Micheál Martin
Ceist:1 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach when details of the legislative priorities for the current Dáil session will be published. [5915/11]
Amharc ar fhreagraLegislative Programme
Ceisteanna (1, 2)
Micheál Martin
Ceist:2 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will provide a list of the Bills that have been restored. [6851/11]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (49 píosaí cainte)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The Government's legislative priorities up to the summer session are set out in the legislative programme published on Tuesday, 5 April. A motion restoring a number of Bills from the last Dáil to the Order Paper was passed on 23 March. I will send a list to the Deputy today.
I congratulate Ministers on their ingenuity in finding ways not to acknowledge the work of those who actually prepared most of the legislation being published. It takes creativity to praise one's own radicalism——
Does the Deputy have a question?
I do. It takes creativity to praise one's own radicalism while at the same time introducing legislation published by one's predecessor.
One of the major questions is whether the legislative programme actually reflects the legislation we are likely to be debating for the rest of the year. No constitutional amendments have been included. Will the Taoiseach tell us whether he has a list of items such as the referendum on children's rights and the abolition of the Seanad not currently included in the legislative programme but which he expects to include within the next few months?
There is no praise involved here. As the Deputy is aware, for years at the beginning of every Dáil session the Government of the day published lists, A — Bills expected to be published; B — Bills for which the heads have been agreed and are being drafted; and C — Bills for which the heads have yet to be approved, with lists A and B being given priority and to be published in that session. However, the commitment was never lived up to, as the Deputy well knows. In the last session, the Government of which the Deputy was a member published three sessional programmes comprising 20, 14 and 23 Bills on the A, B and C lists and managed to get to only seven, ten and 11 on each list. On this occasion, I told Ministers that when they spoke to the Secretary General in the Department, they were to see to it that whatever Bills they brought forward were able to be published and dealt with in this session. This will bring a sense of reality to it rather than having a long list that might not see the light of day during the session.
The question of constitutional amendments has been spoken about extensively. The Government did not commit to holding any constitutional referendum in tandem with a presidential election. However, quite a number of comments have been made by groups such as children's advocacy groups suggesting it might be possible to deal with it that way. Obviously, the Government mentioned a number of other areas including accountability in respect of the question on the Abbeylara decision and in respect of giving protection to people who might inform public representatives as public or private citizens on issues which should be made known. These matters are being given consideration also.
The Deputy is well aware that to hold any constitutional referendum, let us say in the context of a presidential election whenever that might be, it is necessary to bring forward a Bill to set up a referendum commission and the Government is giving consideration to this. I have written formally to the Attorney General to start the process in respect of the preparation of work on the question to be asked about the abolition of the Seanad which, as the Deputy is aware, cannot be abolished without the imprimatur of the people. All references to the Seanad in the Constitution will have to be taken into account and I have advised the Attorney General formally of this.
Does the Taoiseach expect to bring proposals to the House in the coming months to include in the legislative programme substantive amendments to the Constitution? I am aware that some months in advance of the election, Fine Gael gave categoric commitments that there would be a referendum within the first 12 months if not in the autumn to abolish the Seanad and other referendums. Legislation is required to prepare to hold such referendums. Can the Taoiseach can give a timeline on the referendums to which he has committed in the programme for Government?
No. The Government has not decided formally on holding any constitutional referendum this year. The Government is considering whether it is feasible to hold any constitutional referendum this year, possibly in conjunction with a presidential election that might be held. For our part in Fine Gael, we set out a programme to allow for a series of constitutional amendments to be decided on what we called "Constitution day", to be held within 12 months of the new Government being formed, including a complex question on the abolition of the Seanad. As the lead Department putting together the structure for a constitutional convention, my Department is working on this and I hope to bring proposals to Government on the structure of a constitutional convention which would allow citizens to engage in a number of areas in which constitutional referendums might be held. This might be separate from matters on which the Government might decide as a matter of priority to hold a referendum.
On the second question——
Which one is that?
It is about the list of Bills that have been restored to the Order Paper, which the Taoiseach is due to circulate. The point I was making is that there is no acknowledgement of the work of previous Ministers in building up that legislation.
I would have thought the Deputy would not want us to acknowledge what his party did to the country.
We are dealing with questions now.
Yes, on the legislative programme. It is becoming unclear as to when those referenda will take place, and the Seanad one appears to be becoming more complex as the weeks go by. "Complex" is a word that is becoming more common in the Taoiseach's rhetoric.
The Taoiseach should acknowledge what the last Government did to the country.
Can we stick to Question Time please?
The Taoiseach does not need to be prompted by the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte.
I acknowledge the fact that the Deputy's party in government ran the economy onto the rocks and has left this Government with an almighty legacy to resolve. We will have to do that without fear or favour and with a sense of fairness and courage. I also acknowledge that legislative measures were prepared during the Deputy's time in government which did not see the light of day. I have asked Ministers to reflect as accurately as possible on what can be produced in this session. As the Deputy is aware, the Dáil will sit for longer than it did previously to deal with these matters. It will return on the day after bank holidays, sit for longer periods and take a shorter break at Easter to deal with the legislative programme we have set down.
I acknowledge the fact that the Deputy's party ran the country onto the rocks and that legislation was produced during its term of office. We have not decided formally on holding a constitutional referendum this year but we are committed to following through with regard to the constitutional convention and keeping the House informed about issues that might require legislation in the context of a referendum being held.
I agree the last Government ran the country onto the rocks, but that is no excuse for this Government to do it again.
Will the Deputy put a question to the Taoiseach?
One of the Bills promised for the summer session is the electoral commission Bill. The last Government also promised to establish an independent electoral commission. An mbeidh an coimisiún seo freagrach as vótóirí a chlárú? An nglacann an Taoiseach leis go bhfuil an córas clárúcháin lochtach agus go bhfuil gá ann chun é a leasú? Will the Taoiseach clarify whether this will be new legislation or the old Fianna Fáil-Green Party Bill? Does he agree with the Sinn Féin proposition that people should be automatically registered as they become eligible to vote by using personal public service, PPS, numbers? Will the new electoral commission be in place in time for the presidential election?
Before the Taoiseach replies, will the Deputy please refer to the questions on the Order Paper? They are about when details of the legislative priorities of the current Dáil will be published and if the Taoiseach will provide a list of the Bills that have been restored to the Order Paper. Stick to the questions, please. This is not a general debate. The Taoiseach should reply in accordance with the question put to him.
The Deputy has a point in that there was an item in the published legislative programme dealing with an electoral commission Bill, which was to give immediate effect to something that will take a longer period of time. It was the Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Bill. Obviously, that is being given priority, and the party opposite has published its own proposals in this regard. The constitutional convention and the electoral commission will allow citizens to give their input on a series of matters such as the reduction in the voting age, whether people who live abroad should be entitled to vote in presidential elections, the issue of greater involvement and participation by women in politics as candidates and elected members, and with regard to the electoral system. It is important to involve citizens in giving their views before these matters are finalised.
I call Deputy Boyd Barrett on this question. He has a question coming up on another matter. The reason I am being a stickler is that there are 29 questions for the Taoiseach and if we deal with only three or four of them, we will not get through them all. I intend to be fairly strict. The Deputy must stick to the question before us.
The question relates to legislative priorities. In light of the projected growth forecast of the International Monetary Fund, IMF——
That is not in order.
——and the reduced——
Will the Deputy resume his seat? That is not in order.
It is a question on legislative priorities.
That is not a legislative priority.
The worse growth prospects put forward by the IMF and the outcome of Iceland's referendum——
Would Deputy Boyd Barrett resume his seat?
A Cheann Comhairle, this is about legislative priorities.
What legislative priority are you talking about?
If you let me finish the question, I will explain.
Respect the Chair.
The result of the Iceland referendum, where the people in that country voted "No" to the bank bailout——
It is not on the list.
(Interruptions).
I am moving on.
Would the Taoiseach consider it——
Would Deputy Boyd Barrett please resume his seat?
——a legislative priority——
Did Deputy Boyd Barrett not hear me?
A Deputy
Boring.
——to bring forward legislation for a similar referendum to the one in Iceland?
Did you not hear me? That is not in order.
It is.
It is not in order. I am moving on to Question No. 3 in the name of Deputy Boyd Barrett.
Deputy Boyd Barrett is not in transition year now.
(Interruptions).
Deputy Buttimer thinks he is in first class.
Agreements with Members
Ceisteanna (3)
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:3 Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach in view of the findings of the recently published Moriarty report in relation to a former Minister (details supplied), if the Government intends to reconsider the recent arrangement it made with the Deputy to gain his support; if he will reveal the precise nature of that arrangement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6024/11]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (25 píosaí cainte)
The Government does not have any agreement or arrangement in place with Deputy Lowry.
I do not want to go over all of the ground. Obviously, it has been well covered.
I can assure the Deputy he will not be allowed go over all of the ground. Would he put a supplementary?
In fairness, the Ceann Comhairle should not cut across me all of the time. I am entitled to ask a question.
Of course you are.
I am on the list for this one.
Ask the question, cuir an ceist.
There is no help needed up there either.
There are matters arising from the Moriarty tribunal debate that were not satisfactorily answered which are to do with the here and now. The Taoiseach stated there was no arrangement. Did the Taoiseach meet Deputy Lowry or did any member of the Government, formally or informally, meet Deputy Lowry in the context of him making a decision to support Deputy Enda Kenny's nomination for Taoiseach and support for the Government? Were there any meetings of any description and were any undertakings given or agreements or tacit agreements made between the Government and Deputy Lowry which led to him supporting Deputy Enda Kenny for Taoiseach and supporting the Government?
Other issues arose out of that, such as the issue of the problem of corporate donations to political parties.
That is nothing to do with the question.
It arises out of the Moriarty tribunal and the issues related to it.
We are not discussing the Moriarty tribunal.
That is in the question, if the Ceann Comhairle looks.
I am looking at it all right, Deputy Boyd Barrett need not worry.
Is it in line with satisfying public concern about the issue of corporate donations to political parties, given all of the findings of the Moriarty tribunal, that the Government should tell us what corporate donors——
This is Question Time.
——gave to Fine Gael Party funds over the past year?
Would Deputy Boyd Barrett resume his seat? I am on my feet. This is Question Time. I will not tolerate this. There are others who have questions down——-
I have my six minutes.
——-and I will not allow it be destroyed by not providing time for their questions to be answered. When I ask the Deputy to co-operate, will he please co-operate? This is nothing to do with the content of the Moriarty tribunal.
It is the question.
It is not. The question was whether an arrangement was made with the Deputy in question, and the reply was "No".
I repeat that there are no arrangements, formal or informal, made with the Deputy named in Deputy Boyd Barrett's question. I might remind him that the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources sent the Moriarty report to the Revenue Commissioners, the DPP and the Garda. I have already asked the relevant Departments to respond within four weeks in respect of implementation of the recommendations in Moriarty and as Deputy Boyd Barrett will be aware, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has listed the introduction of a comprehensive Bill dealing with corporate donations as a priority for this session. Once the Departments respond in respect of the recommendations of Moriarty, we will proceed with that.
Were there any meetings?
I would extend the courtesy of the House to every person who was elected here. There were no meetings. There is no arrangement, formal or informal, with the Deputy named in Deputy Boyd Barrett's question.
Easter Rising Centenary
Ceisteanna (4)
Gerry Adams
Ceist:4 Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach his plans to re-establish the all party committee in preparation for the centenary of the 1916 Easter Rising; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6040/11]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (10 píosaí cainte)
It is my intention to re-establish the Oireachtas consultation group on the commemorative programme to be brought forward for the centenary anniversaries in the period to 2016. A substantial commemorative programme should be brought forward in respect of the events leading to the foundation of the State. With the passing of almost a century, most people in Ireland today have had little direct contact with the generation of that revolutionary era. It is important therefore that we commemorate the actions and acknowledge the achievements that have shaped modern Ireland.
In this endeavour, we should reflect not only on the military history of a difficult struggle but on the principles and vision which inspired the movement to achieve independence. It would be appropriate that a broad and inclusive commemorative programme would bring to attention the economic and social conditions of the period, the cultural tides and the connectedness of the Irish abroad in this national effort.
I am aware of the keen interest in the Oireachtas and widely among the public to contribute to the development of the centenary commemorative programme. I will contact all party leaders shortly with a view to re-establishing the consultation group at an early date.
The coming decade is filled with many important anniversaries, including the signing of the Ulster covenant, the 1913 lockout, the Easter Rising and the general election of 1918. Aontaím leis an Taoiseach go bhfuil a lán suime ag muintir na tíre agus daoine eile ar fud an domhain san ábhar seo. Tá a fhios ag an Taoiseach gur bhain mná agus fir páirt san eirí amach ar son saoirse na hÉireann, ar son tír neamhspleách agus ar son fíor-phoblacht. Níl an phoblacht sin ann fós. Ní bhfuair siad bás ar son an IMF nó an EU. I welcome his commitment to establishing the committee but can he advise us when it will be put in place?
Mindful of the events of 1916, can he ensure every effort is made to restore and preserve Nos. 14 to 17 Moore Street, where the leaders last met before their surrender? Nos. 14 and 17 Moore Street constitute a legally designated national monument but are under threat from a developer. An aontaíonn an Taoiseach leis an moladh atá ann ceathrú 1916 a fhorbairt i mBaile Átha Cliath?
The Deputy will be aware that the previous Taoiseach nominated the then Minister for Defence to chair the consultation group, which comprised Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh from Sinn Féin, Deputy Deenihan from Fine Gael, Deputy Costello from the Labour Party and Deputy Lowry as an Independent. The Green Party was satisfied that the Minister for Defence should be the sole representative of the Government. I would like to establish the consultation group before Easter. This is an issue which needs to be addressed sensitively in light of the broad range of views held about 1916 and various other issues. The Deputy will also be aware of the establishment of a Unionist centenary council. These are issues in respect of Ireland and we need to be cognisant of them.
I took the opportunity some time ago to visit Nos. 14, 15 and 16 Moore Street. The previous Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government placed a preservation order on No. 16 and there were plans for a major redevelopment of Carlton site. It is a confined area but it contains the lanes of history from the time those men and women emerged from the side of the GPO and went in through the side of the buildings to get to No. 16. Physically, the structure does not at present look particularly appealing as a national monument. This is an issue in which I have a particular interest and I will discuss the matter with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government shortly.
I would like to set up the consultation group before Easter, as part of which I hope those who come behind us will be able to understand the locations and the circumstances which led to the foundation of this State and its achievement of independence as one of the first small states of the 20th century. That is important and I believe we can have modernity beside tradition, where one can enhance the other.
I commend the designation of that quarter. It is a hugely historical site encompassing the withdrawal from the GPO up Moore Street and up Moore Lane, the meeting and decision to surrender, where O'Rahilly was killed, where the surrender was handed over, the Rotunda where Tom Clarke was stripped naked in front of a British garrison and where Tom Clarke's shop is now hidden behind a plastic piece of neon. There are very few states in the world — the Taoiseach and I have both travelled — where one does not go to some national commemoration, some ceathrú saoirse or some liberation or revolutionary quarter. Here we have a perfect example which can be saved from the developers. The Taoiseach will know that the relatives of the leaders of 1916 are campaigning on this issue so an aontaíonn an Taoiseach leis an moladh go gcuirfear ceathrú na saoirse le chéile i lár na cathrach?
As I said, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government placed a preservation order on No. 16. The area from the GPO to the Rotunda is very compact. There is an opportunity, if handled properly, to make available a multilingual explanation to people from all over the world in order that they can see the circumstances and locations where one of the first independent states was recognised in the early part of the 20th century.
Under section 14 of the National Monuments Act, the consent of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is required for all works affecting the area covered by the preservation order. This needs to be looked at afresh. If one looks only at the preservation order on No. 16 or Nos. 14 and 17, it is very confined. The lanes are still there as is some of the original brickwork, etc., to enable a more comprehensive explanation and analysis of what went on.
I do not mean to interfere in any way with applications for planning permission which may have been granted. However, in respect of this period of our history, which will probably grow in importance as time goes on, we have an opportunity to get it right before anything happens which might impact severely on it. From that point of view, I will discuss the matter with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
There is a preservation order on No. 16 which presents us with an opportunity to handle this in a sensitive way. I say that in the context of the 1916 commemoration ceremony and all that leads to it being treated by the consultation group in a sensitive and responsible fashion.
I support what the Taoiseach and Deputy Adams said in regard to Nos. 14 to 17 Moore Street. I would be very anxious to see something concrete and productive emerge from that.
I wish to ask about the 1916 centenary committee. Would the Taoiseach consider it useful if the membership was potentially broadened out or if, for example, a Northern input was facilitated, either from the Assembly or strands of opinion, to ensure the centenary is celebrated in an all-island context? As the Taoiseach said in regard to the sensitivity of the commemoration and so forth, there is a range of issues, from the Ulster Covenant to the Great War to other major events taking place over the next decade. It is important those commemorative opportunities become opportunities for fresh insights, perspectives and a deeper mutual understanding among people of different traditions on the island. Let us face it — people from a different tradition may not have the same perspective on 1916 as Members of this House. It is an opportunity for a comprehensive approach to commemoration.
I met previously with the Orange Order in regard to this and there is a willingness to engage in constructive dialogue towards the collective commemoration of different events of historical significance over the next decade which resonate back to conflict, history and so on. I am sure the Taoiseach would agree that the challenge is to do this in a way that can advance and add value to the kind of society we want to create on the island of Ireland.
It is possible and it should be so. The consultation group should be broadened beyond the membership of this Dáil and Seanad. There are people with a deep and brilliant understanding of the background and environment in which these events happened. It is an opportunity for the Oireachtas to be a party to sensitive and proper commemorations in the period 2012 to 2016 and beyond. These should be carried out in a sensitive, understanding and fitting manner, appropriate to a country that has achieved over a century since that first Rising. I am favourably disposed to putting people on the consultation group and to taking into account the fact that the Ulster Unionist Council has launched a document and has a committee dealing with commemorative ceremonies as they see them. It is appropriate to link the two.
On a point of information, if I heard the Taoiseach correctly, he said this is the area where the State was first recognised. That is not the case, this is the area in which a totally different State was proclaimed. It took a counterrevolution to create this State.
The point I am making is that the 1916 Rising began the first steps towards economic independence and political independence, which came about with Ireland becoming one of the first countries to become independent in the early part of the 20th century. We do not need to differ on the details.
The Taoiseach should tell the IMF and the EU about our economic independence.
European Council Meetings
Ceisteanna (5, 6)
Gerry Adams
Ceist:5 Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach his priorities for the next meeting of the European Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6577/11]
Amharc ar fhreagraMicheál Martin
Ceist:6 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the bilateral meetings he has arranged with other EU prime ministers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7687/11]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (27 píosaí cainte)
I propose to answer Questions Nos. 5 and 6 together.
A formal agenda has not been finalised for the next meeting of the European Council, which will take place on 24 June. However, I expect the emphasis will remain on the key economic challenges facing Europe, including the response to the current crisis, the preservation of financial stability, and laying the ground for smart, sustainable, socially inclusive and job-creating growth. The comprehensive package of economic measures we decided at the March Council included pressing forward with implementation of the new European semester. This will see member states submit programmes this month covering budgetary plans and structural reforms, as well as commitments under the euro plus pact as appropriate.
On foot of these national programmes, the Commission will present its proposals for country-specific opinions and recommendations in good time for assessment and adoption at the June Council. I remain in close contact with my European colleagues, both in capitals and in the EU institutions, including on matters relating to the economic challenges facing Ireland and the Union. Arrangements for specific bilateral meetings will fall for consideration in this context.
Tá sé soiléir nach bhfuil morán dul chun cinn déanta ag an Rialtas lenár bpairtnéiri san EU. As an observer, it strikes me that no progress has been made in recent engagement with the EU partners. During the period under consideration the debt here has increased——
Can Deputy Adams ask a question please?
These policies have had the same effect in Greece, increasing their debt. The debt has increased here. The banking debt is unsustainable. Does the Taoiseach believe that rolling out these policies will lead to different results and to increasing the burden on ordinary people? Would it not be better to make it clear to our partners in Europe that this is not sustainable? Leaving aside every other ideological or political issue, we cannot afford this debt. Would the Taoiseach not be better off making this point clear to people at the EU?
Tá a fhios ag an Teachta go bhfuil an-chuid difríochta idir an Rialtas seo agus an ceann a bhí ann roimhe seo. The legacy inherited by the Government must be dealt with. There is no point in running away from it because if we do nothing it gets worse. The decisions made by the Government in tackling the banking problem have brought about a positive response from the IMF, the EU, the European Commission, international banks and commentators, who have all recognised that at last a Government has taken decisions in respect of the banking sector. These decisions will bring about what are now known as the two pillar banks, which will be in a position to lend money and return to a position which one would expect banks to be in. Deputy Adams is well aware that we will never achieve the growth levels to which we aspire unless we sort out these problems. The Deputy will also be aware that parallel to dealing with the banking sector the Government, as part of its programme for Government, proposes to introduce in the next couple of weeks a jobs initiative scheme that will lead to a stimulation of the indigenous economy, thus creating the confidence necessary for people to spend, employers to take on new employees and assisting in the rebuilding of our economy. Far from the Government being lethargic or not moving on issues, it has and will continue to make decisions. The process outlined here is a necessary part of this. It is also in keeping with what other countries in Europe must do.
Aontaím leis an Taoiseach faoin Rialtas deireanach. I agree with what the Taoiseach had to say in regard to the last Government. He is correct that it created this legacy and that its policies were wrong. Why then repeat them? I never said that we are not moving. We are moving: we are moving backwards. There needs to be a change of tactics. Politics is at all times a matter of political choices. We cannot all the time blame the previous Government for what this Government is doing. That is the responsibility of the Taoiseach and not the previous Government.
A question, please.
This Government has in its first month taken some serious decisions about the banking sector, which have brought about a positive response internationally which we did not have before. It is a small step in the right direction, although it is not where we want to be. We want to see the IMF go home and this country getting back to borrowing on the international markets at rates below those currently available to us, thus putting us in control of our own economic destiny. The Government will continue to make decisions, difficult though they may be. If this crisis is not faced up to it will only get worse. I think the Deputy understands that. From that point of view, we must try to sort out our problems in a eurozone context. The Government will continue to play its part in that regard. This is necessary from a European Union and eurozone perspective.
It is time to put spin and optics to one side. The Taoiseach and everyone else knows that the decisions taken last week in terms of the banking sector flowed from stress tests which were well underway before the previous Government left office. It is time to put all the spin aside. Everyone knew about the two emerging banks, Allied Irish Bank and Bank of Ireland. There is no big deal in that regard either.
The entire problem was caused by the previous Government.
The fundamental issue is that there has been no burning of bondholders. In regard to the forthcoming meeting, will the Taoiseach be raising the issue of an interest rate reduction? Will it be on the agenda given the IMF report and its statement that such interest reductions are now urgent in terms of the European loan facility and mechanisms? Also, can I take it from the Taoiseach's reply that no bilateral meetings, separate to the summit, have been arranged between him and other EU Heads of State?
I remind Deputy Martin, who was on this side of the House a short time ago, that there were six dysfunctional banks in this country, complete confusion from day to day and from week to week, and that the Government would not even admit to the people that the IMF had landed here. Obviously, a deal was done between the IMF-ECB-EU, the consequences of which we must now deal with.
The Deputy will be aware that it was decided at the Heads of Government meeting that the Ministers of Finance should deal first with the bank stress tests results before pursuing the question of interests rate reductions. From that point of view, while the next charge in respect of interest is not due until October-November, this matter will be pursued by the Ministers for Finance. It is always referred to at other meetings. Several heads of Government were in contact at the last meeting about arranging bilateral meetings and I am pursuing that. I will advise the House of them as soon as the arrangements are finalised. There will be a meeting with the British Prime Minister next week.
On the interest rate, we heard what happened at the last meeting of European Finance Ministers. There was some sort of bilateral meeting on the bus with the French Finance Minister and the German Finance Minister was fairly categoric and blunt in his approach to the issue, which I regret because there has to be some quid pro quo. What is required is an overall European resolution of this issue. Surely, given the response from Finance Ministers, it is time the Taoiseach took the issue to the heads of state at the next meeting and put it formally back on the agenda for resolution.
I cannot comment on all of the meetings that took place and whether people spoke on a bus. I know that the Minister, Deputy Noonan, had a number of meetings with——
The national broadcaster so reported.
If you ask the question, the Taoiseach will give an answer.
——the different Finance Ministers. At least it was known if the conversation took place on a bus, unlike when a previous Government brought assessors in a van with blacked out windows to see the site of a proposed sports centre several years ago. The German Minister for Finance made his views known, and not for the first time.
This is an ongoing process. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, and Deputy Howlin have been delegated responsibility to deal with this matter and will do so. The Minister, Deputy Noonan, on behalf of the Government, has been clear in this regard. While it is the legal responsibility and right of the Commission to produce any paper that it so wishes, in respect of a CCCTB, as we have already made clear at the meeting of the heads of Government we will participate in discussions on any paper produced by the Commission. In this regard, we have a very healthy scepticism and have outlined our objections to the consequences for Europe, and not just Ireland, of a CCCTB.
That is a change from previous Government policy which was always to oppose a CCCTB.
In respect of the corporation tax rate, there will not be any movement from our stated position.
Previous Governments opposed a CCCTB.
I have already stated my views on a CCCTB. The Deputy does not expect us to sit at a meeting and not contribute to a debate that is taking place. We have a very healthy scepticism about that. I have pointed out the difficulties as I see them. Obviously, the Commission is not bound by any Government in producing papers that it wishes to. As a country we will participate in the discussion and I have given the Deputy an outline of what our discussion will be in that regard.
Should the Taoiseach not say to his European counterparts when he next meets them that, in light of the downward revised growth projections for the Irish economy, the cuts and austerity they require to be imposed on this economy and the people in it are counter-productive and are not working? He should tell them the reduced growth that is projected is the result of the austerity and cuts and we should perhaps acquaint them with the common wisdom here, namely, that if one is in a hole, one should stop digging. That is what the lower growth rates indicate.
I have already raised the issue of the austerity programme that has been imposed on the Irish people and the difficulties we foresee. Energy costs have risen due to external factors. There is a loss of confidence in consumer demand, which must be stimulated. That is why the Government will respond to that issue in the coming weeks by introducing a jobs initiative to stimulate consumer demand.
It is perfectly obvious that one has to have a growth strategy to grow the economy. As somebody who has an interest in this, the Deputy will be well aware of what we could achieve over the next ten years if we did not have to pay out €3 billion every March in promissory notes signed up to by the last Government.
Was the Minister at the back of the bus?
I do not know anything about the bus. I am not sure whether it was the No. 8 or the No. 7.
We do not care whether our Taoiseach sorts out our problems on a bus, a car or an office; we would be grateful for help wherever he gives it.
I did not ask about the Kerry bus either.