Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 13 Feb 2013

Vol. 221 No. 2

Address to Seanad Éireann by Ms Phil Prendergast, MEP

I welcome Ms Phil Prendergast, MEP, to the House. She was a Member of this House for a long number of years and contributed greatly to debates in the past. I wish her well in her new role.

Ms Phil Prendergast

I thank the Cathaoirleach and colleagues. It is a pleasure to be back in familiar territory. It is comforting to be here to address the House. I thank the Leader for inviting me to address this House on a key pillar of European integration, the Internal Market, as the only Irish Member of the European Parliament who sits on the Internal Market and consumer affairs committee.

While the Single Market was officially completed in 1992, two decades ago, with the aim of allowing persons, goods, services and capital to freely circulate within the Union's borders, making it work for citizens and businesses has been a work in progress ever since. Legislation has been harmonised across a vast range of areas to make sure that 20 million businesses, employing 175 million workers, can have access to a market of 500 million consumers, and beyond, and that they can compete on an equal footing with their EU counterparts with rules that are known and predictable. Likewise, their EU customers have enjoyed rights that protect them in cross-border purchases, an illustrative example of which is flight tickets.

However, harmonising rules across the EU through legislation passed by the European Parliament and the EU Council is not enough to remove barriers to free movement and trade. In those cases when a directive is the most appropriate EU legal instrument, it has to be transposed by member states by means of statutory instruments or their equivalents. Even when EU law is laid by means of regulations, which have direct effect, these must still be properly applied and enforced and the same goes for the statutory instruments that transpose EU directives in the respective national jurisdictions. Very often, difficulties arise at member state level when it comes to enforcement, which may be lacking or inadequate, and disparate approaches to the detailed implementation between member state administrators are brought to the attention of EU institutions by citizens and businesses who have to deal with two or more jurisdictions as they try to apply the rules to their concrete cases.

This means that the Oireachtas, the Government, the courts and their EU counterparts play a role in making the Internal Market a workable reality for individuals and companies that is by no means less crucial than that played by the EU institutions themselves. For this reason, I did not hesitate to accept the kind invitation to address the Seanad and I hope the current Irish Presidency of the EU will help us foster stronger ties between European and national parliamentary representatives, which are much needed at a time when the key thrusts of the response of member state governments to the crisis has been found quite lacking in democratic representation and legitimacy.

The Single Market is a proven driver for trade, competitiveness and economic growth, given the scale and development of the integrated area it opens up. The Irish economy has benefited very significantly from the Internal Market and has in many ways developed to tap into its potential. Not even the most ardent of the British eurosceptics I have come across has ever questioned the importance and value of the Internal Market for their economy, which is notable. On the contrary, they remain quite keen on expanding and perfecting the means by which it enables us to trade and do business across borders, even if they are missing equally important parts of the picture. That is a case of taking the cherries they like and leaving what they do not want.

Approximately two years ago, on foot of a report prepared by former Commissioner and current Italian Prime Minister, Mario Monti, for Commission President Barroso, on the need to relaunch the Single Market and to make it tangible for our citizens, the Commission announced a package of proposals known as the Single Market Act. Its aims were to enable us to exploit the potential of the Single Market to a fuller extent and to stimulate growth at a time of crisis, based on a number of flagship initiatives that are currently in the course of being translated into law or materialised as policies.

The most important of those include access to finance for SMEs as small and medium-sized companies face difficulties securing funds to develop new products, expand and innovate. The Commission provides venture capital but common rules are needed to allow venture capital to flow across member states. They also include worker mobility - we are well acquainted with this in Ireland but only 2.5% of the active population of the EU worked elsewhere in the Union in 2009, while, at the same time, there are gaps in national labour markets in areas requiring highly qualified professionals such as health care or engineering. There are obstacles and problems with mutual recognition of qualifications that cut across member state laws, regulators and educational systems that prevent highly qualified professionals from either having access to practice elsewhere in the EU or from having their training acknowledged by the would-be host authorities. The review of the professional qualifications directive is thus being undertaken to iron out some of those differences. This is not a simple task, as different interests and priorities are at stake.

Health care professionals are part of a special group of professional categories that enjoy automatic recognition of qualifications under the directive. Professionals who demonstrably acquired the necessary qualifications to practice according to their home member state's rules are automatically deemed apt to practice in whichever member state in which they apply to work, as the directive sets standards and core competencies that they must gain in the course of their training. In the case of health care workers, patient safety is a major concern, however, raising issues such as command of language or the need to exchange information on those professionals who have been banned from practice due to legal or disciplinary action in the home member state.

Both through my experience as a nurse and midwife and my engagement with regulators and professional bodies, I was mindful to put the interests of patient safety above all else when amending the initial proposal. I am pleased that we mustered enough support for an alert mechanism to immediately and automatically inform all member state authorities whenever a health care professional is temporarily or permanently barred from practising due to a disciplinary action or criminal conviction. Until now, mobile practitioners could escape through the net and practise abroad until the host authorities had reason for suspicion and proactively sought information from the authorities in his or her home country. We have now ensured that the information will automatically reach the Irish authorities and vice versa. This will not only guarantee safe treatment for our patients but also permanently assure our EU counterparts that our excellently trained Irish professionals are fit to practise in the hospitals and health care centres across the European continent.

Intellectual property is another area that the Single Market Act identified, a particular achievement in this regard being the legal framework to grant pan-EU patent protection to those businesses and entrepreneurs who wish to request it. A related topic is that of copyrights management, where much remains to be done to ensure the provision of certain contents is not fragmented and even blocked across EU borders, as is still often the case with content delivered online. A digital single market is nevertheless taking shape and we are moving forward on a number of fronts. Improved consumer confidence in online trade has been estimated as having the potential to yield as much as €2.5 billion in cross-border online transactions alone, which is a very significant amount. This is why the EU is pushing for the development of affordable and simple means to settle disputes or to obtain redress out of court that can apply to transactions across borders, including those that were made electronically. Another necessary development to shore up confidence in electronic transactions across the board will be the enactment of legislation on the mutual recognition of electronic identification and authentication throughout the EU.

E-signatures, as we may call them, are a priority for the current Irish Presidency and I am personally involved in the process as I will lead the work of the Labour Party group in the European Parliament on this legislation, and we will have a first exchange of views on the Commission's proposal at a meeting of the Internal Market Committee on Thursday week. The process will entail a review of the e-signature directive so as to enable faster and safer identification, interaction and conclusion of transactions involving citizens, businesses and public authorities on-line.

The reform of EU rules on public procurement rules was one of the most important strands that needed rebalancing in the interests of public authorities, workers and citizens at large. Last December, in the European Parliament, we voted through a reform of EU public procurement law that I see as a major breakthrough for workers' rights and the improvement of social and environmental conditions in Europe. Public investment in works, goods and services through tendering accounts for almost 20% of Irish and European GDP. We are talking about a fifth of our economic activity, generated through the provision of public goods in the general interest. So far, public authorities were tied down by cumbersome and inadequate procurement provisions that imposed the cheapest option on them. This "penny wise, pound foolish" approach systematically undermined other public policy goals, in the name of fair competition in the internal market. That was a huge move forward. While EU public procurement law has been pivotal in improving transparency and deterring discriminatory or outright corrupt practices in the use of public funds to procure goods and services, the provision of public welfare in a social market economy cannot be simply equated to any other business either. Many of us had been pushing to secure a majority for this legislative reform for a long time.

Contractors must respect social, environmental and labour laws, including collective bargaining and international labour conventions when they bid for public contracts. Public authorities must be empowered to exclude companies that violate such laws from calls for tenders. Likewise, subcontractors must respect the same rules, and the original contractors may be held responsible for breaches that take place further down the chain. We aim to have a clear legal toolbox at the disposal of public bodies that allows them to impose, along with cost effectiveness, social, environmental and strategic criteria in their calls for tenders. This will enable public procurement to contribute to public policy goals, taking full life-cycle costs, quality, experience and continuity into account in the assessment of tenders.

We have also brought in simplified rules for social services, which often provided at a local level and by community-based NGOs. SMEs will also stand to gain from the overall simplification of the rules, the possibility to divide tenders into lots they can apply for separately as well as a facility that enables small businesses to form temporary consortia to bid for tenders. That is a hugely important element. Just because a company can storm into, for instance, the provision of elderly care or meals on wheels in a given county, claim to be able to beat any other player in terms of cost and actually deliver on it, does not necessarily mean it can do it well and truly achieve the outcomes intended by the public authority. How long will it stay there? Is it cutting corners to cut costs? Under what conditions do its staff work? What is the local know-how and community ties? These are just some of the many questions that would be ignored by awarding tenders on a cost-basis only. It is a question of humanising the element of services being bought for them and paid for by the public purse.

The present complexity of the rules crowded out smaller players without the legal and administrative resources to manage the tendering processes. It also led smaller public bodies to err on the side of caution, for the same reasons, for fear of costly legal challenges even when the legislation could have given them some leeway to choose among other prospective contractors.

Another aspect that I have also pushed strongly concerns better transparency and governance, including the protection of whistleblowers who denounce illicit practices in good faith. While I wish we had gone further in terms of the thresholds above which certain requirements kick in and in terms of other requirements, I must concede that there is a complex balance to be struck between those and the need for simpler rules for smaller actors on both sides of the tendering process.

This brings me to mention one other important strand of the Single Market Act, albeit more general in nature. The Commission has committed to simplify and reduce the regulatory and administrative burdens imposed on SMEs, including in terms of financial reporting and accounting requirements for smaller companies. The Single Market Act package was followed up with the announcement, last October, of more legislative measures to enhance the growth potential in our continent. The Commission expects to come forward with the proposals by the end of this quarter. We need to keep doing more for consumer protection. Many of us have been pushing for universal access to basic payment accounts.

With increased mobility, more and more persons abroad find that the possibility to open a basic bank account is contingent on conditions they cannot fulfil given their employment or residency status. This makes many transactions we perform in the course of our daily lives, such as cashing in salaries, social entitlements, paying rent and bills more difficult or expensive for mobile students and workers, or even those who live in their own country but with such low levels of income that they are not attractive to commercial banking.

When I led the Labour Party group's work on the evaluation of the consumer credit directive, we found much room for improvement on consumer credit. Consumers need to be carefully briefed on the risks they incur when taking a loan in a different currency, which is subject to interest and exchange rate variations that can become back-breaking in times of financial turmoil. EU member states have the power to extend this directive's consumer protection provisions to low-value loans, short-term loans such as payday loans, often offered on-line and by SMS. I have urged all the member states to do so as soon as possible, as increasing reports of abuse have come to my attention. The European Commission needs to keep screening lending institutions for non-compliance with their information duties. A sweep operation carried out last year found that 70% of their websites failed to include key information and had misleading presentations of costs.

Rules on early repayment need to be straightforward and entail reasonable fees, so as not to tie customers when they can afford to free themselves from debt. We have had situations where consumers bought goods on credit that was negotiated directly between the shop and the creditor, and when the consumers exercised their right of withdrawal they are saddled with financial penalties and fees for a loan they never negotiated or saw a penny of. This is an illegal practice that the customer must not accept. The guarantors for consumer loans should be subject to the same creditworthiness assessment as the borrowers and be fully informed of their responsibilities. Customers should be given enough time to look for alternative offers on the market when their bank notifies them of raises the interest rate for their loans. Issues such as the portability of social security and pension rights are still extremely intimidating and complex even for well informed citizens, and unforeseen obstacles can put individual workers' entitlements in jeopardy. We must streamline and simplify these rules.

Most importantly, I will keep fighting for strong EU legislation setting universal service obligations, to safeguard the provision of accessible and affordable essential services, such as water, health, communications, transportation or energy. A vibrant single market is indispensable for our future prosperity but quality public services are indispensable to make it sustainable. European citizens will not tolerate open markets over open borders if they become an end in themselves rather than a means to improve their existence and living conditions. For all the potential and scope for improvement the Single Market presents, it is important not to lose perspective and overestimate what can be achieved by an unbalanced focus on further liberalisation in our economies, at the expense of our social model.

We are still reeling from very recent experiences on that front, and we saw a U-turn in the Commission's approach to financial regulation, after the heyday of the light-touch regulatory approach of the previous internal market Commissioner, a fellow countryman of ours. The Single Market is a means, a tool that has and can continue to be a driver for growth and prosperity on a continental scale. We can see it as an engine for growth but an engine cannot run without fuel or be expected to fuel itself. It can tap into and enhance the effects of whatever stimulus we inject into our economies but it will not be a source of stimulus in or by itself. If we keep suffocating the economic environment with hasty fiscal consolidation, we cannot expect the Single Market to square the circle for us.

I thank members for their attention and patience. The internal market cuts across EU borders and policy dimensions and many other topics could have been addressed, other than those I believe to be most important at present. I am happy to be here to answer any questions.

I am delighted to see Senator David Norris. I did not get a chance to give him a special mention.

I thank Ms Prendergast and welcome her to the Chamber. I bet when she was a Senator she never thought some day she would be sitting in the ministerial chair in the Seanad, but I say, "Well done."

As agreed, each spokesperson has five minutes, with a contribution from Sinn Féin of two minutes, following which Ms Prendergast will respond. Then there will be questions from other Senators. The first speaker is Senator Leyden who has five minutes.

First, I welcome Ms Prendergast back to the House. It is great to have her back in the House. She played an important role here and was an active Member.

I admire the fact that, as a trained midwife, she was extraordinarily kind to one of our Members, former Senator Lisa McDonald from Wexford, who at the time had difficulty getting pairs. It was not our Chief Whip who caused problems, but our numbers were tight. I appreciate the fact that Ms Prendergast was prepared to put aside the political because she was a trained midwife and understood the difficulties of a young pending mother in the Chamber.

On the Single European Act, strange as it may seem - I probably will not get much recognition for it and I had better mention it myself because nobody else will-----

Would we do that?

-----when I was appointed by the late Taoiseach, Mr. Charles J. Haughey, at my request, to the Department of Industry and Commerce with responsibility for trade and marketing, with then Minister, Mr. Des O'Malley, I was delegated full responsibility for international trade and the negotiations of the Single European Act. That may not be known to Ms Prendergast but it is a fact. At the time, the then Minister, Mr. Des O'Malley, was extremely generous and forthright in signing an order which gave me full authority to negotiate that. I refer to the period 1989 to 1992. In fact, in 1992 it came into being, and in the 1990s it was very active. I had tremendous backup in Europe from our permanent staff, the ambassador and the sectoral responsibilities. All of the Departments fed in through the Department with responsibility for trade and marketing, and they fed in on everything - education, health, energy, communications. That was the way it worked; there was one lead Department. The backup of our Civil Service in Europe is second to none. It is outstanding.

I compliment the current ambassador. As Ms Prendergast will be aware, I was in Brussels the week before last. I met her for a few minutes and she was busy at her work on the day concerned. The current ambassador has been most active on the agreement reached on the budget.

Ms Prendergast outlined her role comprehensively, and I am delighted she is in the trade area. On the Order of Business, I mentioned the significant speech by President Barack Obama last night in his State of the Union address to the Congress. It is one of the most significant statements on Europe I have heard made by an American president. He wants to create a transatlantic trade agreement between the 500 million people of the European Union and the 50 states of the United States. I raise this with Ms Prendergast as an MEP. I ask her, as an MEP representing Ireland, to make this a priority. There is a meeting on Thursday, as far as I can recall. With Ireland's Presidency of the European Council, the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Gilmore, now have an opportunity of leading the negotiations. These will take time. It is a complex situation, but there are enormous opportunities. I remember being a trade Minister representing Musgrave in Cork and other companies exporting to the United States of America. There are different barriers and conditions of trade in relation to sales to the United States of America, but if those were lifted and there was a transatlantic free trade area between the United States of America and Europe, it would have enormous potential for job creation and job retention, particularly because of our links with the United States of America, such as our 40 million diaspora and The Gathering this year. I was delighted when I heard President Obama's speech. It is a big step forward. It also leads in to the question of emigration and the rights of the Irish in the United States of America. That question certainly will be part and parcel of negotiations.

It is appropriate that Ms Prendergast is here today because she is a member of the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection. I think she is the only representative from Ireland in the area of trade and the Internal Market. It is tremendous that she can use her influence as an MEP. If she makes that to which I have referred a target until 2014, it will be a substantial achievement, and I mean that sincerely. When President Obama spoke in that regard, I felt it was one of the most important statements and the biggest opportunities that Ireland and Europe will get to compete with countries such as China and India. I thank Ms Prendergast and wish her well in the future.

I join in the welcome to Ms Prendergast. I have not had the pleasure of meeting her previously but I have heard a great deal about her and her contributions to the Seanad during the years. I wish her well in her important role in Europe and on when she next goes to the electorate in 2014.

Much has been mentioned about the Single Market by Ms Prendergast. It is probably one of the most significant developments in Europe over the past number of decades. An example of the important statistics concerned is that the Single Market was originally opened to 345 million people in 1992 and it is now open to 500 million. The trade between EU countries has increased, from €800 billion in 1992 to €2.54 trillion today. One can imagine the enormous opportunities that opens up for trade. Some 20 million SMEs are operating within the Single Market. From an original 12 countries, there are now 27, and this will increase to 28 when Croatia joins.

Obviously, there is the free movement of citizens. On the benefits Ireland has achieved, Ms Prendergast brought it down to our everyday lives in that it is easier to travel for holiday, work and study within the EU. There is the free movement of goods. Delivery times and cost of transport, despite all we hear, have decreased. Obviously, the reduction of bureaucracy and paperwork makes it easy to do business. The Single European Act of 1987 gave a major boast to Ireland's economy when we were on the brink of economic disaster. Our only hope was to enhance our attractiveness as a low-cost manufacturing base inviting foreign investment and boosting local employment. We benefited a great deal at that particular time.

The completion of the Single Market is a work in progress and is a central element of the growth agenda to address the current economic crisis. In October 2012, the European Commission adopted the Single Market Act II, putting forward 12 key actions for rapid adoption by the EU institutions. These are concentrated on four main drivers for growth - employment and confidence: integrated networks, cross-border mobility of citizens and business, the digital economy, and actions that reinforce cohesion and consumer benefits.

A major survey produced by the European Commission highlighted 20 main concerns of citizens within the EU, and Ms Prendergast referred to at least one or two of them. One of them is the cumbersome social security procedures that discourage citizens' mobility. Many moving from one EU country to another find it difficult to understand and make use of social security rights such as family allowances, unemployment benefits and social security. That is certainly one.

Citizens who receive health care abroad are often frustrated when they receive the bill. They find that if they have the European health insurance card, it gives them the same rights to health care and insurance throughout Europe as they enjoy at home. However, the reality is that the card gives the right to be treated as a local resident for unplanned and necessary health care during a temporary stay abroad. Many citizens moving around Europe are surprised, therefore, when they are asked to pay upfront for treatment abroad if they need not do the same at home. That is an area of concern for citizens.

Another concern is that professionals have difficulties getting their qualifications recognised in another member state. Another is tax barriers for cross-border workers and employers. Cross-border workers who have to deal with the tax authorities of more than one country may find it difficult to attain comprehensive information on their tax status and tax liabilities. These are issues that have yet to be addressed.

We will have a satisfactory working Single Market only when many of the issues of concern to citizens are addressed throughout the EU. I wish Ms Prendergast continued success and we look forward to having her here again.

Like everybody else I welcome Ms Prendergast back to the Seanad where she played a very active part over a number of years. It is great to see her facing us rather than with her back to me as it used to be.

I had the duty of being president of EuroCommerce for three years and vice president for another three years. EuroCommerce represents the 6 million shops in Europe, a sector which employs the very large number of people, 31 million. I found a constant battle between those who wanted more European control and those who believed in subsidiarity. Subsidiarity states we pass laws as close to the citizen as we can, but it is a continuous battle to avoid going the other way. To give an example, the late payments directive comes into operation next month and states public bodies should pay within 30 days but no later than 60 days. I believe the Irish are the worst in Europe in this regard so this will mean 60 days. Will Ms Prendergast comment on this? Where does it come from? How do we manage to do something about it?

With regard to the cost of EU legislation on small and medium enterprises in particular, as somebody who has been in business I would love to see more research done on the cost of each piece of legislation before it is implemented. Will Ms Prendergast comment on whether she believes an audit to find the cost of European Union legislation for businesses, particularly small and medium enterprises, would be a good idea? I believe it is a big problem.

Recently Angela Merkel stated the European Commission will eventually become a government, the Council of member states will become an upper chamber and the European Parliament will be more powerful, but fixing the eurozone problem is more urgent for now. She is clearly a federalist and this is what she wants to see. She states this is our objective and what we plan to do, but we will not do it just yet because we have other things to do. What are Ms Prendergast's view on this? How does she think the European Parliament would feel about it? Are we looking for more power to go to Europe? Are we looking for a united states of Europe in the years ahead? How does Ms Prendergast feel about this and how does she believe others feel about it?

On Monday the European Commission stated the horsemeat scandal is a labelling problem and does not represent a health issue. I do not agree. There seems to be a big problem with the way Europe labels products. In 2013, directives will be introduced in this regard which will decide on crucial rules on the labelling of food products. I would not like to see best before dates being encouraged. In my business we used to sell potatoes and the potato supplier stated if one wanted new potatoes to taste well one should eat them within three days of being picked. This meant a best before date of three days for these potatoes. Many people do not understand that best before has to do with taste and they throw away products. We have a huge food wastage problem and we can do something about it at a European level to give a direction elsewhere.

Last week the European Parliament voted on a draft law which stated patients should have faster access to cheaper generic drugs. We are all happy to do this, but I am not sure where we go in this area. Only 4% of European hospitals allow people direct access to their medical records. This could come from Europe; whatever about as a directive, an example could be set with regard to access for patients to their medical records online. This would be a very useful step.

If we discuss value for money and serving customers, we should also discuss what happens at EU level. There is austerity throughout Europe but Brussels is still dominated by thousands of highly paid mandarins. The German newspaper Die Welt stated this month that thousands of senior EU officials who earn a basic salary of more than €18,000 a month earn more than Angela Merkel, who earns approximately €16,000 a month. A group of net contributors to the EU, including Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, want deeper cuts in the pay of European Union officials to fit in with national austerity programmes. The President of the European Parliament stated last year he asked member states to disclose how much they pay their Brussels-based diplomats, to compare this with EU staff. He received a partial reply which he described as a series of disaggregated data. Staff at the Council and European Parliament recently went on strike in spite of their massive salaries and perks. Does Ms Prendergast agree with her fellow workers at the European Parliament going on strike, particularly given the massive amount of austerity at home? A number of EU officials have received several pay rises in recent years. At a time when practically every country in Europe is cutting back, the EU itself is expanding.

Kenneth Cork was a leading liquidator and wrote that he found businesses which got into trouble often had one thing in common, namely, they built a new head office, and it was a guarantee if a fountain was built in the foyer of that new head office. Will Ms Prendergast remind us whether the lovely new head office which the European Parliament has in Brussels has a fountain in the foyer? I cannot remember.

It is a real pleasure for me to welcome Ms Prendergast to the House. Ms Prendergast and I served together on the Labour Party seats in opposition for some years and it was always a pleasure to work with her. Senator Leyden already referred to her professional training as a midwife. When I was pregnant and sitting here in the Chamber it was an immense relief to know a trained midwife was sitting beside me should anything have happened prematurely.

It is a pleasure to have Ms Prendergast here in her capacity as an MEP. She is doing a huge amount of work and her comments on the Internal Market struck me, particularly her comment that even the most ardent British Eurosceptics do not dispute or challenge the existence of the Internal Market. This surely shows how embedded it has become in European culture.

Following on the very practical issues about the European Parliament which Senator Quinn discussed, and I am trying to recall whether there is a fountain in the foyer in the building, he made a good point on the overblown status symbols of major corporations and institutions. The House has been addressed by a number of MEPs and the difference in their type of work and that of a national parliamentarian is striking. Ms Prendergast has long experience of being a Member of the Seanad. Is the work of the European Parliament at a completely different level? Mr. Gay Mitchell referred to a parliamentary committee having to sift through 1,000 proposed amendments to a particular directive. This illustrated the highly complex and technical nature of much of the law-making at EU level and how difficult it is therefore to form a connection with citizens in member states such as Ireland. I would like to hear Ms Prendergast's take on this and whether she believes there is a way to make more of a connection between citizens and the European Parliament, or to simplify or make more accessible to people the procedures which operate in the European Parliament.

We are all conscious that much of the European Parliament's work is done through committees. Ms Prendergast stated she is the only Irish member of the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection. She also serves on a number of other committees including the Committee on Petitions and the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. Do the Committees on Agriculture and Rural Development and Internal Marketing and Consumer Protection work on food safety, which is an aspect of consumer protection, given the enormous issue which has presented at EU level through the horsemeat scandal?

Of course, that has given rise to a whole range of jokes but is a serious matter. It is clearly now a matter that is of concern at EU level. It was the Irish food safety authorities that blew the whistle but now we have seen the implications across the EU. What can the committee do about the issue?

I know that the Ms Prendergast is particularly interested in the agricultural issue. Recently Ms Mairead McGuinness, MEP, was here and we debated the issue along with CAP and CAP reform. Ms Prendergast has pointed out that CAP reform must have a constructive impact on the Irish agricultural sector and rural way of life. I know that there is real concern among those working in agriculture, especially among farming families, about the impact of CAP reforms here. Does Ms Prendergast think they will have a constructive impact? Is there work that we can do here to ensure that happens?

Ms Prendergast also highlighted the rights of workers, the need to strengthen and protect workers' rights at EU level and to prevent a race to the bottom. I shall mention her work with Waterford Crystal in particular which is something that is close to my heart and family. She supported the campaign to have Waterford crystal made only in Waterford and to bring back Waterford Crystal jobs that were sadly lost in 2009. I have visited its showroom a number of times but most recently last summer. I was struck by the real ambition of its workers. The people who have been laid off from Waterford Crystal are highly skilled craftspeople. They have a great ambition to start taking on apprentices again and to grow its manufacturing business which is very small. Is there any help or assistance available at EU level that the workers in the crystal showroom can avail of? The showroom has become a major tourist attraction and has improved Waterford city centre. It has been a wonderful initiative by the Waterford City Council and the workers in the crystal company.

Ms Prendergast has also talked about connecting Munster to the EU. She is the first Munster MEP that we have had in the Chamber which is welcome. She pointed out the need to ensure the people of Munster have a strong voice in Europe. That is of interest because we have often overlooked, because of Ireland being so small, the need to ensure regional representation at EU level. What are Ms Prendergast's thoughts on regional representation? Is there a more direct way to connect the regions? Will it ensure citizens have a better connection with the EU? I know that I am running short on time.

That goes for both of us. I wanted to address the issue of women's right, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender or LGBT rights, and the equality agenda generally at EU level. A number of progressive MEPs in the social democrat and socialist groups are gravely concerned about the drawing back of the equality agenda and the lack of progression and initiatives on furthering equality at EU level. The Irish Labour Party MEPs are 100% female - Ms Prendergast, Ms Costello and Ms Childers - but that must be unusual. Even so we see a better gender representation in the European Parliament. Is there anything more that can be done about it at EU level?

I welcome the chair of Trinity Labour and her colleagues who are here to listen to Ms Prendergast speak. Senator Cummins, the Leader of the Seanad, had to go to a meeting. He asked me to convey his best wishes to the Ms Prendergast and to say how welcome she is here.

I call on Senator van Turnhout and she has five minutes.

I thank the Acting Chairman for facilitating me and allowing me to speak. I apologise that I had to leave the Chamber briefly because I had to attend the internal meeting that also detained Senator Cummins. However, I was present for Ms Prendergast's intervention at the beginning. I welcome her.

I still feel relatively new here but the issues that I wish to mention today relate to the Single Market and the multi-annual financial framework. I want to question her specifically on those issues given her work on the Internal Market and her opening comments. As we know 2012 represented the 20th anniversary of the European Single Market. The development of the Single Market is a key priority and it is a key priority for the Irish Presidency. However, we are all very aware that it remains incomplete and Ms Prendergast mentioned where it is incomplete in her intervention. During the Single Market week held in October 2012 there was an opportunity for the private sector and citizens to engage, on a personal level, in the European policy area. I shall mention four of the areas that were raised then. Perhaps Ms Prendergast can enlighten us and share her opinions on the concerns raised. First, access to the market of a host country can be restricted by national certification or regulations that do not exist to the same extent in the home country. For me that goes against the principle of a Single Market and single area.

Second, cross-border procurement can be a problem. This is the age of electronic and online technology but many procurement procedures require a hard copy to be delivered rather than use electronic means.

Third, e-commerce is very popular at national level but it is more difficult at international level. We are very aware of the different regulations for areas such as consumer protection and data privacy and that makes things difficult. The playing field is uneven or unequal when it comes to e-commerce.

The fourth area related to European start-ups and that surprised me. On average, European start-ups are only entitled to half the amount of venture funding of their US counterparts. Is there a way to redress that imbalance? We must ensure that we have an even playing field between the US and the EU if we want to encourage start-ups. Ireland is extremely interested in promoting entrepreneurship.

Many of these issues will be addressed by the Single Market Act which is in its final stages of implementation. It always seems to be problematic to reach a completed option. The adoption of the Act should be expedited because it is a job-creating opportunity for Ireland, the Irish Presidency and the EU. I would welcome Ms Prendergast's opinion on the Act.

As Ms Prendergast has informed us, the Commission recently introduced the Single Market Act II. To what extent does the second Act address the issues that were identified by the consultations, the four areas that I repeated here, during the Single Market week? To what extent does it fill the gaps left by the first Act? I would appreciate anything she has to share with us on that matter.

Last week was an interesting, exciting and challenging week for us all, both personally and stamina wise. For me the negotiations that took place in Brussels on the multi-annual financial framework at the European Council summit were extremely important and I am very aware of the Parliament's role. I am also very aware that Ms Prendergast has previously stated that the budget must do more to stimulate growth in the European economy. I know that the Parliament will be looking at the multi-annual financial framework and the proposals on the budget. I want Ms Prendergast to tell us, as a preliminary opinion, whether she supports the proposals by the European Council. Does she think they go far enough? I thank the Acting Chairman and Ms Prendergast.

That concludes contributions by the spokespersons and I call on Ms Prendergast to respond.

Ms Phil Prendergast

Some of the questions are comprehensive and rather than be very specific and risk glossing over important questions, I shall respond to each Senator individually. I shall read the transcript from today's proceedings and give the Senators specific answers.

I thank Senator Leyden for his comments. A few weeks ago I was flying in one direction and he was going to another meeting in the European Parliament and it was nice to see him. As he saw from that day, there are over 7,000 people working in the building that I work in. As Senators can imagine I can only briefly go into the costs of running such an institution.

We have the dichotomy of two seats. We have the official seat in Strasbourg where we must all decamp to at great cost once a month and we have the general office in Brussels. Everybody shares the view that it is a shocking waste of money having a seat in two countries and having to return home to cater to constituencies which can make work difficult.

As for Senator Leyden's remarks on the transatlantic trade agreement when he himself held ministerial office, he is aware that at times, systems and processes can move very slowly. Since becoming a Member of the European Parliament, I have found there are frequent opportunities in which there are assessments and reassessments of what its Members are actually doing. I sat in this Chamber when the whole area of discussion on its very future, existence, role and functions came under scrutiny, as it continues to be. Having sat here in this Chamber and now being a Member of the European Parliament, I believe there is a real opportunity for a joint process in respect of the impact in countries. Senator van Turnhout raised this point in a small way about, for instance, how legislation can be transposed across borders and on how we can work and have recognition of qualifications. I touched on that issue with regard to the professional qualifications directive. There is a huge amount going on and each MEP has his or her own committees. Incidentally, there are 12 of us from the Republic and three more from the North, although the indications are that this number is soon to be reduced to 11 Members for the Republic. In this context, it is not known whether there will be a national consistency or what division will be made on the basis of the assessment of needs. However, it looks as though Ireland might lose a seat.

Each Member sits on committees and those committees sometimes cross over, as they do in Ireland. For instance, on the issue of food labelling, which is of huge importance, the issue concerning the horsemeat will be much bigger then simply being an issue of labelling, mislabelling or sourcing. Consideration must be given to processing, to how our food is getting from farm to fork and to what happens in between. The scrutiny will be very wide and I am proud, as an MEP representing Munster and Ireland, that we can honestly claim we were not afraid to state we had found irregularities. It now appears as though it is more than irregularities and I refer to the ridiculous statement that it was DNA in the air, which cantered down and 29% of which happened to leap into one burger If Members will pardon the pun, I wonder what are the odds of that happening. While we have opened a can of worms, we must get to the nub of it and find out where we are going in that regard.

In response to Senator Quinn, I am very respectful of his wealth of experience and the fact he was president of EuroCommerce. I always have had huge respect for the Senator's work. I can recall that back in 1994, when I was first elected as a councillor, Senator Quinn opened a branch of his supermarket chain in Clonmel that very month. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the opening because I was on holidays. I might add it is the only holiday I have had since then, but I reiterate my huge respect for the Senator. In addition, I have been watching the Senator on television and have seen how he has been turning businesses around with his wealth of experience and how he has transposed this to effect real changes for and differences to people. The Senator had some specific questions but in respect of giving him specific and proper answers, I could only gloss over them in this Chamber. Consequently, each of his questions will be addressed in person to him in respect of the present position and status. I refer to giving the Senator a proper answer that is more comprehensive than I could possibly touch on at present.

Senator Mullins's level of briefing on his questions shows that I have been googled. I feel as though I have been googled since he knew I was coming here. I must acknowledge this level of questioning is what I had expected. As for putting forward what we do in the European Parliament and trying to get a composite of the range of work done by Members of the European Parliament, it is very difficult to give an overview of it all and sometimes one must concentrate on just a few items. In respect of the professional qualification directive, how it was enacted and what amendments we needed to put forward, because I worked in the profession as a midwife - in which capacity I was delighted to be a source of comfort to Senator Bacik - for me there was difficulty with regard to Germany seeking a period of ten years, whereas we sought a 12-year period. This was because our nurses have a status, recognition and standard we do not wish to be diluted on foot of the introduction of a professional qualification directive. Consequently, one must be very careful and always cognisant of the law of unintended consequences or the outcome of unintended consequences whereby something one has and which is held up as being a model of what is good, right and proper does not become less than that in the general sense when we seek to have it recognised across all borders. I have no fear of making the point that Irish nurses and the training thereof is recognised worldwide and I would not like to see any dilution in this regard.

In response to Senator Quinn, there is no fountain in the European Parliament foyer that I have ever seen. In respect of salaries and payments, the Senator is aware that occasionally, one gets flavours of some outlandish and outrageous payments. To give a general commentary, one must sometimes question the reasoning of those who run countries and systems. I must question, for instance, the reason that someone who potentially earns more than €100,000 or €200,000 would make a blanket statement stating that all graduate nurses should start working for 20% less from next Monday. That would be my particular bugbear and I have a difficulty about that. The people who work in Europe have a very hard and difficult job and for an MEP to work efficiently and effectively within their own committees, he or she must have staff who are highly capable, highly qualified and highly dependable in terms of preparing briefs, knowing what is the legislation, knowing procedure and process, as well as knowing when to intervene. I cannot over-emphasise the basis for good relations Members have with the secretariat, the committees and their own staff. In this context, I am accompanied today by Mr. Mario De Sa, who came from Brussels. I would like to express my thanks to Mario and think everyone should have a Mario, as they would be so much better off.

Ms Phil Prendergast

No, the Senator is not getting him.

Ms Phil Prendergast

Yes, a super Mario is what we have and dear Mario now is on the record of the Seanad. I am conscious of the time and acknowledge I have not answered highly specific questions. However, if I can give a point of clarification to anyone, because many points were made by the contributors, I would be happy to do so.

I will revert to the question of generic drugs, which is an extremely important issue throughout my side of the country because a huge number of pharmaceutical industries are located in that region. On generic drugs, I believe there has been a cultural change in respect of how people now get their medicines and in knowing what the medication contains, as well as knowing there are cheaper alternatives. At the same time, one must take cognisance of protecting patents on a drug that would make it very profitable for the company in question. Senator Quinn also mentioned access to medical records. It already happens that all pregnant women have their records. Generally speaking, they bring their records with them and keep them with them. This is because it was thought that if a baby decides to come when one is in Roscommon, even though one is booked into a hospital elsewhere, it would be more important and relevant to have one's notes with one. However, I always am a little surprised because I have never yet seen women lose the power to speak, even if they are in labour or out of it or any other party. Another question was asked in respect of cross-border procurement and again, there is an issue about procedures and changes that happen. Sometimes a lag phase occurs between a change or directive being initiated and the Civil Service aspect of it, in respect of changing its rules, regulations and ways of doing things. Sometimes, as a result, we are a bit slower than we should be and this can create its own difficulties. However, we now are in a time of great change and consequently, the idea that this is the way in which one does things and that they are only done in that fashion must change and I believe is changing.

I have enjoyed appearing in the Chamber today-----

You are not finished yet, as there will be further questions.

Ms Phil Prendergast

I will take them but I merely am stating formally how much I have enjoyed being here today. It is a great opportunity to return to a Chamber like this and to give an overview of what it is the Members of the European Parliament are doing. I know that my other colleagues who have not yet been here will provide Members with a different viewpoint. Members may be wondering whether these people are doing the same job.

We are not doing the same job. Everyone does a different job depending on the committee of which he or she is a member. I am happy to take more questions.

Senator Ó Clochartaigh missed out on his spokesperson's two minutes so I will allow him two minutes to address Ms Prendergast. All other Senators will have one minute for questions.

Bhí mé ag éisteacht san oifig. I was listening very intently to Ms Prendergast in the office. Cuirim fáilte roimh an Fheisire de Pharlaimint na hEorpa. Is breá an rud duine dá leithéid a bheith anseo le labhairt linn.

It is somewhat ironic that Ms Prendergast is speaking to us today as a midwife at the same time as we have had a protest of midwives in the Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation, INMO, and the Psychiatric Nurses Association, PNA, outside Leinster House. It is a serious issue. I am pleased she alluded to the fact that she takes issue with what is going on. I am interested in hearing her views on the changes being introduced which appear to be draconian. Yesterday, ten new graduate contracts were terminated in Kerry General Hospital. Management is attempting to force graduates to become re-employed under the terms and conditions of the new contract. A war of attrition is going on between the Department and the INMO and student nurses.

The situation is appalling. I wonder whether it contravenes EU directives. Ms Prendergast indicated that we have the world’s best trained nurses. The students who spoke to us outside said they have no choice but to leave as they cannot afford to work for the money being offered to them. No new jobs are available. The students said it is being taken for granted that they would take a pay cut and work alongside other health professionals who might not have the same responsibilities but who would be paid more than them. I would welcome additional comments from Ms Prendergast on the issue. It is a European issue that goes to the heart of what is supposed to be the European model of equality and fairness.

Certain statements from the EU that have been made on youth unemployment have almost diverted attention from the situation. The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Eurofound, puts the overall EU cost of not integrating young people into the labour market at €150 billion per year. However, rather than investing in young people, the EU prefers to throw billions of euro at failed and failing banks. Does Ms Prendergast agree that it is just rhetoric we hear from the European Parliament and Commission on youth unemployment or is real action taking place on the issue?

In her opening remarks Ms Prendergast referred to the whistleblower's Bill. I note that we have had draft heads of legislation in this country also. It is important that such legislation would be introduced so that people could speak out and know they would be protected. Is Ms Prendergast aware of the draft heads of the Bill that are being prepared in this country and whether the Bill is in line with what is being considered in Europe because they should be in harmony?

What do Ms Prendergast's European colleagues think of the deal done on the promissory notes? Do they think we are a soft touch and that we have accepted a deal that does not involve a write-down on the bank debt, which means we will be paying interest twice a year at 3% and that we are carrying a much heavier burden than the rest of our European counterparts?

Ms Prendergast is most welcome. I have served in the European Parliament and on the Internal Market committee. From her experience of working in Europe, what changes would Ms Prendergast like to be introduced in order to get information across on what is happening in Europe? I have been a strong advocate for the use of the Seanad. I proposed that two days a month would be set aside to deal with EU affairs.

Ms Prendergast referred to the free movement of people and services. I wish to raise medical services and recognition of qualification. One of the problems that has arisen in this country relates to cosmetic surgery. People come from abroad to provide the service but do not have adequate insurance. I published a Bill prior to Christmas which I hope to introduce in the Seanad next Wednesday requiring all medical practitioners to have insurance. It is great to have free movement of people but that has implications for individual states.

The third issue I wish to raise relates to patents. I was nominated by the patent lawyers association, which I did not know existed until I began to seek a nomination for the Seanad. The European Patents Office is going to be moved to the UK. There is concern that if the patents office for the entire European Union is based in the UK then new research facilities for medical devices and other developments will tend to locate in the same place. Given that the UK is talking about having a referendum to withdraw from the EU, perhaps it is time to review the decision and reverse it? Ms Prendergast might not be able to give me a response on the issue today but the matter must be examined. If the UK is talking about leaving the EU why should we transfer an entire office for the registration of EU patents to the UK?

I join in the welcome to Ms Prendergast. Our terms did not overlap but she was evidently an extremely popular Member of the House. I thank her for her address.

I am concerned about the loss of an MEP to this country. Ms Prendergast said it has been suggested that this country would have only one constituency. That would cause concern as we have a problem with a democratic deficit in that this House might be abolished, there will be eight fewer Deputies and many local authorities are scheduled for abolition. Perhaps there is another way. Senator Bacik indicated that localities should have representatives which might not happen in the event of having one national constituency. I am interested in hearing a response to the issue.

President Obama is most interested in free trade between the United States and the EU. There is a trade meeting in Dublin in April as part of Ireland’s Presidency. What would Ms Prendergast put on the agenda for the meeting?

The other concern relates to the fact that the troika and the IMF have referred to the high cost of sheltered sector services in this country. Does Ms Prendergast’s work in the services Single Market give us some hope in that regard? I again welcome Ms Prendergast.

Three Members have still to pose questions. Does Ms Prendergast wish to respond individually or will we take questions from the remaining speakers?

Ms Phil Prendergast

I will respond to the questions posed. Otherwise, I will be less than comprehensive. I am conscious having been a Member of the House that even though at times it might seem that people are not listening I am aware that people have to attend committees. I am also extremely aware that the committees sit while the Seanad is sitting. I do not see the absence of Members as disrespectful.

I have made my views clear on the INMO. I do not agree with the termination of contracts. First, it is my considered opinion, having served on the national executive of the Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation, having worked as a midwife for 23 years, and worked in front-line services, that the jobs graduates are filling are not new. Graduates are currently filling the positions and they are being asked to terminate contracts and return to the positions on 20% less pay. I have a fundamental problem with that. I do not agree that this is the correct way to treat nurses.

Senator Ó Clochartaigh inquired about youth unemployment. A total of 5.7 million young people are currently unemployed in Europe. Another 1.5 million work in precarious jobs. One in five of those aged between 15 and 24 years who are in the labour market are without a job. Youth unemployment rates in Spain and Greece are more than 50%. In this country, youth unemployment is 32% or 61,000 young people. Members will agree those are fairly astounding statistics. In 2005 the European Council outlined employment policy guidelines, including that in the case of young people, every unemployed person would be offered a new start before reaching six months of unemployment. Subsequently, upon review, the period was reduced to four months. By 2010 the measure had not been implemented across the EU. Therein lies the difficulty. One can come up with great ideas but achieving the reality is difficult. A youth guarantee is now in effect. That is a positive step. Of course, we need investment to avoid problems because a young unemployed person does not have the basis of experience.

There is a spiral that is almost a self-fulfilling prophecy, as it leads to poor chances and poor outcomes for them. There are aspirational issues such as reducing early school leaving, making sure there are no skill mismatches and that courses fit a person's educational standards. There have been changes in education where courses are based on continuous assessment rather than by exams in a block at the end of the year.

The overwhelming response on the promissory note issue is positive. It is seen as positive for Ireland and is certainly better than what we had. It is a matter for discussion how we communicate that to our citizens and across Europe. It would be nice to take those parts we like and not take the parts we do not like but sometimes we must buy the entire package when we do not like all of its contents.

I feel humbled talking to Senator Colm Burke, someone who has served in the European Parliament and on the committee of which I am a member. We see the argument from both sides about how this Chamber could be given over even twice a month to European affairs. As one of the most frequent attenders at the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs, I was devastated when it was changed to a Tuesday because everyone knows that no matter what an MEP is doing, if he or she is not in Brussels on a Tuesday, except for during the constituency week, he or she is not doing his or her job. To go on Tuesday means missing two days in effect. For us a Thursday is a better day and I was delighted to see it has been moved back to Thursday on a temporary basis, although it has been on a week where I have had votes, and once a month I go to the plenary session in Strasbourg, which MEPs cannot miss. There are also group weeks, meeting weeks, committee weeks and the Strasbourg week for plenary session, when we all vote on legislation that has been going through the system. As a Senator, I was unaware of how things worked in Europe for MEPs so we could all do with some education on people's roles. It is easy to slag off someone when we do not know what a person is doing in a particular place. This system works.

The recognition of qualifications and insurance were mentioned. I agree that a doctor who comes to this country to practise cosmetic surgery should have to demonstrate his or her competence in order that those availing of his or her services can be confident in his or her ability. The qualifications must be verified because anything can be made to look real on paper. The professional qualifications directive allows for a process where if someone wanted to locate to another country having demonstrated a need for his speciality, there would be a procedure in place to ensure that doctor can safely practice.

The idea of a British referendum on leaving the European Union was mentioned. The carry-on of the MEPs in the European Parliament is a bit sad. They continuously heckle and shout. They only go there to do that. They do not attend any committees and therefore do not do any work. That is a difficulty where someone is making a political point and not prepared to engage with the process. It is not possible to be a Senator and not be involved in the work processes of the Seanad. Equally, a person cannot be an MEP and not have the workload that goes with committees and those who are part of the team.

Any decision down the line about Britain staying within the EU gives a welcome opportunity for the entire European project to be brought into the light because it gives us an opportunity to put a focus on it. We can then see what is going on because we get both sides of the argument. It gives us the opportunity to show what MEPs do and the importance of being part of the European Union and the Single Market.

Senator Barrett asked about the loss of an MEP. It has been proposed but we do not know yet if it will happen, although it appears certain. There might not be a national constituency because that would create difficulties for elections. We will observe this with interest and will try to maintain our representation in Europe. We tend to wear the green jersey in Brussels; we are parochial. Senators serve the country and although we try to do that, we also try to look after our own areas. It is important we have the opportunity to represent people in the way they want.

I welcome Ms Prendergast back to her old stomping ground. Ms Prendergast has talked about cyberbullying and we have discussed it in the Seanad on many occasions. We were delighted to receive the report of the working group on cyberbullying. Has there been any response from Facebook about the privacy issues that were raised? Are we any clearer about the European Union's campaign being better directed? Often when we hear of a fund having millions of euro available, we wonder how to get the money to the right place so schoolchildren in Ireland, France, Spain and Germany will benefit. I am not clear how it works or how the fund is being encouraged to target that money.

I agree with Senator Colm Burke about bringing Europe closer to all of us. I would welcome the initiative that is being rolled out in libraries in Sligo which will allow people to go into their local library, pick up the telephone and talk to someone in Brussels and ask a question about an issue they are interested in within the workings of the Union. I am sure it will take time for the programme to start but it is a great initiative. I share Senator Burke's view that we should discuss European legislation in this House. What are Ms Prendergast's views on the practicality of that? Could it be done on a two days a month basis? Can she understand why some people here might resist that or is simply that old habits die hard?

Online gambling is No. 6 on the agenda for the meeting on 20 February of the European Parliament's Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee. I asked Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, when he appeared before the Seanad about the potential for excessive gambling online and what procedures are in place to protect vulnerable people. Mr. Mitchell is not a member of the committee, however. An ordinary post office worker is in jail because he gambled millions of euro online that did not belong to him. Few websites have a facility in place to ensure social responsibility. Perhaps the European Union could take action in this matter.

I am delighted Ms Prendergast is before the House because she and I soldiered together in a previous Seanad. Attending a recent EU meeting in my role as a member of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs, I learned that the digital single market is not making as much progress as it should. If we were to get our act together in this area, we could increase gross domestic product, GDP, by 2%, which would have a major impact on the economy and level of unemployment. I ask Ms Prendergast to provide a brief report on Ireland's progress in meeting the directive on the EU digital Single Market, for example, in the area of e-signatures and so forth.

I am greatly concerned about the youth guarantee scheme. Addressing the Seanad, Professor Christopher Pissarides stated the scheme did not offer value for money as it would provide very little for young people who are out of work. While the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, may have good intentions, the scheme could have a poor return and result in billions of euro being poured down the drain. Will Members of the European Parliament have an open mind on the scheme? We need to spend the national funds being committed to it in a manner that achieves the best return.

Anything less than an internship of six to nine months is too little, whereas I understand it is planned that the youth guarantee scheme will offer young people internships of only three to four months. Those who participate will be required to leave the scheme just as they are becoming familiar with the job or training post. The scheme is rubbish. Let us do the right thing and spend the money well. While I accept that Ms Prendergast cannot answer every question, I ask her to outline other ways in which money could be spent to help young people who are unemployed. We should not put all our eggs in one basket.

On a point of order, is the session scheduled to continue until 1.45 p.m.?

It will conclude when we finish.

In that case, there is no major rush.

The time was specified on the Order of Business.

How much time do I have?

The Senator has one minute. If I show latitude to him, previous speakers who stuck to the allocated times will be upset.

I was merely seeking clarification. I welcome Ms Prendergast, MEP, and am grateful she chose to address the important issue of the Single Market. For too long, and especially in recent years, policy has tended to focus on macroeconomic strategy and banking stability. I am grateful, therefore, that Ms Prendergast has returned the focus to people and raised the requirement to have a more people-centred strategy.

I am grievously concerned about the level of youth unemployment in Europe. We ignore this problem at our peril. There is little point in having well trained and educated young people who are willing to make a valuable contribution to society, the economy and our culture and community, if they are languishing on the dole queues. The level of youth unemployment in Spain, at 50%, has created a tinderbox that is waiting to explode. Youth unemployment is also a serous problem in this country. The current position whereby emigration serves as a safety valve is unsatisfactory. I have friends in Galicia in northern Spain, where people traditionally had to emigrate to Argentina. I do not know for how much longer Europe, notably Ireland, can continue to rely on emigration as an economic strategy for relieving the pressure on youth unemployment. I urge Ms Prendergast to ensure the European youth guarantee scheme for young people who are unemployed does not become an aspiration or a token gesture. Given the many billions of euro being sanctioned in the current budgetary round under the Irish Presidency, substantial funds must be allocated for the purpose of making a robust challenge to youth unemployment.

Ms Phil Prendergast

I thank Senator Susan O'Keeffe for her questions. We cannot overstate the importance of recent high profile cases involving cyberbullying. I used European safer Internet day on 5 February to call for a co-ordinated EU programme to tackle cyberbullying and an increase in funding for the European Union safer Internet programme, for which €55 million was provided between 2008 and 2013. Cyberbullying is a European problem which requires a European solution. Children across Europe are experiencing bullying online and new, more sophisticated ways of bullying are being found, for example, through Facebook, Twitter, Reddit and various other means at the disposal of young people, including some we adults do not know about.

There is no question that we need a safer online environment for young people. The European Parliament is sometimes accused of being a talking shop. We have to put our money where our mouth is. Senator Healy Eames and I are involved in the sexual health programme in schools. In the course of talks to schoolchildren we touch on issues such as self-esteem, sexuality and bullying. For a person looking on, bullying may be so subtle that it does not appear to be bullying. Anything that causes the fracturing of a person's self-esteem can have long-term, devastating consequences. I take on board Senator O'Keeffe's comments on the issue.

Senator Cáit Keane referred to online gambling, an issue about which I am very worried. Social responsibility is needed in this regard because the system can be abused. We have had high profile cases involving individuals who had access to funds that did not belong to them. They were able to gamble these moneys and hide their gambling by means of clever accounting. This would not be the first time people have been able to hide what they were doing using clever accounting or by cooking the books. Online gambling is a cause of great concern. Procedures should be in place to flag when a certain amount of money has been spent. People sometimes enter what is almost a trance-like state as they become lost in the attractiveness of what is presented to them online. The comfort of their physical environment, as they sit in their armchair in front of their personal computer in their comfortable little world, can have devastating consequences for families and society. This is a societal problem that has become highly visible.

On the European youth guarantee scheme, a couple of weeks ago a young person expressed a view to me that the scheme would not have any effect on youth unemployment, especially in Ireland, and asked what policies, if any, would be introduced to curb youth unemployment.

The reason somebody so young would be so cynical is because we do not have great models to which we can point as having been successful. However, one must start somewhere. In trying to meet the needs of many, a good intention can be diluted by many other good intentions, to which sufficient resources are not given because of attempts to cover too many areas with too thin a veil. When we do this, inevitably things fall through the cracks.

The European Commission announcement in December of a youth unemployment package, previously known as the youth guarantee, was a positive sign of acknowledgement by the EU institutions of the extremely serious youth unemployment problem. As I stated, youth unemployment in Greece and Spain is estimated to be more than 50% and is 32% in Ireland. There are currently 51,000 young people in Ireland who are unemployed. The affects of unemployment on younger people are longer term because there is a cut-off point, in terms of age, at which employers are willing to give them a start as they may believe there is something wrong with a person because he or she has not worked previously. There is a need for a societal change in terms of how people who become long term unemployed are viewed.

Since I took up office, my colleagues and I in the Labour group of the European Parliament have been arguing for a focus on growth and employment needs in Ireland and Europe. What is required is a shift from the front loading of austerity measures to real investment. I agree with Senator Healy Eames that anything less than six or nine months participation in a scheme is unsatisfactory. The fact that people take part in such initiatives should be viewed as a positive and as a step at a time when we are in crisis. We are trying to do something about it. While currently a person can take up an internship for nine months, it may now be necessary to reduce this to six months. There is so much to do and doing even a small amount is better than doing nothing. We may need to adjust our viewpoints.

I agree that there is not enough money to do everything we want to do, that people are often frustrated because of this and end up doing something for the sake of it. During the course of the next seven years €6 billion will be spent on youth employment initiatives across Europe. That is not to be sniffed at. Ireland should get its share of that funding. We will make sure that people are aware of what is on offer and how it can be accessed and drawn down.

I thank Ms Prendergast for attending the Seanad today. I hope she is enjoying her work in Europe and wish her every success.

Sitting suspended at 1.15 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Barr
Roinn