Joan Burton
Ceist:5 Ms Burton asked the Minister for Finance the outcome of the recent informal meeting of EU Finance and Economics Ministers held in Punchestown; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13012/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraThursday, 6 May 2004
Ceisteanna (5)
Freagraí ó Béal (6 píosaí cainte)
The Council of Economics and Finance Ministers held an informal meeting on 3 April in Punchestown. Ministers were joined at the meeting by the central bank governors, Commission President Prodi, Commissioners Solbes, Bolkestein and Schreyer, President Trichet of the European Central Bank and President Maystadt of the European Investment Bank. As with all informal meetings, no formal decisions were taken at Punchestown.
With regard to EU financing in the period 2007 to 2013, President Prodi and Commissioner Schreyer elaborated on the Commission's recent communication on this subject. The meeting provided a valuable opportunity for a full exchange of views between Council members and with the Commission. Some member states believe the growth of the Union's budgetary spending should not exceed the growth of the Union's economy. Others could support a more rapid increase in the budget.
Ministers and governors discussed the current economic situation in the EU and the longer term strategies that will boost Europe's capacity to grow. They agreed that the economies of Europe should gather momentum over the course of 2004, helped by the global upturn and by the expected strengthening in domestic demand. Also discussed was the EU Presidency speech to be used at the IMF-World Bank spring meetings in Washington.
Ministers and governors considered financial market conditions and the progress made in relation to the integration of financial services in the EU. They noted that the financial services action plan had significantly enhanced the regulatory and supervisory framework for European financial markets.
Commissioner Bolkestein briefed Ministers and governors on the state of play on negotiations on the two outstanding international accounting standards, IAS 32 and IAS 39. Ministers also discussed the post of managing director of the International Monetary Fund. The Council had a productive meeting that made substantial progress on the important issues on its agenda.
As the Minister has reminded me, EU Ministers were discussing accounting and auditing standards. Did he have an opportunity to give the Ministers a copy of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the Punchestown pony club? That would have been a good point at which to begin a discussion of accounting and auditing standards. Did Ministers receive a special embossed copy of that report?
What does the Minister have to show for his stewardship during the Irish Presidency of the EU? When Deputy Quinn was Minister for Finance, at the end of the Irish Presidency the euro and other items on the EU agenda had been significantly reformed. What about the reform of the Stability and Growth Pact and what are the obstacles to such a reform? Is reform of the Stability and Growth Pact not in Ireland's direct interest, especially as we need so much capital spending on roads, public transport and other infrastructural projects? Why has the Minister not taken the opportunity to advance Ireland's interest in a reformed pact?
What has ECOFIN done under the Minister's stewardship to advance the Lisbon agenda? What did the Minister do with regard to the appointment to the IMF? A very conservative appointment was made. Is he not interested in a reform agenda in the Bretton Woods institutions, particularly with regard to the developing world?
What has the Minister got to show for the Presidency? We know about the pomp and circumstance — the Minister and Mrs. McCreevy looked very well in a magazine — but what does Ireland have to show as a consequence of the Presidency?
Several questions have been submitted today regarding the Stability and Growth Pact and the nomination of Rodrigo Rato as secretary general of the IMF. The ECOFIN meeting decided the matters to which I have just alluded. Progress was made during the Irish Presidency on a number of issues. We have progressed the agenda as best we could in a fair and effective manner and our colleagues in Europe will attest to that. I do not intend to introduce a new currency during my regime. The Deputy appears to imply that I should do so. In 1996 the rules of a pact were agreed which was the background to the introduction of the euro.
With regard to the reform of the Stability and Growth Pact, it is in Ireland's interest that there be rules. It is the smaller countries which will suffer if there are no rules regarding financial management as a background to the euro. For the past number of years Ireland has been spending 5% of gross national product on the multi-capital envelopes which were announced in the budget, and we will continue to do so. This is twice the EU average. We spent a long period leading up to the March 2003 meeting discussing the pact, and it was impossible to find unanimity among the member states. This was confirmed by the European Council meeting at that time. I am sure we will return to the question of the pact in the next year or so. Due to the outcome of the ECOFIN meeting of November 2003, the majority of members of the euro would prefer further reform of the pact to be discussed over the next year. That is where the matter now rests.
Is the Minister saying that the Finance Ministers had a jolly time in Punchestown? He cannot list one achievement of his period as chair of the Council of Ministers, whether reform of the IMF Bretton Woods agenda in favour of the developing world or reform of the Stability and Growth Pact to allow Ireland to make necessary capital investments in areas such as public transport. The Minister has nothing to show us. It is a pity.
It would not be in our interest if the Stability and Growth pact was reformed to allow Ministers for Finance to go off on ridiculous borrowing sprees. It would be to the detriment of this country if that were ever allowed.
No one suggested that.