Micheál Martin
Question:12Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the issues he discussed at his recent meeting with Democratic Leader Ms Nancy Pelosi; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16242/12]
View answerTuesday, 19 June 2012
Questions (26, 27, 28)
Gerry Adams
Question:13Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will to report on his recent meeting with Ms Nancy Pelosi. [23759/12]
View answer
Joe Higgins
Question:14Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report back on his recent meeting with Ms Nancy Pelosi. [25363/12]
View answerOral answers (38 contributions)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 12 to 14, inclusive, together.
I met former US Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her accompanying congressional delegation in Dublin on 13 March. I welcomed her warmly to Ireland as she has always shown such support both for the peace process in Northern Ireland and to Ireland in general. We spoke about Irish-US relations in advance of my trip later that week to the United States for the St. Patrick's Day period. I also briefed her on my own visits to the US in February, including attending the roundtable on investment organised by former US President Bill Clinton.
I briefed her on the Irish economy and our public finances and the Government's efforts to return the economy to a position of strong growth and job creation. She assured me of continued US support both on Northern Ireland and for our recovery efforts.
Former Speaker Pelosi has been a constant friend of Ireland and her and her friends in the Irish Caucus have never wavered in their support for the peace process and for economic activity and development in the country. She had close relations with the last Government and with President Obama. I also was glad to have the opportunity to meet her.
One of the important bilateral issues between Ireland and the US in recent times has been the fact that Washington may have in some way vetoed the writing off of key parts of Irish bank debt in 2010. The Taoiseach has come into the House on many occasions to tell us he is leaving no stone unturned in his efforts to renegotiate the bank debt but he did not raise it with President Obama, as he said to the House in recent weeks, or with Secretary of the Treasury Geithner. The Minister for Finance did not raise the issue with him either. Did the Taoiseach raise the issue with former Speaker Pelosi? As one of the key leaders of the Democratic Party, she has considerable influence.
I raised the Irish economy, the public finances and the Government's wish and intention to return our economy to a strong growth and job creation agenda. She assured us of continued US support both on Northern Ireland and for our recovery efforts here. The meeting with her delegation, which comprised seven other representatives, covered a range of issues in respect of the diaspora, connections between Ireland and the US and so on. I certainly briefed her on the general programme of what we wish and she assured us of continued US support both here and for Northern Ireland.
That is not the question I asked.
The Deputy asked about the bank debt.
Week after week, the Taoiseach comes in and says he has taken the opportunity to raise issues with foreign leaders or to update them. We take it these leaders would be aware of all the issues from the briefing notes they get. I asked about one of the big issues but any time someone from the Government meets someone from the US Government, this is the one question no one will ask: did Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, veto an attempt to write down Irish debt or to make senior bondholders make a contribution at the famous G7 meeting. Did he or did he not? The Taoiseach has not raised the issue with President Obama. Did he raise it with former Speaker Pelosi? The Minister for Finance would not raise it with the Secretary of the Treasury. It is a big issue and very interesting and we would like to hear from the US Government its reasons and perspectives for not wanting senior bank bondholders to make a contribution to the resolution of the situation at that time. It is widely reported but for some reason every time we raise the issue in the House we get a blank stare and no answer.
I will give the Deputy an answer. I did not raise the issue of Timothy Geithner or his actions or comments with Nancy Pelosi. We discussed a range of issues and I briefed her on the position as far as the Irish economy is concerned and what the Irish Government is doing and the efforts we are making to restore our economy to strong growth and a jobs agenda and all of those issues. Neither did former Speaker Pelosi raise any comments or actions of Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner at the meeting.
What follow-up work has taken place in the three months since the visit? Aside from briefing Nancy Pelosi on the economic situation here, which must have made for a pretty depressing briefing session, what support was sought from the Irish in America to help rebuild the economy here? What specific issues were discussed? Was there any discussion of the Global Irish Network initiative? Was the issue of undocumented Irish living and working in the US raised by the Taoiseach? Many of them have built their lives there and they deserve the support of Government. Unfortunately, many more will be joining them because emigration is now a major phenomenon again.
Far from the situation being regarded as depressing or there being a feeling of hopelessness, the American delegation was absolutely on a high about the reputation this county has had restored in the United States to a point where we are seen internationally in the words of former President Clinton and President Obama as being a country that is making real progress in difficult and challenging times but heading in the right direction.
"Punching above our weight," was how he put it.
It confirmed the pipeline of investment into this country from the United States remains exceptionally strong. During the course of the referendum campaign, as the Deputy is well aware, quite a number of chief executives of major multinationals from the United States not only put their money where their mouths were but spoke publicly about the reasons they wanted to invest in this country - because of our demographics, our tax situation and the talent pool that exists here.
Of course no one likes to see anyone leave. When I came back from London a fortnight ago, a young man from the west of Ireland sat in the seat beside me. He is a married man with two children who was in the building business. He left and is now involved in inspections on oil rigs because he went after courses to up-skill himself and said his work now takes him worldwide, with an enormous potential. It is not all bad news. We regret there are those who leave because of economic circumstances and that is all the more reason the Government must focus as a priority on jobs. The American delegation, which comprised Representatives George Miller, Ed Markey, Nick Rahall, Richard Neal - well known to Ireland - Carolyn Maloney, Mike Doyle and Keith Ellison, was intrigued by the scale of reputation our country has in the US as a place in which to invest and work and the reputation of our people to interact with, and I was happy about that.
The question of the undocumented Irish was raised. Clearly, the situation is not easy in the legislative sense in the US, given the paralysis that exists on Capitol Hill, although I note the decision of President Obama last week in respect of illegal immigrants who came to the United States as children and who are aged under 30 not being deported anymore. That will impact principally on the Hispanic vote. I understand the number of undocumented Irish who would be affected by this measure is small but that is no reason to believe the ongoing work in respect of E3 visas should not be brought to a conclusion.
I referred to the impact of the Global Irish Economic Forum internationally and Ms Pelosi, as former Speaker and leader of the CODEL delegation, was enthusiastic about the prospect of Ireland emerging from the programme and being seen to be a success story in a difficult time for Europe.
I am struggling to believe that a delegation from any part of the globe could come here and get an honest briefing and be, as the Taoiseach put it, on a real high. Whatever about recognising the positives in terms of demography, the work ethic of Irish people, their ingenuity and so on, there is nothing here about which to be on a real high. I am also surprised the Taoiseach's reaction to the rate of emigration is that nobody likes to leave.
Correct.
Statistics tell us that nine people an hour leave the country.
And none of them likes to leave.
That is pretty catastrophic. That is not casual tourism or people heading off for a jaunt, and the Taoiseach should recognise that in his commentary.
Will the Taoiseach be more specific about the issues I raised? What is he doing in respect of the undocumented Irish? I acknowledge others are active on this matter but what initiatives is he taking and what contacts does he have? Where does he see this going?
With regard to the interest and support from Irish America, I appreciate his comments about general goodwill, a supportive view in respect of the North and positivity in wanting to help economically, but what concretely are the asks?
I had a meeting with the Taoiseach recently about the constitutional convention. We have underlined to him many times, and he shares our understanding, that the relationship with the diaspora has not been leveraged to its maximum historically to be of benefit to the State. I am anxious this would happen and, therefore, I made the argument to him that the global Irish community has to be given a stake in the constitutional convention and its outcomes. Will he be more concrete? I understand he has had general conversations but what are his specific asks? What specifically is he doing on the undocumented Irish?
We are discussing questions regarding the visit of former US Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. We have drifted somewhat and I have other questions to deal with.
When I was in the US, I made it my business to meet a number of Democrats and to speak to a number of Senators and Congressmen on both sides about the issue of the E3 visas. The Deputy will be well aware of the political interchange that goes on between Senators and Congressmen in various parts of the US who have an interest in this issue but, clearly, the position in so far as the party system is concerned has been paralysed because of politics on a range of issues. A Bill sponsored by one party may not be accepted by the other but the party may be able to tag it on other legislation going through Congress. To be honest, I feel it will not be sorted out before the presidential election in November. The stakes in a number of states are probably too political. I may be wrong - I hope I am- that this could be resolved in terms of the E3 visas for the undocumented Irish. I am aware that the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform is working with the Republican Party to sort out a number of misunderstandings to see whether extra assistance can be brought about. We would like this resolved but I made it perfectly clear to the delegation that it is not our right or our position to attempt to interfere in the process they are going though. I met them face to face both here and in the US and I put that to them.
I happen to know a little about emigration and about the people who were forced into it in years gone by and those who have to deal with it now. When I was in Beijing, all of the 500 Irish people I met were there by choice. They have a different view from those who, unfortunately, have to emigrate. It is important we have a fix on those who emigrate to America, Australia or wherever else and that there is a connection with them. It is easy now from a digital perspective and they should be constantly informed as to the progress being made in their part of the country and where employment might be created.
I met the Deputy and other party representatives about the constitutional convention, and the diaspora will be tied in and will be encouraged to participate in the work, discussions and arguments through the website and all the information that will be published there. I welcome the fact the diaspora will be able to do that. There are many, varied, deeply held and widely respected views among members of the diaspora and they will have a full opportunity to participate in these discussions. As I explained to the Deputy previously, the diaspora comprises people who have left voluntarily, those who have left involuntarily, the Army, the Navy and those who serve our country in different parts of the world. They all will have the opportunity to deal with the convention.
I referred in passing to the fact that next September, the Army-Navy college football game will be played in the Aviva Stadium in Dublin. A total of 33,000 American personnel will travel and they will stay for a week with their spend expected to be more than €60 million in Dublin and its hinterland. Enormous opportunities will present for business and new connections to be made.
The Taoiseach is certainly straying now.
The NFL is looking to play two games in Europe next year. Croke Park has made a big pitch for one of those. It may well be, if Ambassador Rooney is in a position to leverage it, that the Pittsburgh Steelers will be there. Wembley is the other venue that has made its case. Next September there is an opportunity for many people who have never been here previously to get a flavour of Ireland and all the excitement that college football brings with it. Businessmen and investors will come to Ireland for the game and many will travel to Belfast, Cork, Galway and so on. It will be a brilliant opportunity and we strongly support it.
The Taoiseach answered my previous question about the Pelosi-Geithner issue straight up eventually. Why did he not raise the role of the Secretary of the Treasury in vetoing any attempt to burn bank bondholders in 2010? Why is there a reluctance to raise the issue with anybody in the American Administration?
The argument we had before was about whether I had raised the issue. I am giving a straight answer to a straight question in saying I did not raise it.
Why not?
Deputy Martin now wants to know the underlying reasons for my not doing so. It is simply the case that we had a lengthy and broad agenda and there were many other issues we had to discuss.
I am intrigued as to why the matter was not raised. When we ask in this House about meetings with President Obama or the Minister for Finance's meeting with the Treasury Secretary, Mr. Geithner, we are told that nobody mentioned the G word or the word "veto" in respect of the possible role played by Mr. Geithner prior to Ireland's bailout. I am very interested to discover the position of the United States Government in this regard and why, for example, it might have had a view at the time that bank bondholders should not be burnt or whether it set down at a G7 meeting that there could not be any attempt to force senior bondholders to make a contribution. This issue has been debated and analysed at length. We know, for instance, that Mr. Trichet at the ECB was of the view that no bank could be allowed to fail and that senior bondholders must not be burnt. What is intriguing is that this view was apparently supported by the United States Government. I am asking why nobody seems to want to ask this question of the American Administration and the American President. It is a perfectly fair question and it is reasonable that people in this House should ask it. Why does no member of the Government, in meeting with members of the United States Government, seek their views on it? Have our diplomats, by way of their channels of information, picked up the view of the American Administration on the issue and, if so, have they relayed it to the Taoiseach, Tánaiste or Minister for Finance?
I am not sure how much Deputy Martin, when he was Minister for Foreign Affairs, knew about the United States Government's view on bondholders.
The Minister, Deputy Joan Burton, asked the Taoiseach to make that comment. I would prefer if he would answer the question I asked.
I do not know whether the Deputy, during his very frequent travels as a member of the last Government, asked any question of any member of the American Government on the issue of burning bondholders or what might happen in the event of Ireland having to go into a programme. I do recall the two caballeros at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government saying there was no sign of the IMF.
The two amigos.
I am not sure where the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, was at that time or whether he had any information about this.
Will the Taosieach answer the question?
People on the Opposition benches at that time were pointing out that the property bubble was about to burst, but there were trenchant defences from these benches and claims it could not happen, that we would never have need of a bailout and it was nonsense to suggest the country would have to enter a programme. I recall Deputy Martin's statements about that. I am not sure whether he, as Minister, had any contact with Mr. Geithner in his role at that time or whether he spoke to members of the American Government.
We never shied away from any issue.
We have heard nothing from the Labour Party about extraordinary rendition since it went into government.
If I recall correctly, the basis for speculation about any influence Mr. Geithner might have had is the reports of something he said in the Far East about bondholders.
Is this questions to the Taoiseach or questions to the Leader of the Opposition?
The Deputy seems to be laying it down that we should all know what the American Government is thinking. The basis of his argument, however, is that Mr. Geithner was at a meeting in the Far East and comments of his were reported.
The Taoiseach has given a master class in not answering a question.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.