Parliament on matters of sexual and reproductive health and rights. Some members will not vote for sexual and reproductive health funding, while others will, including me. Some will not vote for any of these things, while others will vote for everything. The phrase “and rights” is taken by many to mean that there could be funding for abortion in the developing world. I have been involved for eight years in the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly, where 30 MEPs, if we can get that number, meet with the 78 African- Caribbean-Pacific parliaments. We do this twice a year. One such meeting will happen during Ireland’s Presidency, although it will take place in Brussels. During all those years I never heard this issue being raised. People are more concerned with other issues. However, there are serious gender issues which can be addressed, and not only in the traditional ways in which we consider them. For example, in countries where gendercide is an issue, if there was some support in the form of crop insurance and insurance for old age, as there is in this country, people might not feel the necessity to have very big families, and to have boys rather than girls. We need to approach these matters on a range of fronts and this is something in which I am very much involved.

I am glad to hear Senator Eamonn Coghlan is still running around the streets of Dublin. We come from adjoining parishes, as he noted. I am glad he mentioned the peace process, which I forgot to do. We should remind ourselves that much of the solid support for the peace process came from and continues to come from Europe.

The 12.5% corporate tax rate is entirely a matter for member state governments and the European Parliament has no competence in it. Of course, national governments could decide together to change this situation, but it would require unanimity. I sometimes imagine that if the Irish Government said one morning, “We are going to put this 12.5% tax rate on the table; let’s talk about the issue,” the British, the French and some of the smaller member states would immediately say “Not so fast.” Such a change would require unanimity, which is unlikely. People are looking at the CCCTB, the common consolidated corporate tax base, which is something we could consider. Others try to build into that a repatriation of profits, because there would have to be an allocation of profits to where sales had taken place and where staff are mainly based. There are points of that kind. Let us be open about this. There is a certain jealousy in regard to Ireland’s tax rate, but ours is not the lowest rate in the Union. I believe Bulgaria has a rate of 10% and one of the Baltic states also has a low tax rate. The French tax rate is supposed to be 35%, or somewhere close, but the effective rate is 8%. I do not wish to point the finger at France, but some countries speak of how egalitarian they are, with a high rate of tax, while in the background they are writing things off in order that the effective rate is 8%. Our tax rate is very transparent. Our effective tax rate is in the order of 11.6% on a rate of 12.5%; therefore, for all intents and purposes, they are the same. Senator Barrett would know the answer to this,

414 24 January 2013 being a transport economist, but I recall that when I was spokesperson on transport, the cost of bringing our goods to the market was twice the European average. We need some advantages, being an island, to give us the opportunity we need.

On the same issue of tax, the current Prime Minister of Italy, Mr. Monti, who used to be a Commissioner, produced what is called the Monti report, in which he stated that corporate tax competition is a good thing because it keeps everybody on their toes. There may be much talk about this issue, but I do not see grounds for any major change in the future. If one were to happen it would require unanimous agreement on behalf of the member state governments. There would certainly have to be something in it for Ireland to agree to that, and the same applies to Britain, France and other countries.

24/01/2013R00100Acting Chairman (Senator Pat O’Neill): Senator Mullen asked about the moving of the European Parliament to Strasbourg.

24/01/2013R00200Mr. Gay Mitchell: I missed that point and thank the Senator for reminding me. This frustrates MEPs terribly. For example, accessing Strasbourg is a nightmare. Although it is in France, no matter what way one goes, it takes about eight hours to get from Ireland to Stras- bourg. Many MEPs from some of the eastern and central European countries and Cyprus have difficulty even getting to Brussels because direct flights are not available in all cases. The problem is that the treaties stipulate that the Parliament must sit at Strasbourg. This is much more strongly defended than the Shannon stopover, I can assure the House. For example, when I went to Strasbourg first, I could not get a hotel room in Strasbourg with the result that I had to stay in a place called Kork on the German side of the border. This is an issue which exercises both the French and the Germans. I had discussions recently on this matter with a senior official in the Parliament. The long-term solution might be to move the Council of the Regions and other bodies permanently to Strasbourg. The public outcry is being led in the Parliament by a British Member who is Vice President of the Parliament. He is quite rightly very exercised by this issue. However, his campaign makes it more difficult for the French to do something about it. A treaty change will be required. People are exercised about how to bring about that change. There is a range of institutions which could be located permanently at Strasbourg. An itinerant Parliament is not a good idea. Strasbourg is a nice, small place but moving around is very costly. However, it is necessary to remember the value rather than the cost of things. The European Union is a work in progress; we are not there yet. I expect the Parliament will have one location when everything settles down.

24/01/2013R00300Senator Ned O’Sullivan: I sincerely thank Mr. Mitchell for coming before us today and for giving a paper which was quite interesting and compelling. I also commend the manner in which he dealt with the subsequent corollary questions. As Senator Mullen said, he is very much in command of his brief. He has had a long and successful political career and has been quite a strong performer at elections. To a certain extent he would be called a politician’s politician which is one of the reasons I did the unthinkable and gave Fine Gael a vote at the last presidential election.

24/01/2013R00400Senator Ivana Bacik: That is an admission.

24/01/2013R00500Acting Chairman (Senator Pat O’Neill): That is on the record of the House now.

24/01/2013R00600Senator Ned O’Sullivan: I put it on the record before. I can assure the Leader that I am fully cured.

415 Seanad Éireann In response to an earlier question, Mr. Mitchell contrasted the different styles of parliamentary activity vis-à-vis the Dáil and the European Parliament. We inherited the confrontational politics from the mother of parliaments in England and there is a more consensus type approach in Europe. Are there aspects of the European parliamentary interaction that could be delivered here? I am not referring to this House but rather in the Dáil where it is adversarial all the time. Mr. Mitchell was quite a good man at the adversarial stuff himself when he was here as I remember. There may be some particular elements which could improve business in Dáil Éireann.

24/01/2013R00700Acting Chairman (Senator Pat O’Neill): Does Senator O’Sullivan wish to clarify if it was a No. 1 vote?

24/01/2013R00800Senator Ned O’Sullivan: Do not push it too far.

24/01/2013R00900Senator Ivana Bacik: I will not make any disclosure about voting. I welcome Mr. Mitch- ell. I commend him not only for his excellent paper but also, as others have said, for his great command of the brief as shown by his answering a very wide range of questions from Members. All of us would welcome his suggestion that we might extend an invitation to Baroness Cath- erine Ashton to speak in the House when she is in Dublin. That is an excellent suggestion. It fits in with a question I wish to ask. It refers to his immense work in the area of development and development aid. I am struck by what Senator van Turnhout said about the link between conflict and poverty. I note how much the European Union has given to Palestine over a long period of time in order to support infrastructure within Palestine, particularly over periods of time when Palestinians were under a great deal of attack and when conflict was being perpe- trated. We note the immense poverty in the Gaza Strip as a result. I have always wondered why the European Union is not more proactive in trying to broker a solution between Palestine and Israel in order to achieve a resolution in that protracted and ongoing conflict, given the immense stake built up by the European Union in rightly supporting the Palestinians. Should Catherine Ashton be doing more for the peace process?

24/01/2013R01000Senator Catherine Noone: As a Dublin Senator from Dublin South-East, I welcome Mr. Mitchell. He is always very good to us in Dublin South-East and we respect him hugely. It is great that he is here today. On an issue of less macro-importance - it may be a macro-issue for us in Ireland - I refer to an issue which the horsemeat controversy has brought to light in recent weeks, namely, food labelling. I agree with Senator O’Brien’s point about alcohol labelling. We could do more work on labelling information on the country of origin. I know there are hundreds of EU regulations and it may not be an issue on Mr. Mitchell’s radar. However, it is an issue on which I have strong views. I do not mean to sound as if I am anti-EU but it is vital that we know where the produce comes from. Perhaps we could correspond on this matter.

24/01/2013R01100Senator Cáit Keane: I am delighted to welcome Mr. Mitchell to the House. I began my political life in Dublin South-Central with him. I also welcome Norma Mitchell. They say that in front of every great man there is a great woman. The name “Mitchell” stands for what is good in politics, what is good for Dublin and good for Europe. I remember his brother Jim, Lord have mercy on him.

I have a question on equality. Since the 1970s, 13 pieces of equality legislation have been passed by the European Parliament. Many people do not realise that much of the equality legislation now enjoyed in Europe to the benefit of men and women, has come from the European Union. Equality is still a work in progress with regard to workers’ rights, women’s rights, 416 24 January 2013 women in poverty and the career advancement of women. Is the European Unin as proactive now on equality as it was in the late 1980s and the early 1990s? It is a work in progress in Ire- land and the European Union.

24/01/2013R01200Mr. Gay Mitchell: I thank Senator O’Sullivan for his kind words and for the vote. The idea of rapporteurship would work here. The inter-institutional agreement, IIA, may be useful and we could borrow it. There could be an inter-institutional agreement between the Govern- ment, the Dáil and the Seanad to remove adversarial politics in some circumstances. This in turn would require Members to take responsibility as well as having a right to have their say. This should be explored. Matters could be decided without the whip but people would have to take responsibility.

I thank Senator Bacik for her kind comments. She is right about the issues of conflict and poverty. The European Union is not just the most significant contributor to Palestine but it is also the most significant contributor to the Middle East. Tony Blair is a former President of the European Council. He is very involved in the Middle East. He reports to the European Parlia- ment from time to time. When I was a Minister, David Owen had that position. However, these individuals do not earn any publicity. The US Secretary of State is given massive publicity even though the European Union is the most significant contributor. The situation is at an early developmental stage. There is a Palestinian friendship group. There is also an Israeli friendship group. Some of us take the view that if one is to have rows with the Israelis, they should be held privately, thereby resulting in a better chance of being heard by the Israelis. I certainly try to raise my concerns with them. I also try to raise with the other side the right of Israel to exist. Everybody hopes the outcome will be a two-state solution. In the meantime, we need a humanitarian approach to dealing with the issues.

The question of the origin of food, raised by Senator Noone, has been pursued strongly by my colleague Mairead McGuinness. The origin of food is a really important issue for us and there are people exercised by it. Ms McGuinness will be addressing the House soon and the issue may be raised with her. She has been very active in this area. I thank Senator Noone for her kind comments.

I thank Senator Keane for mentioning Norma, the power behind the throne. She is always the person who takes the leadership role on all the issues we need to address. I thank the Sena- tor for her kind words about me and my brother.

Senator Keane asked whether the European Union is as proactive as it used to be. It is. It is very much an issue on the agenda of the Parliament, the Commission and the Council. We are exercised by access to boardrooms by female non-executive directors. I do not generally favour quotas, but I did support the 40% quota because we just have to do something to break down the barriers. With regard to executive directors, there is an effort to persuade companies to put in place a voluntary programme in this regard. These are issues that greatly concern the European Union at a very central stage. There is a women’s affairs committee in the Parliament and it is very active.

It has been a great honour to have had the opportunity to address the Seanad on this special occasion. My colleagues will be looking forward to appearing before it also. I spoke about the foundation of the State and what happened in 1916. This is our national Parliament and I am very proud of it. I am very proud to be a Member of the European Parliament. I was a Mem- ber of Dáil Eireann for 26 years and I am really very proud of our Parliament and what it has 417 Seanad Éireann achieved. It is really time that, in addition to giving criticism where it is due, we returned to giving credit where it is due. There should be a greater balance in the way we address the issues of the day. Greater credit must be given to the role of Deputies and Senators in the functioning of the Parliament. There is nothing in it for the Seanad this morning to have me here. However, it is useful exercise. It has certainly been a useful exercise for me and it helps me to focus to a greater extent on what the Senators regard as relevant. I sometimes wonder whether I have got it right. This certainly helps me to do that.

24/01/2013S00200Senator Maurice Cummins: On behalf of the House, I thank Mr. Gay Mitchell for addressing us. We had an excellent exchange of views this afternoon. Mr. Mitchell was the first of the MEPs to address this Seanad and we hope to have more addresses in the coming months during the EU Presidency. We also hope to have a number of European Commissioners addressing the House.

We certainly welcomed Mr. Mitchell’s comments on this House. We have no intention of duplicating the work of committees in the Houses but we intend to have an active exchange of views on European affairs. In that regard, we are not being afforded the staffing resources required to carry out our duties but the Members will carry out those duties nevertheless. We are intent on having greater scrutiny of EU programmes and directives. We would welcome any help that Mr. Mitchell can give us in that regard. I thank him for attending. It was an honour to have him here. We hope it will not be his last visit to the House.

Water Services Bill 2013: Second Stage (Resumed)

Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.”

24/01/2013S00500Senator Maurice Cummins: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy O’Dowd, back to the House. We had a very good debate on water on Second Stage yesterday. One of the most important points pertained to the quality of water, which is so important in this country. Over time, we have seen the difficulties that have arisen in this regard. I recall the cryptosporidium in Galway. We were listening to news reports thereon every night.

It is important that our water quality be excellent. As a result of the setting up of Irish Wa- ter, we will achieve this. With regard to points made yesterday, I hope the expertise in local authorities will be drawn upon. A guarantee has been given that Irish Water will draw upon that expertise, and I hope that will be the case. I acknowledge that it will be difficult for people to pay additional amounts for water, but I hope they realise the cost of producing the quality of water we need.

Senator Whelan alluded to industry’s need for water. That is another important area. It will be difficult for people to pay the charges, but I hope the allowances will be generous and that the numbers in families will be taken into consideration when those allowances are being given. I do not believe people will object too much. Some people who are against everything will campaign against paying for water or any other service. That is par for the course in the democracy in which we live, but I do not believe people will rebel too much when asked to pay less than €1 a day for this important commodity. I acknowledge people have been asked to pay property charges also, but I believe they will pay the water charge with a heart and a half if they 418 24 January 2013 get the quality of water they require.

On the question of metering, the Minister might let us know more about that in his response. He made a comprehensive contribution on Second Stage, but he might provide more detail on the timescale for the metering, who will do the metering and the contracts for that. I hope that as many small local contractors as possible will get the opportunity to be involved in the provision of these meters.

The Minister of State has been actively involved in this area since his appointment as Minis- ter with responsibility for the setting up of Irish Water and this Bill dealing with water metering. I praise the Minister for his efforts in that regard. It will be very difficult but it is important for the country that we get right the question of the supply of and charging for water. I hope that as a result of householders throughout the country paying for their water, there will be some alle- viation for the people who have been paying for water until now including traders, shopkeepers and small businesses. I hope there will not be any major increases in the cost of water for those small companies, and the larger ones, that provide employment for so many of our people. That is a point Senator Whelan mentioned regarding Intel and other such major industries.

I commend the Minister for his work. It will be a difficult area. We will have resistance from those in some areas of the community who will not want to pay. Some will say they cannot pay. In that regard, what are the provisions for people who will not pay? We have a situation with the other commodities, namely, electricity and other areas, where the supply can be cut off if people do not pay. Will the same situation apply or what way is it intended to address that problem because I am sure a problem like that will arise? We had serious problems in areas of the country, even in my area, with such problems previously but Bord Gáis will be dealing with it this time, not local authorities, and that may change people’s attitude. However, I remain concerned about it.

24/01/2013T00200Senator Denis O’Donovan: I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I was in a position yesterday to listen to what was an informed debate on this issue. I have some questions for the Minister of State. First, I have deep reservations about the awarding of the contract for this water service to Bord Gáis. It should have been more transparent. With the huge dip in construction employment I would like to see local contractors, primarily those who have experience and training in plumbing, involved in this project. I met some of them last week and they would be very interested in becoming involved as subcontractors. I would not like to see the work subcontracted to two or three firms in Ireland.

I made a point here previously about a new second level college that was built in Bantry and opened by the Minister of State, Deputy Sherlock. A gaelscoil next door, which I was very involved with during the years, was opened by the Minister’s colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy McGinley. They were great occasions for the town but what concerned me about both those contracts was that many people worked on them but because of the European tendering process, less than 20% of those involved in those jobs were from west Cork. That is a wrong approach when there are many people who are idle. If there was a job in Louth, the Minister of State’s neck of the woods, and the people appointed were Dublin-based or Galway-based, he would ask why there was not more local involvement.

I have a grave concern that this Government or a subsequent Government will impose a water extraction charge in the future on those who have their own bored wells. That is European thinking and I hope it is not the thinking of the Cabinet. I would hope a definitive answer could 419 Seanad Éireann be given that that will not be the case. I live in south Schull at the end of a cul-de-sac with about 12 or 14 houses and for various reasons none of us has a public water supply. On three occasions my partner has bored wells without success and had an awful problem with contamination of the well, use of filters and so on which is annoying from the point of view of washing, dish washing and even using the shower. We would love to have a proper water supply. It would gall people in those circumstances, and I am sure there are thousands of them in rural Ireland, if they had to pay an extraction charge for water in the future. The view is that water is a very valuable commodity whether the State provides it by way of this new scheme, the local authorities or whatever and that anyone who extracts water from the ground for use will have to pay for that. I hope that is not about to dawn.

The issue I raise may not be directly related, but it should be under consideration. I was a member of the local authority in west Cork for about 18 years until my election to the Dáil in 2002 and I was deeply concerned about the quality of water in the region. We had major issues with the main water supply for the Bantry region, which covers a large area, and the council had to put in an amount of additives to make the water potable - that is the word they used. I got the water analysed by experts in St. Finbarr’s Hospital and the results were that the water was potable but there was an awful stench from it at various times of the year. If people are expected to pay for water they will expect it to be top quality and in that regard it is difficult for me, as a Member of the Oireachtas, to say that for almost a decade I have been buying gallons of drinking water. A Labour Party Senator asked yesterday if anyone ever thought Ballygowan would be a success but I buy gallons of drinking water. I am conscious that one can buy two gallons of water for less than a pint of stout, and it is probably better for me-----

(Interruptions).

2 o’clock24/01/2013U00100

Senator Denis O’Donovan: It is better for my liver and my kidneys. Having said that, it is regrettable that thousands of people who are concerned about quality buy water for drinking. I have reservations about the Bill, but I have no doubt the Government will push it through and, while there will never be a Utopian situation, in two or three years time 99% of water will be of good quality. There will be an uprising in many areas, in particular in the large urban areas of Cork and Dublin, where water is currently of the highest quality.

The benefits or otherwise of flouridation, however, is a significant issue. I have received hundreds of e-mails saying it is not good for one’s health. I am no expert in that regard, but it is an issue which has been highlighted and should not be ignored.

The Government is responsible for bringing forward legislation, but it will argue that there is an extent to which it is imposed on us by EU directive. Perhaps it is something that should have been done before. We have substantial amounts of water falling in Ireland. We do not have a situation of drought as in Australia which recently saw temperatures of 50° Celsius. We need quality water and fairness in its delivery. While not every Tom, Dick or Harry can get an installation contract, the need to create jobs locally in the areas where projects are rolled out should be borne in mind.

24/01/2013U00200Senator Paul Coghlan: I welcome the Minister of State to the House and thank him for the overview of Irish Water which he provided for the House yesterday. It is good to know there will be ongoing liaison with people who are already involved in water services at local author-

420 24 January 2013 ity level nationally and that nobody’s job is threatened. Water is a precious resource which is of great importance in our everyday lives. A great deal of concern has been expressed about people who will not pay water charges. While I do not have any time for people who will not or who do not want to pay, I have concerns for people who genuinely cannot afford to pay. The Minister of State has provided assurances that there will be a waiver scheme for people who are genuinely unable to afford the charges.

There is a great deal involved in the delivery of water. Reservoirs must be created and kept as free of pollution as possible. Water must be piped and treated. A great deal of money is invested in water before it comes out of one’s taps. As Senator Denis O’Donovan said, the quality of water is important. Like Senator Maurice Cummins, I do not have any time for those who are campaigning against paying for water. Water services cost a fortune to provide. A great many people are involved at every level in local authorities to provide water services which are vital to public health and vitality. There is no excuse not to pay for it. I wish Irish Water well and look forward to the passage of the Bill on Committee and Report Stages. It is a good thing. We are going in the right direction in the way in which we deal with water.

24/01/2013U00300Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Gov- ernment (Deputy Fergus O’Dowd): The debate in the House has been first class in terms of its standard and the issues which have been raised. It is very welcome for the Department to listen to the important points which have been raised. The debate affirms the importance of the Seanad. Perhaps six minutes’ speaking time was far too much for many Members who will spend a bit longer on the legislation on Committee Stage. It is important that this debate has been full and transparent and that the Government has been kept accountable in the Houses with regard to these issues. I welcome the comments Members have made.

It is important to get our strategy right and to ensure that the public buys into it. This is not about the troika, even though the latter has forced our hand due to what happened in the last Government. Even if the troika had never been established, these provisions would have had to have been introduced. The Bill is about ensuring we have potable water and the most efficient method for distributing it and eliminating the appalling waste of 40% of our supplies. It is also about addressing health issues like that of cryptosporidium in Galway and boil notices, of which there were under 200 last year nationally. It is about health, the environment, conserva- tion, business and jobs.

The strategy will create more than 2,000 jobs over the period of the three-year contract to install water meters. I agree with Members on both sides of the House that those jobs will have to be local. The procurement process is ongoing but as soon as possible I will announce the number of SMEs who have been given contracts. The contracts will be broken up to ensure that small businesses can tender for them and that local tradespersons can come together to pre- qualify. The process is all about pre-qualification and people demonstrating they have the capacity and track record to do the job. I understand that hundreds of firms have applied and will give the exact details to the House at a later time. I will also be able to tell the House how many people have pre-qualified. The procurement process is about local employment and ensuring the job is done properly by those best qualified and placed to do it. Contracts will have to be of a size which makes it competitive for an SME to tender and which makes the job worthwhile for an SME to undertake.

Strange as it may seem, there will be a drought in Dublin by 2020. By drought, I mean a shortage of water. The greater Dublin area includes Dublin city and county, Louth, Meath, 421 Seanad Éireann Kildare and Wicklow and will experience a water shortage by 2020. That means the production of water and demand for it will be equivalent and therefore require significant augmentation of the water supply above the current level. While we appear to have water, water everywhere much of the time, it does not fall in the right areas. We must supplement and improve certain water schemes to meet future needs, which is the major challenge we face. Members mentioned Intel and its commitment to apply €20 million to the future purchase of water. We have a tremendous opportunity with the water infrastructure we build to attract water-demanding industries. We have Intel and other IT firms and the pharmaceutical and farming industries already. Many countries experience water shortages. I visited Anglian Water last year when it was rationing water in parts of England. It was not even high summer. If we get this right, we will create a water infrastructure which is best in class; best in Europe if not best in the world.

The legislation is aimed at creating an efficient, effective physical infrastructure to purify water to provide the best quality. The annual EPA surveys which are available in the Oireachtas Library show that the quality of water in Ireland is as good as it is anywhere, particularly in Europe. We are at the top of the leader board when it comes to water supply services for communities in excess of 500 persons. There is an issue with some smaller schemes, which is why the synergies of the new body are important. Currently, there are 20 to 30 small, individual water supplies in County Kerry for example. The engineers and professionals will advise on how to improve and augment all of them.

With one single national body, we will be able to review issues in a river basin district or region and, working through Irish Water and local authorities, can meet all these needs. The relationship between Irish Water and local government is absolutely critical, as we know, because all of us present have come from a local government background. We have to get right that important relationship with local councillors, councils and the regional water bodies. Later this year we will come up with the legislation to integrate and make Irish Water accountable at local level in respect of the access and information elected representatives already have, regional planning and so on. Planning is very important. It cannot be the case that one council in one part of the country states it will increase the population by a certain amount when the infrastructure cannot support it. There has to be joined-up thinking and significant decision-making on how such issues will be resolved, for example, if the infrastructural programme in one area is X and the demand in other areas is Y. It has to be done in a transparent, accountable way that meets the needs of local communities without making unnecessary or unreasonable demands on national infrastructure.

It is important to mention climate change which will impact adversely on parts of the country. Some parts of the country will receive more rain than they need or want, while others will have less, which will create problems.

One major initiative to meet the needs of the greater Dublin area will be the fantastic water supply project at Garryhinch which will be a water resource primarily for this region and an amenity of international standard for fishing and so on. It is very important that what happens there will be compatible and works in with what happens on the River Shannon. I stress that the two will not compete with one another.

It is Government’s responsibility to deal with the issue of affordability. We will have to decide on it. There are serious issues to address such as providing for people who have an ill- ness and require a large supply of water, family increment size and so on. The Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has worked with the Department of Social 422 24 January 2013 Protection and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in this regard. We are putting a great deal of thought into the matter and much research has been done. When the Pricewater- houseCoopers report was issued, there were many comments and significant submissions from organisations such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and individuals such as Fr. Healy. It is very important for us to get this right. The Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht emphasised the issue of affordability in its report. This key issue will be properly researched and whatever we do will be transparent, fair and equitable, as otherwise it will not work.

In response to the question about those who cannot pay and those who will not pay, we do not intend that anybody will ever have his or her water supply cut off. There will have to be strategies in place for those who will not pay but can afford to do so. One of the issues we have studied in the United Kingdom is how to discriminate between these two groups and go after those who can afford to pay but will not do so. In the United Kingdom there is a simple system, whereby with due process the person who will not pay receives a civil bill. This depends on the legislation being correct. The process requires issuing notices, having proper time spans and so on, but there will be no money wasted on this. People will not get away with not paying if they can afford to do so. That is part of modern Ireland. I have dealt with the issue of those who have financial difficulties.

One question that came up yesterday and today was how did Bord Gáis get the job, did it receive a big fee, why was this not opened up and who could have tendered for the contract. The prime reason for doing it this way was to be sure a public entity received the contract for Irish Water. We could have set up a new company from scratch, which would have involved finding a chief executive with all the skills and knowledge required. It would have taken a significant length of time, a minimum of 12 months, to reach critical mass and be sure the team could work together. Which State companies could possibly have been involved? Bord Gáis, Bord na Móna and the ESB are the three main organisations that have databases and are used to working with customers, providing for the supply side, customer needs, call centres and so on. Bord Gáis and Bord na Móna made submissions and there was significant preparatory information, not through a political process but by interview with competent and qualified people to go through all the relevant issues involved. Bord Gáis was the successful company and it did not receive a big bonus. No money was exchanged. It was given the job of setting up Uisce Éire, Irish Water. The process was transparent and any State company that could have applied did so. It is crucial that we have critical mass immediately to do what we want to do. I hope that answers the questions asked.

A question arose about the cost of meters. When the process is finished, everybody will know the cost, but if we were to say now that we anticipate the cost will be X, Y or Z, all those involved in the procurement process would have a field day with us. There is no question of this not being a transparent and accountable process.

The legislation provides that at the end of the financial year the annual report of Uisce Éire will be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. There will be a debate in both Houses and Uisce Éire will be accountable to the Oireachtas committee which will deal with any issue arising.

The price of water will be fixed by the regulator which must also be transparent. It will have to decide what issues arise in connection with the cost of water such as what it is reasonable to include. Uisce Éire will not be able to stack up a pile of bills and add them to the cost of water. 423 Seanad Éireann It will have to make a submission on its physical operations and future investment programme and so on. The regulator will base its proposals on this information. The regulator’s job is to consult the public and it is committed to doing this. I presume that once it has made its proposals, the regulator will be able to come before the Oireachtas committee where Members will be able to properly debate all the issues involved in full. Nothing will be hidden and there will be no hiding place for a cost that is not absolutely essential.

Senators Diarmuid Wilson, David Cullinane, Cáit Keane and David Norris raised the question of affordability, to which I hope I have responded clearly. The stakeholders are the De- partments of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Social Protection and Public Expenditure and Reform. The comments submitted to the Oireachtas committee and Pricewa- terhouseCoopers will also be considered.

Irish Water will have a range of options in place for anyone who can pay but will have difficulty in doing so. There will have to be different strategies to deal with different customers. No one who can pay will get away with not paying. If, at the end of this, one can pay but will not do so, one will not get away with it. Everybody who can do so has to pay and that is it.

Concerns about local authority staff were expressed by a number of Members. We have made it clear to everybody that service level agreements will be in place until 2017 and an existing body chaired by Kevin Foley deals with the unions, the Department and Bord Gáis to ensure any issues which arise will be dealt with constructively. It is very effective.

Staff carrying out these functions will move to Irish Water on secondment in the period to 2017 and as such will remain as employees of the relevant local authority. We fully recognise the importance and quality of work carried out by local authority staff and the commitment shown by each and every one of them. The transfer of assets from local authorities to Irish Water was also raised. This is not addressed in the Bill. As I stated yesterday, another Bill will be brought before the Oireachtas later this year, I hope before the summer, which will address the issue of asset transfer and the relationship between Irish Water and local authorities. We do not anticipate any issue which will not be clarified in the second Bill. We are speaking about people on the public water supply. Rural cases will be different, but in most cases the work will be done on the road and not in the house or yard. We will be very happy to ensure total clarity on whatever protocols and procedures are in place with regard to the public water supply.

A number of Members, including Senators Keane and Cullinane, raised the issue of addressing leakage and I fully agree. It is complementary to and very much a part of the programme. There is no point in installing more than 1 million meters and charging a tariff for water when almost 40% is being wasted. This will not happen. A programme must be put in place, to which Irish Water is committed, which states how and where leakage will be reduced. It is easy to fix big leaks because everyone can see them, but small continuous leaks are much more difficult to find. In some cases they have been continuing for years. Replacing 1 km of pipe will put pressure on the old pipe further down. A programme will be put in place and leakage will reduce, but it may not be as easy to do immediately as people might think. It will be very much part and parcel of this and significant focus will be on it. I presume the regulator will ask Irish Water by what percentage it has reduced leakage and what are its plans and if the company does not keep to this it will not receive the same tariff. Everybody will welcome this and I have no doubt Irish Water would not want to have it any other way.

The calculation on unaccounted for water is based on an assumption of reasonable usage. 424 24 January 2013 International experience and group water schemes, which are great advocates for water con- servation and water metering, have shown that metering works. A Cavan-Monaghan group scheme reduced water demand by approximately 18%. Senator Mooney raised the issue of privatisation. There is no intention to privatise water services. At the outset I explained why we made sure it was a public entity. Investment in the water sector is key to our strategic interests and any revenue generated by Irish Water will be reinvested in infrastructure. The very important issue of job creation was mentioned by Senator Whelan and I have dealt with it. Careful management of our water resources is very important.

I hope this legislation will be passed. In the first week of next month an information leaflet will be sent via An Post to every house in the country outlining some of the proposals. We will also have a national information campaign. We want feedback and want to know what people think. It is all about educating and informing people and our young people are very important in this regard as they are most receptive to change. Just as in the race against waste and smoking, it is important to get through to young people, including through schools. We hope a very proactive programme on all aspects of water will be put in place and we will work with the Department of Education and Skills to push this home. An Taisce will also be a key player as it has a water programme and the green flag award.

I thank Senators for listening to me. If there is an issue I have not addressed, I will be happy to take it up on Committee Stage.

Question put:

The Seanad divided: Tá, 25; Níl, 9. Tá Níl Bacik, Ivana. Byrne, Thomas. Brennan, Terry. Cullinane, David. Burke, Colm. Daly, Mark. Coghlan, Eamonn. MacSharry, Marc. Coghlan, Paul. O’Sullivan, Ned. Comiskey, Michael. Reilly, Kathryn. Conway, Martin. Walsh, Jim. Cummins, Maurice. White, Mary M. D’Arcy, Jim. Wilson, Diarmuid. Gilroy, John. Harte, Jimmy. Higgins, Lorraine. Keane, Cáit. Landy, Denis. Moran, Mary. Mulcahy, Tony. Mullen, Rónán. Mullins, Michael. Noone, Catherine. Norris, David.

425 Seanad Éireann O’Donnell, Marie-Louise. O’Neill, Pat. Sheahan, Tom. van Turnhout, Jillian. Whelan, John.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Ivana Bacik and Paul Coghlan; Níl, Senators David Cullinane and Diarmuid Wilson.

Question declared carried.

24/01/2013X00100An Leas-Chathaoirleach: When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

24/01/2013X00200Senator Maurice Cummins: Next Tuesday.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 29 January 2013.

24/01/2013X00400An Leas-Chathaoirleach: When is it proposed to sit again?

24/01/2013X00500Senator Maurice Cummins: Next Tuesday, at 1.30 p.m.

Adjournment Matters

24/01/2013Y00075Industrial Development

24/01/2013Y00100Senator Thomas Byrne: I thank the Cathaoirleach for yet again accepting my request for an Adjournment matter to be discussed. It is a useful opportunity for Senators to question Ministers on important matters relayed to us by people, as we do not have the rights evident in the Dáil.

Today’s issue arises from a parliamentary question in the Dáil which revealed to my colleague, Deputy Dara Calleary, that there were no IDA Ireland site visits to County Meath last year. That is disappointing because County Meath has a number of significant advantages over many other parts of the country, including a very highly skilled workforce that, by and large, commutes to other counties for employment. We also have some large industrial properties, most notably the former Quinn premises in Navan, which badly needs a tenant to provide jobs and keep the economy moving.

The excuse is often given that County Meath is not in the Border region and cannot avail of the same grants but that ignores the fact that only last year, Coca-Cola - on its own initiative and after many years of planning - opened its European, Middle East and Asian headquarters in 426 24 January 2013 County Meath. As I understand it, there were no grants available to the company but the other factors that encourage companies to locate in County Meath appealed to it. As I mentioned, those factors include a skilled workforce, the availability of premises, particularly in the urban parts of the county, and the convenient distance to Dublin. Dublin Airport may as well be a local airport for County Meath and there are also convenient connections to local transport hubs and the transport network in Meath, which includes notable motorways, rail and other modes of transport, including buses.

Meath has many advantages, with its educated workforce crying out for jobs in the local area. There are many advantages to locating employment in County Meath and attracting multinationals to the county. If people have jobs there will be fewer people commuting to Dublin and energy costs will be reduced. People would also be happier if they worked closer to home. It is very disappointing that IDA Ireland does not see it as appropriate to bring companies to the county. Alltech in Dunboyne is a major international company and the Minister would be familiar with it.

There are so many companies willing to work in County Meath but the people of the county are demanding that IDA Ireland does its bit to bring in people. The fact that there was no site visit at all last year tells me that the organisation is simply not interested in County Meath, which is disappointing. I urge the Minister to change that position.

24/01/2013Y00200Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation (Deputy Richard Bruton): I thank the Senator for raising the issue. County Meath is part of IDA Ireland’s eastern region, which includes counties Dublin, Kildare, Wicklow and Meath, and overall, the region has performed extremely well. There has been increased employment in the past two years totalling 6,000 jobs, compared with a net job loss in the previous four years of 7,000. There has been a dramatic turnaround in the performance of the eastern region. I can understand the Senator’s disappoint- ment that not more of the new job creation is occurring in County Meath, although the people of County Meath have gained an advantage from the strength of performance in the wider region.

This is a bigger issue in the context of IDA Ireland. I had the privilege to be in this office 15 years ago and there has been a dramatic change in the profile of the sort of company that is picking Ireland as a location, which creates a difficulty in achieving a regional spread. Increas- ingly, companies involved with information and communications technology, medical devices and financial services come in clusters where Ireland has achieved competitive strength. They tend to be much more focused on gateway cities within regions, and IDA Ireland is increasingly focused on delivering effectively within those regions.

That is not to say IDA Ireland does not promote other areas, as it does so. Its representatives recently met people from Meath County Council to discuss the property solutions available. As the Senator mentioned, these include the Quinn building and the business park in Navan. IDA Ireland has recently got planning permission for a significant new site to ensure availability of properties for companies seeking to invest. Ultimately, IDA Ireland does not decide the locations that companies choose, which is a difficulty. Depending on their sectoral strength, companies look to different labour market pools. That is part of the wider challenge we face.

I have set a target, like the previous Government, that 50% of projects would be won outside Dublin and Cork, and IDA Ireland continues to work to that goal. For many years, under both this and the previous Government, it has not been able to achieve that target because of difficulties. Ireland must make a transition from an economy that got too big with construction 427 Seanad Éireann and debt activity to an economy that can be built on exports and enterprise. We must look to our indigenous companies and the inherent strengths of regions. We will continue to seek to press all regions but companies ultimately come with a list of what is required in a region or particular location. Very often, those requirements narrow the focus, and we must work under such constraints.

Much of the work being done in the action plan for jobs looks to deepen the strength of our indigenous companies, building an export base and getting more companies who only consider the domestic market to expand into exporting. There is a big challenge to broaden what we regard as successful regional strategies for a county or region and deepen all elements rather than just seeing foreign investment as the only element.

I note the Senator’s points but the eastern region is performing strongly. Overall, County Meath has just 14 foreign-owned companies, employing 1,200 people. The foreign sector is relatively small within the overall employment profile of the county. I continue to focus on achieving regional spread but this will come within the constraints of the types of company which are relevant. Compared with many years ago, companies are demanding research and development skills and very specific sectoral specialties which creates a constraint for the type of spread we want to achieve. I remain conscious of the need to continue to focus on this matter. I engage with IDA Ireland regularly in order to focus on regions that need support and to ensure there is a regional spread. The organisation must understand the dynamic of different companies and regions.

I thank the Senator for raising the matter, but it is not an area where we can just turn on a tap to solve the problem. It is heartening to see the turnaround in international confidence in the overall region and we are now attracting more companies. IDA Ireland is happy to work with Meath County Council and other players in the region to try to increase the attractiveness of Meath as a location for international companies.

24/01/2013Z00100Senator Thomas Byrne: I accept much of what the Minister says, but it is disappointing that there were no site visits. Site visits are, presumably, part of the way in which IDA Ire- land attracts companies to Ireland, in that it offers a menu of places. I ask the Minister to be conscious of the Drogheda Business and Technology Park which is, in fact, located in County Meath. It has an international financial services company on site, but nothing else. While I underplayed the issue of grants and State support that can be given for Border regions and non- Border regions, that park is in county Meath, even though it is called Drogheda, and is not in a Border region. As there is a company there, companies come to these areas. Coca-Cola’s European headquarters in County Meath is not far away. That was opened in the last two years. There are reasons for such companies to come to the area and I would like the IDA Ireland to support that further.

24/01/2013Z00200Deputy Richard Bruton: I thank the Senator for his contribution. IDA Ireland has already met Meath County Council and will continue to build a relationship in the county.

24/01/2013Z00250Bank Branch Closures

24/01/2013Z00300Senator Kathryn Reilly: The issue I raise is one I mentioned briefly during my contribution on Private Members’ business, for which the Minister was present. He might be familiar with what I will say. When banks are restructuring the Minister for Finance should ensure that, 428 24 January 2013 as they deleverage, they do it in a way that does not alienate local communities and leave them without vital services. We all know there is a need to reduce the size of the banks. After their excessive growth during the boom it would be naive not to expect them to undergo significant restructuring. However, the process of deleveraging agreed between the Government and the troika must not leave communities, particularly small communities in rural areas, without an adequate provision of banking services.

Given the volume of public money that has been pumped into the banking system, there is a social responsibility on bank chiefs and the Government to ensure the restructuring of banks not only makes commercial and economic sense but also social and community sense. I see the potential impact that recent bank closure announcements is having in my home county and particularly in towns such as Belturbet, Killeshandra and Kilnaleck. In many ways banks are the bedrock of communities and towns. They are the bedrock for businesses and also attract people into towns. When people are in the town they will call into local shops and other businesses in the area. That supports the local economy. However, once the bank branches are closed there will inevitably be a knock-on effect on the local economy and businesses.

Apart from the inconvenience these closures will cause for the customers of Ulster Bank in the affected locations, there is a more worrying dimension in terms of the provision of banking services in rural areas in the wake of branch closures by AIB, the former National Irish Bank and Northern Bank and the reduction in services by Bank of Ireland in other locations. We must consider the bigger picture and the impact on many rural areas, where the lesser alternative of online banking or mobile banking might be very difficult due to problems with connectivity. We must wake up to the fact that with the closure of small banks in rural areas, particularly in areas where the Garda stations have already been closed, there is a danger of more criminality and theft. Businesses must transport their money to deposit it in banks, which leaves the people concerned vulnerable to attacks.

We are watching the withdrawal of vital services from communities which already have been negatively affected by the economic downturn. On a personal basis, many customers, particularly elderly customers, will not travel the extra distance to the bank. They might not be able to do so. Where will they keep their money? This might result in people keeping more money at home, which will be another problem. It will make them the target of burglars, which does nobody any favours.

The closure of bank branches due to deleveraging marks the withdrawal of another vital service from rural towns and villages. The value of such services should not be underestimated because they are important for businesses and individuals in such towns and for people who are unable to travel longer distances to the nearest branch. We talk about economic regeneration in the indigenous economy and trying to achieve economic growth on a widespread geographi- cal basis. In that context, we should examine how to retain as many of these bank branches as possible to serve the local communities and local businesses, rather than close them and make those local areas uncompetitive. Not everybody can conduct his or her banking online or by telephone and not everybody has the capacity to travel extended distances to branch offices. These points must be made to the banks in question when they are being restructured.

24/01/2013Z00400Minister of State at the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (Deputy Dinny McGinley): I thank the Senator for raising this matter. Being from a rural background I understand her concerns very well. Unfortunately, a number of bank branches are being closed in my constituency also. 429 Seanad Éireann As the Senator will be aware, operational decisions for the covered banks - AIB, Bank of Ireland, Irish Bank Resolution Corporation, IBRC, and Permanent TSB - remain the responsibility of the boards and management of the institutions. Notwithstanding the fact that the State is a significant shareholder in these institutions, we must ensure the banks are run on a commercial, cost-effective and independent basis to ensure the value of the banks as an asset to the State. The relationship frameworks between the Minister for Finance and each bank define the nature of the relationships with those banks as per the memorandum on economic and financial policies agreed with the European Commission, the European Central Bank, ECB, and the International Monetary Fund, IMF. These frameworks were published on 30 March 2012 and can be found on the Department of Finance website. Likewise, the State has no control over operational decisions made by the non-covered institutions operating in the State.

As the Government has stated previously, it is an inevitable but unfortunate consequence of the necessary restructuring of the banking system, and return to viability of the sector, that branches in certain towns and villages across the country will be closed. Each branch is looked at on an individual basis regarding income and costs. Banks also assess the level of usage of each branch in the decision-making process. Other factors affecting the decision may include whether the premises is owned or leased. The Government appreciates that any branch closures will have an impact on the affected towns and villages. However, it is an inevitable consequence of the cost cutting programmes being undertaken across the banking sector. Nev- ertheless, to mitigate the impact of the branch closures on customers, both AIB and Danske Bank have developed a relationship with An Post that allows customers to perform a range of banking functions in their local post office. In the case of AIB, additional banking facilities are available in over 90 selected post office outlets in areas affected by branch closures. AIB has also launched a new mobile bank service to provide certain banking services to customers in remote locations.

All the banks are keen to embrace new technologies to enhance the customer experience and there has been increased investment in new and innovative ways for people to bank. The availability of Internet and telephone banking with mobile and iPad applications allows customers the opportunity to perform banking transactions outside traditional hours. It is now possible for customers to access banking services 24 hours a day and 365 days a year.

The Government is committed to the development of rural areas and supports this commitment with resources that aim to diversify the rural economy and improve the quality of life in rural areas. Programmes managed by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government such as the rural development programme and the local and community development programme continue to provide the financial resources necessary to support both economic and community activity in rural Ireland, thereby laying strong and sustainable foundations for vibrant rural communities for the future. The Government is committed to the roll-out of broadband services to rural Ireland and will ensure all customers can avail of the full range of new innovative services provided by the banks.

3 o’clock24/01/2013AA00100

Schools Building Projects

430 24 January 2013

24/01/2013AA00200Senator David Cullinane: I welcome the Minister of State. Last March I raised the matter of capital funding for Gaelscoil Philib Barún. I draw attention to the long campaign waged by the board of management, the principal and the pupils at the school to have prefabs, which are in place to teach most of the pupils, transformed into buildings in order that pupils can have proper accommodation. The project upon which the school has embarked will provide a new eight-classroom replacement school, teaching accommodation for three full-time special education teachers and the appropriate ancillary accommodation, including a general purpose room. A site of 2.5 acres has been identified. There is one building in the school, but it is surrounded by prefabs. The response last year was that, because the Department is looking at growing needs and changes in demographics mean we need to ensure new schools are built, it was not possible to find replacements for prefabs in all schools across the State. There has since been a site visit by the Minister and officials of the Department of Education and Skills, and positive indications were given to the principal and the board of management. A public meeting organised by the school and attended by most of the Oireachtas Members put pressure on us to raise the issues with the Minister.

The school opened in 1985 with 29 pupils. It was a one-teacher school and moved to new premises in 1989 when it had 65 pupils. In 1992 a site was identified in Tramore, but in 1993 planning permission for the site was refused. In 1994 a second site was identified but in 1995 planning permission was refused again. In 1996 a series of meetings with council officials took place with a view to identifying a new site. In 1999 this happened and in 2000 the first building was built. Pupils have since been taught in prefabs. In view of the history of the struggle of the school and its long association with trying to get new buildings built and given that this has gone to the architectural design stage and that the majority of pupils in schools are being taught in prefabs which cost more in terms of rental accommodation, it would make economic sense as well as good social sense to ensure pupils are taught in the best possible accommodation. Everyone accepts that we are in tight circumstances and that it is more difficult to provide capital funding for everything. However, when the major capital investment in schools was announced by the Minister last year, we can appreciate that the pupils, parents, principal and board of management of the school believed their school would be successful. Unfortunately, it was not. Since I raised this matter on the Adjournment last year, the Minister has visited the school and he knows at first hand the need for the prefabs to be replaced with new classrooms to ensure pupils are taught in the best way. I hope the Minister of State has good news. If he does not have good news about capital funding being made available in order that the school can move to the building and planning stage, perhaps he can outline the future plans of the De- partment for the school.

24/01/2013AA00300Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills (Deputy Ciarán Can- non): I thank the Senator for raising this matter as it provides me with an opportunity to outline to the Seanad the Government’s strategy for capital investment in school building projects in the next five years and to clarify the current position on the application for major capital funding from Gaelscoil Philib Barún, Tramore, County Waterford.

Gaelscoil Philib Barún is a primary school catering for both boys and girls and operating under the patronage of the Bishop of Waterford and Lismore. The school has been in operation since 1986 and was afforded permanent recognition in 1996. Enrolment for the 2011-12 school year was 219 pupils, an increase of 13% in the past five years. While enrolments have increased overall in the area in the past five to ten years, projections at primary level for the Tramore area up to 2018 indicate that enrolments will remain largely unchanged, with no anticipated increase

431 Seanad Éireann in demand for additional classroom accommodation in the area over that period.

The brief for the major building project is to provide a new eight-classroom school, plus accommodation for three full-time special education teachers and appropriate ancillary accommodation, including a general purpose room. The design team for the project was appointed on 12 March 2012. The project is at an early stage of architectural planning. A standard pre-stage 1 meeting with departmental officials, the school authorities and the design team was held in the Department in July 2012. The pre-stage 1 meeting is a relatively recent introduction, as part of my Department’s revised design team procedures, and is designed to consider all of the site- specific design options as presented by the design team and to agree on the best design option in taking the project forward. Due to issues arising from the pre-stage 1 presentation for Gaelscoil Philib Barún, a revised pre-stage 1 report was requested. This was received in the Department in November 2012 and, following its review, the school authorities and the design team were advised in December 2012 that the project was authorised to complete stage 1.

The design team is working on the completion of the stage 1 report and it is anticipated that the report will be submitted to the Department shortly. Once this stage is complete, the design team will proceed to stage 2a, which involves developing a more detailed design in preparation for the submission of applications to the local authority for planning permission, fire certificate and disability access certificate. These statutory applications, along with the completion of the tender documents for the project, comprise stage 2b, which is the final design stage of the architectural planning process.

Due to competing demands on my Department’s capital budget imposed by the need to prioritise the limited funding available for the provision of additional school accommodation to meet increasing demographic requirements, it was not possible to include the project for Gaelscoil Philib Barún in the five year construction programme announced in March 2012. School building projects, including the new school for Gaelscoil Philib Barún, which have not been scheduled for construction in the five year programme but which had previously been announced for initial inclusion in the building programme will continue to be progressed to final planning stages in anticipation of the possibility of further funds being available to the Depart- ment in future years. The project for Gaelscoil Philib Barún remains available to be considered for progression in that context.

24/01/2013AA00400Senator David Cullinane: In January 2003 Gaelscoil Philib Barún moved to the incom- plete site. In the same year the number of students in the school doubled. Since 2003, pupils have been in prefabs. That factor means the school should receive the appropriate funding and be in the capital programme. That is the Minister’s call, not mine, and he must address that with the students and board of management. It is amazing that the school has jumped through every hoop and over every hurdle. The design team is in place and stage 1 is complete. This process may well end up being completed, with the design and planning completed, but the funding will not be available, even though the school has increased in size to a massive extent.

The Minister of State referred to demographics. The town of Tramore will come into the new metropolitan area of Waterford city under the new local government structures. It makes perfect sense for the Minister of State to ensure the school is properly built in order that it can cater for the growing needs of the people of Tramore. I must impress upon the Minister of State that the school must be built for the sake of the students who have been taught in prefabs for far too long. It is not good enough. I ask the Minister of State to ask the senior Minister to reconsider and ensure capital funding is provided as quickly as possible. 432 24 January 2013 The Seanad adjourned at 3.10 p.m. until 1.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 29 January 2013.

433