Tá sé tráthúil go bhfuilimid ag caint faoi dhíol sócmhainní Stáit. I would like to build on the questions we asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, about the potential sale of State assets. I understand Ministers were briefed on the New ERA report last week. Has the Economic Management Council considered the report? A newspaper reported over the weekend that a minority share in the ESB would not now be sold. Will the Taoiseach confirm that there is no intention to sell a minority share in an integrated ESB? Will he confirm that consideration has been given to Bord Gáis and Coillte and indicate what decisions have been made in that regard? We know Fine Gael has been in favour of the sale of State assets for a long time and that the Labour Party is not so keen. It believes the proceeds of the sale of State assets should be invested in job creation. We all agree with job creation. Will the Taoiseach tell us whether the troika is willing to accept the decision to commit the proceeds of the possible sale of State assets to job creation? Has it agreed to allow a percentage of the proceeds to be used for that purpose? Are water, gas and electricity utilities being looked at when consideration is being given to State assets? Will the Taoiseach confirm that despite what the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, said before Christmas in response to a parliamentary question, there will be no sale in 2012 of State assets of significance - particularly the ESB - which is what the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform seemed to indicate?
Leaders’ Questions
I said no such thing.
Before I respond to Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív, I would like to recognise the loss to Deputy Michéal Martin and his family of his father. I express my condolences to him; his good wife, Mary; their family; and the extended Martin family. I happen to know how the death of a parent feels, as it happened to me recently. I am sure the House will join me in expressing our condolences and sincere sympathy to Deputy Martin on his personal loss.
Thank you, Taoiseach. I certainly join you on behalf of other Members.
The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, has just been answering questions on the matter raised by Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív. Deputy Ó Cuív will be aware that the programme for Government states that the Government intends to realise €2 billion in respect of the sale of State assets at an appropriate time, and not as a fire sale but based on the Government's decisions in this regard. Clearly, the troika in its first number of analyses of Irish performance was of the view that all of the proceeds from any sales of State assets should be used for debt reduction. As Deputy Ó Cuív is aware, the Government has had a number of negotiations with the troika which has resulted in changes in the memorandum of understanding in a number of areas. The Government also made a formal decision in respect of the ESB. The Government is now in negotiations with the troika and concluded some discussions last week for an extended process of possible State assets. The conclusion is that the troika has quite clearly stated it would be prepared to consider a sizeable proportion of any assets realised as investment for job creation. These discussions are continuing. The Ministers made progress in that area with the troika last week.
I thank the Taoiseach for the words of commiseration with my colleague, Deputy Micheál Martin, which are deeply appreciated. We fully appreciate that the Taoiseach suffered a similar loss recently and I thank him for his kind words.
I welcome the Taoiseach's reference to a sizeable proportion, although I think we would all agree that all of the money should be used for job creation and investment for work. At the end of the day, the only resolution of the financial problems is to grow the economy.
Is the Taoiseach saying the Government is still committed to selling a minority stake in the whole of the ESB, including the critical, strategic infrastructure of the networks of both transmission and distribution? Will he not agree there could be long-term economic consequences if part of the basic strategic infrastructure, such as the ESB, gas or water networks, is privatised? Does the Taoiseach agree with his colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, who seems to believe and with whom I would not necessarily argue on the point that the sale of the strategic infrastructure of Eircom, even though it achieved a very high price at the time and which would not be possible now, might not have been altogether wise, despite the price? At the moment, a significant price will not be achieved because the economy is depressed. Will the Taoiseach agree that no sales should proceed in the foreseeable future considering the state of the economy? Will he confirm whether the Government is still open to selling shares in the basic infrastructure of this country which could result in a very negative long-term effect on job creation?
I remind Deputy Ó Cuív that when his own Government considered this matter in the first instance, there was no inclusion for the possibility of investment for job creation out of the potential or possible sale of any State assets. The Government has no intention of selling the Irish taxpayer short. In fact, the troika in its discussions with both Ministers last week was not insisting that assets be sold by a particular date simply because of the changed economic circumstances.
Despite the overall situation in the country, a great deal of interest is being expressed in the potential of a number of assets. The State will not short-change the taxpayer. There is no intention of selling transmission lines or gas pipes which are a part of the strategic infrastructure which is vital to our economy. There is a difference between the sale of non-strategic assets and strategic assets. The expert review group will make recommendations. I assure Deputy Ó Cuív that the Government will make its decisions in light of the best interests of the taxpayer and the country and in compliance with the programme for Government which sets out to realise €2 billion over the period of the programme. The extant decision stands in respect of the ESB.
Following the discussions last week there is interest in having an extended list of possible or potential assets that might be sold. I repeat there was no pressure from the troika to deal with these by a particular date because the Government is fully intent on not selling strategic assets but instead is intent on achieving the best possible result for the taxpayer. The conclusion of the negotiations was a significant change from the original concept, in that the Government will now, with the agreement and co-operation of the troika, be able to invest a substantial proportion of the proceeds of the sale of assets into job creation and investment for work.
Táim leis an Taoiseach agus an Ceann Comhairle faoi bhás athair an Teachta Micheál Martin. Bhí mé ag caint le Micheál ag deireadh na seachtaine ach ba mhaith liom a rá sa Dáil ar son Shinn Féin go bhfuilimid ag smaoineamh air agus ar a chlann ag an am deacair seo.
Go raibh maith agat.
I welcome today's meeting between the Minister for Finance and the head of the ECB. It is always gratifying to know that sometimes the Taoiseach listens to Sinn Féin. Although we have been waiting too long, unfortunately, for this meeting to have taken place, if the Taoiseach wishes to continue to take good advice, I suggest that what Deputy Noonan tells the head of the ECB is crucial. He should tell him that this State cannot afford the promissory note put in place by Fianna Fáil, no more than we can afford to pay the €1.25 billion which the Taoiseach will pay tomorrow to unguaranteed, unsecured bondholders. This amount is more than all the additional taxes that his Government inflicted on citizens. It is more than the household charge, the increase in VAT and the increases in motor taxation. We punish our people and tomorrow we give €1.25 billion to these unguaranteed, anonymous, unsecured bondholders. It is also remarkable to recollect that before the election, the Labour Party's slogans referred to Labour's way or Frankfurt's way. The Minister has now done a complete U-turn given that he told us that not another red cent will be paid to these persons.
Pioc suas an fón, seas suas agus labhair le Alan Dukes agus abair leis nach mbeidh tú ag tabhairt an airgid seo don banc seo. I ask the Taoiseach to stand up for Ireland's interest, to pick up the phone and tell Mike Aynsley or Alan Dukes that, sin é, this is it, and he will not pay them this money.
Bí cinnte faoi seo, a Theachta: seasfaidh mé suas ar son mhuintir na hÉireann, ar son an Rialtais agus ar son na tíre sna cainteanna a bheidh agam leis na cinnirí eile. Ná bíodh aon fhaitíos ar an Teachta faoi sin. The Deputy is a great man to take the words and use them for his own benefit. What we said before the election was that we would not commit one cent more than what was already committed in respect of this. That is what was said but the Deputy chooses to leave that aside.
It was not cents but billions of euro.
Deputy Adams also speaks about telling Mr. Dukes, Mr. Aynsley, Mr. Draghi and everybody else to get lost. I recall the Deputy saying that when he would get into the Dáil, he would tell the troika to go home and to take their money with them. I would like to hear from Deputy Adams and his party how they propose to deal with the situation whereby the European Central Bank has given €110 billion to our covered banks to provide services ranging from ATM machines to public pay scales and the running of our economy. Where does the Deputy intend to get this, since his party has robbed ten times over the National Pension Reserve Fund and drained the European Investment Bank of all its potential investment funds?
We would have to print money.
This is fantasy politics and the Deputy cannot have it both ways all the time. There is €2.6 billion left in unsecured private debts of the €97 billion in liabilities that were guaranteed by the previous Government in September 2008. The Deputy can sound off in here but we have a country that finds itself in difficult circumstances. Believe me, I have no intention of defaulting on Ireland's position and ending up with difficulties similar to those currently being experienced by the citizens of Greece, where 100,000 public servants have been let go, pay rates have been decimated and services are under serious pressure. Is that the kind of Ireland that the ceannaire of the Sinn Féin Party stands for? I do not believe so. The Deputy should speak about reality and a little bit of truth while leaving his hypocrisy outside the door in saying he will tell the troika to go home and take its money with it. The Deputy should explain how he expects the services of Ireland to be provided in the absence of that kind of money.
The great merit of this tradition is that I get to ask the questions and the Taoiseach provides the answers.
The Deputy has no answers.
As they used to say to me in Castlerea, there is a hard way and an easy way, and the Taoiseach keeps picking the hard way. This is not Ireland's debt, and we should be clear about that. This is not in the memorandum of understanding or the agreement. We raised the issue with representatives from the troika last week and the IMF representative stated publicly that it is not opposed to imposing losses on bondholders. This is the rub; the Taoiseach is bringing savage austerity policies on the backs of already suffering citizens, and at the same time he is giving away tomorrow. That will not be the action of Fianna Fáil, the last Government, Bertie or Brian. It will be the action of this Taoiseach, who will sign over €1.25 billion of the people's money to these unguaranteed and unsecured bondholders. Who are they? Tell us who they are. He should stand up and tell us to whom he is giving the people's money. Who are the unguaranteed gamblers? Give us their names.
I want Deputy Adams to understand that it is not to my liking to have to stand up here and say there is no alternative but to pay what a solemn Irish Government committed itself to, with the consequent impact on reputation and status. The Deputy seems to have a very different view of the kind of catastrophic consequences if a default occurs. I have pointed out what has happened in Greece and I am quite sure that even with his warped version of the development of the European Union, which his party opposed at every turn in the road-----
We were right every time.
-----he does not want to see that happen to the citizens of this country.
Ourselves alone.
I have no intention of letting that happen. Despite the economic circumstances in which we find ourselves, the reputation and status of this country has increased with regard to the confidence of investors abroad, the perception of this country abroad and commentary from international financial analysts, business people and politicians.
And the bondholders.
This country is making headway, although it is not easy. I would much prefer to stand up and say we are in a position not to pay this. There is a difference between "will not" and "cannot". This country is making its way through a very difficult period. What was committed to by a very solemn Irish Government must now be followed through. The emphasis for the Government is now in the meetings today with the Minister for Finance and Mr. Draghi to deal with the promissory note and the extent of the €30 billion over ten years that must be paid. It is in that area that the real benefits for this country can come.
The Deputy should be aware that in the discussions last week with the Ministers for Public Expenditure and Reform and Finance, the troika, including the European Central Bank, the European Commission and the IMF, proposed that a paper dealing with the financial difficulties Ireland faces would be prepared and presented on behalf of the troika. Does the Deputy believe that it is in this country's interest, and that of every citizen, to have the backing of the status of a proposal from the troika in regard to this matter?
Who are the bondholders?
It is for that reason that the Minister, Deputy Noonan, is in Frankfurt today, speaking with the Commissioner Mr. Rehn and Mr. Draghi. It is for that reason that whereas this will not be decided on Monday, or by March, it is very important to make our colleagues in Europe aware of the significant burden that this country has had to face because of the borrowing which was used before the facilities of the European Financial Stability Facility and the European Stability Mechanism came into being. Even in his private party rooms, the Deputy is probably hoping that progress is made in that regard because it would be good for our citizens all over the country. That issue will be emphasised. We will not have "defaulter" written on our foreheads. We will pay our way. We have never looked for a debt write-down, although we want an extension of flexibility from these facilities to help our taxpayers and in dealing with our deficit, and to help repay our debts in a more realistic fashion. It is in that regard that intensive discussions are now taking place.
The bar is too low.
I join the Ceann Comhairle, the Taoiseach, and Deputy Ó Cuív and Adams in offering sympathy on behalf of the Technical Group to Deputy Martin and his family.
I wish to raise another serious matter today, the EU decision to ban oil imports from Iran, and the serious consequences for the Irish economy, energy costs, motorists and other consumers. There are also implications for Ireland's foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East. When was the decision on the oil ban made by the Government and did the Cabinet collectively decide on the ban? Why did it make that decision? Did the Taoiseach think about the consequences for Irish customers, motorists, the markets and, above all, Irish jobs? Does the Taoiseach accept that the vast majority of the Irish people do not support this action, particularly the ending of the policy of independent neutrality as we are following Cameron, Sarkozy, Merkel and the US in sabre rattling? Does the Taoiseach not think it a bit rich-----
Deputy McGrath is spreading his wings. I did not take him for an Ahmadinejad man.
-----for nuclear powers like Britain, the US, Israel and France to lecture Iran about nuclear power and weapons when they are up to their necks in them? Is it not time for common sense and dialogue between all the nations with nuclear weapons? Does the Taoiseach accept that dialogue is the way forward rather than punishing the Irish people, consumers, motorists and the Iranian people?
Deputy McGrath was always a strong supporter of human rights and he has rightly raised questions here about the implications of activities by the Taliban, al-Qaeda and other groups. This regards EU support for sanctions against Iran because of the scale of its activities with regard to nuclear power. It is for that reason that the European Union, with the Tánaiste acting on behalf of the Irish Government, supports the sanctions being imposed on Iran in this case.
Reports from this morning - I have not heard reports from the last hour or so - indicated there was not much of a reaction because of the protection that exists in respect of the Strait of Hormuz by an American fleet and others. If this sanction regime continued for an extended period, with a drop in oil supplies, prices would rise not just in Ireland but everywhere else. This is a serious matter of an expansion in a nuclear programme by Iran, and sanctions have been extended against that country as a result. The European Union strongly supports that. I hope there will not be any catastrophic consequences in that region, and oil is important to the economies in western Europe and other countries. For that reason there is a belief that there is sufficient capacity to ensure that the straits are kept opened for traffic to countries in the West, including this country.
I thank the Taoiseach for his response. The Government does not really see the downside of the oil sanction. One loses the moral argument when there is silence from the Government and the Labour Party on other nuclear powers that exist in the world. The Government seems to be targeting one country above others.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
Oil and diesel are expensive enough, as those of us who drive diesel cars are aware. Prices will go through the roof as a result of the Taoiseach's actions. That means higher costs, fewer jobs and more grief for small Irish industries. Why is the Taoiseach doing this? Is it because some in the European Union want to have a go at Iran?
Did the Taoiseach hear David Horgan say this morning that Irish policy was mad? I remind the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, that David Horgan is from Clontarf and he is experienced in the Middle East where he has done much work on the oil industry.
I knew there had to be a local angle.
He said the Minister's policy is mad and off the rails because he does not know what is happening on the ground.
I urge the Taoiseach to think again, to reverse the policy decision, thus avoiding damaging this country's reputation as an independent broker and getting dialogue going with Iran. Let us all work together to end the nuclear arms industry.
Let us remember family members and friends that served in the United Nations in the Middle East who have always acted impartially and fairly and earned respect as people from an independent country not involved in colonialism. Let us stop tipping the cap to the European Union or the United States on these important foreign policy matters.
I notice that the Deputy blamed the situation on the actions of the Government. If the Government were as powerful as he said, then we would probably have been able to deal with the troika and many other issues effectively. In the meantime, I remind Deputy McGrath that approximately 6% of our oil comes from Iran. The matter is serious and has global implications. Deputy McGrath raised the Clontarf angle. We got a result for him in respect of the sea wall some time ago.
That was me.
The people spoke on that issue.
I hope that pragmatism and common sense will result in Iran adhering to the conditions in respect of the nuclear proliferation programme in which it is now involved. I hope also that the sanctions imposed will have the desired effect and that countries can continue with their business in commerce and trade with what is fundamentally a critical supply. I hope the support given by the European Union to the sanctions will result in Iran doing what it should do and not anything that would have catastrophic consequences in that part of the Middle East.