I realise full well the Minister has a difficult job and if she is told to cut a certain amount to try to make it work, it will not be easy. Obviously, I do not agree with the fact she is told to cut so much in the first place. I would have rather seen the money raised through a higher increase in the tax bands for the better off. It is unfortunate the Government has decided to cut this Department’s funding so much but since it is doing so, it is a fairly impossible task not to hurt many people.

There is little doubt one-parent families seem to have taken the severe brunt. I was glad to hear the Minister is thinking of rowing back a little on it. That is positive. I am not one to criticise a person for changing his or her mind. Those who cannot change their mind cannot change anything. I hope the measures will alleviate problems for many vulnerable persons.

Recently, I met two women in Wexford who asked to see me – a girl called Deirdre who had been working continuously for 14 years and a girl called Ruth who had been working continuously for ten years. They had lost their jobs and become single mothers in a short space of time. They told me their stories, even about accessing social welfare benefits. It took Ruth eight months before she could get anything and she found it difficult to make progress in getting the money she thought would naturally be there for her if she ever lost her job, given she had paid tax for so long. Deirdre is still trying to get help. She admitted the father of the child was paying her a small sum of money and as a result, she has not been able to access the benefit. She was told they did not believe her figures because she could not possibly be living on the small amount of money the father of the child was giving her, and that problem is still not solved. There are so many in a difficult place today, and these are only two problems.

A big problem as a result of the austerity measures implemented has been that not only have people become poorer, which is a natural result in a recession and we have come a long way down from the 2006 and 2007 levels of living standard, but also our society has grown much more unequal in that time. It is interesting to look at comparative figures for Ireland and Europe in regard to the numbers at risk of poverty or social exclusion, which is determined as having to live on less than 60% of the average income. I studied certain graphs which demonstrated that in 2007 the percentage of the population in Ireland that was considered at risk of poverty or social exclusion was 23% whereas the European average was 20%. In 2010 the European figure had risen by just 0.2% whereas Ireland’s had risen to 29.9%, which is frightening. Households with dependent children are even more at risk of poverty or social exclusion. In 2007 the European average in this regard was 19.6% and the figure for Ireland was 24%, but while the European figure has remained pretty stable since then, the figure for Ireland has increased from 24% to 34%, which is also frightening.

Single adult households are taking the brunt of the recession in Ireland. The percentage of such households at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2007 was 56.4% and it is now 62.7%. In other words, 62.7% of people who live in single parent households are at risk of poverty or social exclusion, which is an incredible figure for a developed country.

Many of the less well off have been hit by the austerity measures but, sadly, it has developed in a very uneven way. We have seen the wealth of the top 10% grow in the past four years. I cannot help thinking that many of the measures introduced are something of a paper exercise. We sometimes do things that amount to false economy. We all accept the statistics that €1 spent on a child in a developed country saves the State close to €7 before the child becomes an adult. Therefore, it is not planning for the future to fail to take care of the young people who most need our help.

In addition, the spending habits of those on lower incomes and on social benefits are beneficial to the domestic economy. People on lower incomes are inclined to spend all their money – they have to – so the domestic economy suffers when they do not have the money to spend. I would suggest 80% of the people in this country, perhaps 90%, have less money to spend now. However, the fact people from the lower strata have been hit the most by the measures in recent budgets has exacerbated the problem for the domestic economy.

I could read out the list but Members have heard it all before. The list of areas where the less well off have been hit includes one-parent families, old people on fuel allowance, those on back-to-school and clothing allowances. It amounts to too much unfairness. I find it regressive. We need to start working towards tackling the level of inequality in our society, which has to be a primary aim if we want to make this country a better place.

Mick reads the letter of an Irish woman whose child's medical condition was not compatible with life.

Following the failure of six successive Governments to legislate for the findings of the X case, Mick Wallace TD, Clare Daly TD and Joan Collins TD introduced the Medical Treatment Bill 2012 in the Dail on Wednesday April 18th. The Bill sought to legalise abortion in cases where the  woman’s life was at risk. Unfortunately this Bill was defeated and the debate is now shelved until an expert group report its findings to the Government in a number of months. Time will soon tell if this Government will also shirk their responsibility on providing the required legislation. You can watch Mick’s submission to the debate here.

This legislation is 20 years too late. It is hard to credit that successive Governments have failed to deal with the consequences of the Supreme Court judgment in the X case. It is not as if it was a revolutionary judgment even at the time. The Supreme Court found that abortion is legal in Ireland when a woman’s life is at risk, including from the threat of suicide. My colleagues and I have brought forward this Bill to provide a legislative basis for the legal termination of a pregnancy in the very limited circumstances where such treatment is deemed necessary to prevent the woman’s death. We know it is not enough, but it is a start. Six successive Governments have refused to make that start. We hope that failure will be addressed this week.

The right to access abortion is a fundamental human rights issue. The Supreme Court decision 20 years ago was a rational one. It was compassionate and humane. It was the right thing to do. Only a few weeks ago in this House we discussed the horrific nature of symphysiotomy, a violent act carried out on the bodies of women who encountered difficulties in childbirth. It was a violent act driven by a warped religious ideology, designed to maximise the child-bearing opportunities of the mother with no regard to her future health or suffering. This was something that took place in Ireland from the 1940s to the early 1990s, which is difficult to credit. What action has this Parliament taken to redress the wrong done to those women whose lives were irreparably damaged? What has this male dominated Parliament done to put an end to the urge of men to control women’s bodies? Six successive Governments have refused to do anything about the Supreme Court judgment in the X case. The unfairness and inequality which characterise Ireland’s abortion laws are replicated in the Government’s approach to tackling the economic crisis. Just as our extremely restrictive abortion laws disproportionately and adversely impact upon the most vulnerable who cannot afford to leave the State to avail of the service, the political choices made in the last budget targeted the least well-off in our society, such as lone parents and those with large families and young children.

In 2005, three women known as A, B and C initiated a challenge to Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws at the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that the criminalisation and inaccessibility of abortion in this State endangered their health, well-being and life and was a breach of their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. After much deliberation, the grand chamber of the court announced its unanimous finding, in December 2010, that Ireland’s failure to implement legislation on abortion constituted a violation of the convention. These women asserted that Ireland’s abortion laws did not reflect the position of the people. The referenda in 1992 and in 2002 were attempts by the then Governments to restrict abortion in the State. Both were rejected by the people. The appellants argued that Ireland’s abortion laws are inconsistent with international consensus. Forty-three out of 47 Council of Europe countries permit abortion to protect a woman’s health. We are in the dark ages on this issue.

The existing restrictions are ineffective. They have not done away with abortion but merely served to export the problem to England. Moreover, the situation is discriminatory. Women travelling to Britain for abortion services risk medical complications because of later, and therefore often surgical, abortions. A woman travelling abroad for an abortion must first sort out a range of issues, including finding the money, organising child care, negotiating time off work, and making travel and accommodation arrangements. While dealing with all of this, time is moving on and the agony increases. Such women are more likely to avail of surgical rather than medical abortion to shorten the period of stay abroad. Medical abortion is a less invasive procedure but involves a treatment period of three or four days, which is not an option for most women travelling abroad from this country. Likewise, Irish women are less likely to receive pre and post-abortion medical care due to the limited time most can stay abroad. On top of all of this, the stress involved for women choosing abortion is further exacerbated by the need to leave their own country to avail of an abortion. Four such incredible women told their stories to the media and to Members of the Oireachtas this week. These strong women spoke of how much it pained them to have to leave the State and the feelings of fear and stigma arising from the fact that abortion is criminalised here. They described the secrecy element, the sense of isolation and the lack of support.

My colleagues and I have received a large number of e-mails and letters from people caught in this terrible situation. One of these letters tells a story which many may not have heard. I will read it out in full:

Please take time to read this e-mail and consider why abortion should be legalised in Ireland. I am not saying it should be fully legalised, but I also do not think it is enough just to legalise it where the mother’s life is in danger. I will explain as I go. I had always been someone who said I would never have an abortion. Unfortunately, I did not know what lay ahead for me. I was with my husband ten years when we decided it was time to have children. Much to our delight, after ten months, I finally fell pregnant. I did everything right, took perfect care of myself as I was trying to conceive. My bump grew and I began to feel my lovely baby kick me and move about.

I finally received an appointment for my first scan at 22 weeks, on Christmas week in 2010, and here it all changed. When I had my scan I was told that my beautiful daughter had a condition called anencephaly, a neural tube defect which means part of her brain and skull had not formed properly while everything else had grown perfectly normally. The short of it was that our daughter had no hope of surviving and would die without a doubt. If she survived the pregnancy, she would probably die at birth or within a few hours. To say we were heartbroken is an understatement. We were told in Ireland that I had to carry my baby to full term. I was told I would not be brought in early; in fact, I would be left to go two weeks over. I would not be given a Caesarean section and would have to go through the labour. Alternatively, I could travel to the UK to terminate our pregnancy.

How would I cope emotionally? How could I keep going day by day and feel the baby inside me? How would I deal with the questions from well-meaning people: “When is your baby due?” How could I watch my perfect baby struggle and die in my arms? After much deliberation I felt it would be too difficult to continue with the pregnancy knowing our daughter was going to die and opted for a termination in the UK on New Year’s Eve 2010, at 24 weeks. Because of our laws I was not allowed to receive any help from the hospital here. I was given one recommendation of a well known UK clinic and we went with this. I was treated so coldly. They had no understanding that I did not want to terminate this pregnancy. I wanted this baby so much but she was going to die. No medical intervention could prevent this.

It was the most difficult thing in my life as I left my home, my comfortable surroundings, and travelled to a strange country. I was under time pressure because of how far along I was because it took so long to get scanned.

This clinic had a policy of not allowing me to see the baby – this is something I have lived with and regretted since – I have found it very hard to cope with the fact that I was not allowed to see my daughter when I know so many others … were.

This situation was difficult enough to cope with without having the added problormed properly while everything else had grown perfectly normally. The short of it was that our daughter had no hope of surviving and would die without a doubt. If she survived the pregnancy, she would probably die at birth or within a few hours. To say we were heartbroken is an understatement. We were told in Ireland that I had to carry my baby to full term. I was told I would not be brought in early; in fact, I would be left to go two weeks over. I would not be given a Caesarean section and would have to go through the labour. Alternatively, I could travel to the UK to terminate our pregnancy.

How would I cope emotionally? How could I keep going day by day and feel the baby inside me? How would I deal with the questions from well-meaning people: “When is your baby due?” How could I watch my perfect baby struggle and die in my arms? After much deliberation I felt it would be too difficult to continue with the pregnancy knowing our daughter was going to die and opted for a termination in the UK on New Year’s Eve 2010, at 24 weeks. Because of our laws I was not allowed to receive any help from the hospital here. I was given one recommendation of a well known UK clinic and we went with this. I was treated so coldly. They had no understanding that I did not want to terminate this pregnancy. I wanted this baby so much but she was going to die. No medical intervention could prevent this.

It was the most difficult thing in my life as I left my home, my comfortable surroundings, and travelled to a strange country. I was under time pressure because of how far along I was because it took so long to get scanned.

This clinic had a policy of not allowing me to see the baby – this is something I have lived with and regretted since – I have found it very hard to cope with the fact that I was not allowed to see my daughter when I know so many others … were.

This situation was difficult enough to cope with without having the added problems of travelling to the UK. I had to leave my own local hospital where I felt safe, where I knew I could be looked after. I had horrible cold care in the UK. You hear so many horror stories of terminations, if my labour was induced early in my local hospital, I knew I would have been safe.

On the advice of the clinic, I was told I could book flights home for the same day of the termination. I have since been told this was a very dangerous [thing to do as to travel after a surgical operation is not recommended]. … I could have had all my family around me. I could have had my own comforts. I could have seen my lovely daughter and buried her close to me. Now, I will never know what she looked like and I have no place to visit her.

I have tears streaming down my face as I write this e-mail because it truly was the most hurtful thing I ever had to do in my life. I felt I could not tell most people the truth in case I was judged. I felt wrong and dirty for travelling abroad. I felt like I was “getting rid” … of my baby – she was m

Given that much of this report has been in the public domain for a long time, I find the level of outrage in the last week a bit odd. I do not think Fianna Fáil can stand over its lack of knowledge of what prevailed during its time in office. I find it hard to take the media’s outrage about what it has just learned. When the people had their chance to speak 12 months ago, they unceremoniously dumped Fianna Fáil and the Green Party out of office. They had enough. One would have thought the people would have had enough of Fianna Fáil by 2007 but sadly, the media played a part in sustaining it in the run-up to the election of that year. When evidence that Bertie Ahern had given to the Mahon tribunal was leaked to the media in advance of the 2007 election, a number of columnists in the Sunday Independent launched an attack on those newspapers and media outlets that had published and reported on the extracts from the Mahon tribunal. One columnist, Eoghan Harris, who was later nominated to the Seanad by Bertie Ahern, wrote:For the first time in my life I am going to vote Fianna Fáil. And if you care about the future of Irish democracy you will do the same. Because I believe the anti-Ahern campaign to be the most sinister, sustained and successful manipulation of the Irish media that I have seen in my lifetime.Those were strong words. Eoghan Harris accused the rest of the Irish media of being gullible. He argued that “the Taoiseach is the object of two orchestrated campaigns”, one led by The Irish Times and the other being a “Sinn Féin/IRA campaign”. He suggested that if the latter campaign succeeded, it would “take down the most brilliant Taoiseach of modern times”. Eoghan Harris also criticised Vincent Browne, who pressed Bertie Ahern intensively on his personal finances at the launch of the 2007 Fianna Fáil election manifesto.The relationship between politics and big business has been at the heart of a serious problem we have had in Ireland for a long time. Sadly, money has the power to separate the electorate from the Legislature. The Legislature is dominated by the ruling party, which is often financed by big business. The more money one has, the more likely one is to have a greater say in how things are done at Government level. The best example of this is found in America, where it costs several hundred million to run for election. The arms industry is one of the biggest contributors to the political system there. As one might expect, if one wants to win a presidential election in America, one will have to be fairly keen on the use of plenty of arms and bombs in order to ensure the arms industry thrives. Despite President Barack Obama’s promises to deal with the war in Afghanistan and his suggestion that it was mad, there has been an increase in the number of troops in that country since his election.

There is a spectre haunting Europe. It is the spectre of mass unemployment. At the moment, there are 16.9 million unemployed people in the 17 country eurozone and 24.3 million unemployed in the 27 countries. In Spain alone, there are 5.3 million unemployed. In Greece, one in five people are unemployed. There has been a 40% rise in suicide rates in Greece. Austerity is literally killing Europeans.

The only solution to the austerity induced unemployment seems to be more austerity. The Germans argue that any loosening of the fiscal purse strings will increase borrowing costs and might panic the bond markets, yet economic stimulus is working in America. There have been 23 consecutive months of job growth in the US. They have created 3.7 million new jobs in the private sector alone over the past two years, yet we are insisting on turning our back on such a measure.

The irony is that mass unemployment itself is the biggest barrier to deficit reduction. The best way to cut borrowing levels is to get people back to work and paying taxes. Unlike GDP or inflation, unemployment is the only major economic indicator that measures real human beings rather than growth or prices. Having a job is not just about earning a living and paying taxes. It is about human dignity and self worth. We are looking at serious social consequences, such as financial hardship, emotional stress, depression, loss of morale and status among people, sickness, premature death, crime, disorder and social unrest.

There is more to life than the Government’s fiscal package. It is about time it started looking at the big picture.

Last week Mick spoke in the Dáil on the Banking Sector Regulation Motion and raised some similar points. You can watch the footage here while the transcript is below.

I thought I heard it said here a few months ago that no people would be thrown out of their houses, but perhaps I misheard that. There is no funding available for small and medium-sized businesses. I do not understand how this is. We heard so much about a strategic investment bank, but there is still no sign of it. Patrick Honohan said this month: “A key societal function of banks and other financiers is the gathering and processing of the information necessary to make good loan decisions and to continue monitoring the performance of borrowers, intervening promptly where necessary to protect the sums advanced”. It is clear this did not happen in the boom times and it is clear it is not happening now either. The effectiveness of any financial system relates to how it caters for firms when they are in need and is best evidenced by its capacity to service small firms.

There is no logic behind what is going on. It was interesting to hear the suggestion of the British politician Vince Cable this week. He suggested the RBS should be used as a new British investment bank, with a clean balance sheet and a mandate to lend to sound businesses. That would be a great idea here, would it not? We are prepared to use taxpayers’ money to throw at the banks lock, stock and barrel, but we cannot tell them what to do. They tell us they are meeting their lending criteria and guidelines but we know that is not true. Since when did the banks tell us the truth? Most of the banks only moved towards restructuring, not new loans. If people need money from a bank in this country, it is hard to get it but it is easy get it if one does not need it.

I do not have anything new to add to what has been said. It is very hard to talk about this. It is so horrific. It is clearly another example of men trying to control women’s bodies. We have a male-dominated Parliament doing little about this, just as it failed to legislate for the 1992 Supreme Court judgment in the X case, which ruled that abortion is legal in Ireland where a woman’s life is at risk, including through the threat of suicide. This is a moral attitude driven by a warped religious thinking and has led to bad things happening to good people.

We need a temporary lifting of the statute bar to enable women to seek redress through the courts. Justice demands that the statute of limitations be set aside for at least one year. We need to set up an independent commission of inquiry that is not controlled by vested interests and the access to the health benefits and entitlements promised by the Government in 2003, many of which were subsequently withdrawn or never granted, to be placed on a statutory basis. Fairness is all people ask and accountability, transparency and acknowledgement would go a long way.

Mick Wallace

To ask the Minister for Defence when Irish defence forces personnel will be withdrawn from Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Fergus O’Dowd

I have a good briefing on this one.

The Defence Forces are primarily deployed on overseas missions in support of international peace and security under UN mandates. On 20 December 2001, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1386 under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, authorising the establishment of an International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. Ireland has participated in the NATO-led UN-mandated mission since 5 July 2002, following the Government decision of 2 July 2002, authorising the provision of seven members of the Permanent Defence Force for service.

With the increasing use of more robust Chapter VII missions, the UN has turned to regional organisations such as the European Union, the African Union and NATO, to launch and manage operations on its behalf and under its authority. Since 2002, the Government has reviewed and approved, on an annual basis, the continued participation by seven members of the Permanent Defence Force in ISAF. On 28 June 2011, the Government agreed to continue to provide seven members of the Permanent Defence Force for service with ISAF for a further period from July 2011, subject to ongoing review by the Minister for Defence. Currently there are no plans to withdraw the Defence Forces personnel from the mission. Participation in the mission is subject to ongoing review by the Minister for Defence.

Throughout the years, Ireland has and continues to contribute highly qualified Defence Forces personnel to UN-mandated missions in small numbers or for short durations. This is a tangible and visible expression of Ireland’s continued support for organisations such as the United Nations.

The seven Defence Forces personnel currently participating in ISAF are all located in ISAF headquarters in Kabul and work in staff appointments in planning and administrative roles. The Minister for Defence is satisfied that the work carried out by these personnel, particularly by those in the counter-improvised explosive device cell, represents an important contribution to this UN-mandated mission.

Mick Wallace

Most people would agree that the war in Afghanistan is one of the madder ones in which anyone has got involved. After 11 September 2001, the Americans were looking for someone to bash and even though no one from Afghanistan was involved in the bombing of New York, they decided to pick on Afghanistan, leading to tens of thousands killed, millions displaced, society destroyed, billions of dollars worth of destruction and the entire region destabilised. It has been one of the most historic tragedies in the past 100 years and Ireland should not be associated with it. The latest atrocity involved a US soldier who was said not to be well when he went out and killed 16 civilians. Of course he was not well, but nor were the people who went to war in the first place. Does the Minister of State not believe the lives of the Irish people there are more at risk now given that the situation is becoming even more unstable? The level of civilian deaths is at its highest since the war began ten years ago.

Fergus O’Dowd

The key point is what I said at the beginning. I appreciate the Deputy’s comments and I support his point about any civilians being killed in a tragic and appalling manner as happened with that one soldier doing what he did. The photographs of the child victims of that extreme and appalling action are shocking as are the deaths of all civilians. The key point is that we are there supporting a unanimous UN Security Council decision. We are not there as combatants but as part of a United Nations force. The actions of our seven soldiers there are mainly in support but also getting and giving great experience in improvised explosive devices. When a UN decision is made to withdraw the force, we will withdraw our troops at that time.

Mick Wallace

Having a UN mandate does not change the fact that it is completely immoral and is an absolute disaster – it does not make any sense. At the moment the British and Americans are clamouring to get out of the place, which is more unstable than ever. World security has reduced because of the experience in Afghanistan and nothing has been gained. The Taliban is stronger now than it was ten years ago and even the dogs in the street know it will take over the country once the others move out. The Government keeps reminding us that we have no money. Since the Government came to power in March 2011, what has been the cost to the State of keeping those people in Afghanistan in the most ludicrous war we can remember?

Fergus O’Dowd

We have seven personnel there as part of a UN-mandated force. The Deputy spoke about the Taliban and the situation in Afghanistan. The Taliban have been involved in abuses of human rights in denying women the right to be educated and people to enjoy a normal life. The Irish personnel there are rotated every six months. We are part of a group of other neutral and non-aligned countries, including Austria, Finland and Sweden. I believe the annual cost is approximately €300,000. I can confirm that to the Deputy later.

Later that day Mick asked the Minister about the situation in Afghanistan again. You can watch it here or read Mick’s contribution below.

With regard to personnel serving abroad, I would like to put a question the Minister of State which he may have forgotten to answer previously. Is the Government concerned about the safety of Irish personnel in Afghanistan, particularly given the current climate there? Aside from the 16 civilians, including nine children, killed this week, last month US troops were caught burning copies of the Koran. US marines have also been found to have been urinating on Afghani corpses and last year members of a US unit were convicted of killing Afghani civilians for entertainment. At present, British soldiers are on trial for filming their abuse of Afghani children. Also, US Wikileaks files record 21 separate incidents of British troops shooting dead or bombing Afghani civilians. The climate is getting terrible. If my son was over there I would be very worried about him.

Representatives of three community employment schemes in Wexford, Ferns, Grantstown and Tagoat, have contacted me. They are in a bad way and are very upset about the proposed cuts. I asked them for a breakdown of their costs and spending and I can say that they could give lessons to a number of businesses on how to manage money. I was amazed by how well their schemes were put together and by how well they did things. The Minister says that the troika is putting pressure on budgets and that it is looking for quality of training and value for money. I know the Minister alluded to this herself but the troika will not measure the social dividend and that is what these schemes are about. We should not look at these schemes in purely financial terms. In the overall scheme of things, they are not a massive cost to the State but cutting them will have dramatic social consequences for the State.

When the Taoiseach goes to Europe for the European Council meeting, if he gets the opportunity I urge him to ask Chancellor Angela Merkel if she believes that the latest Greek bailout will work, given that it will probably deepen the recession, cause greater unemployment and social unrest. The European Union’s prediction is that the Greek economy will only contract by 4.3% this year, 0% next year and will grow by 2% in the following years up to 2020. The Greek economy is contracting at present by 7% and I do not think anyone believes those figures. I would like to hear a direct answer from Chancellor Merkel on the issue.

From the Irish point of view the Council meeting will be very much dominated by the decision to hold a referendum, which I welcome. There should be greater participation of citizens in decisions made in this country. Having a vote once every five years is not enough for citizens. I welcome the decision to allow a referendum, which will be about many things for different people, such as the austerity economics and the insistence that governments should slash spending in the face of high unemployment which has been all the rage with most governments in Europe in recent times. I am not sure people in this country are fond of that.

I am not sure what kind of country the Taoiseach has planned for us but people will have a say on what kind of country they want. While austerity might not do any harm to the export market or fiscal matters, it is killing the domestic market. The domestic economy, which is responsible for 90% of employment in this country, is going down the tubes. We will not have serious recovery until we deal with issues that directly concern the domestic economy.

We must also ask whether we want more or fewer decisions made in Europe. Of late, Chancellor Merkel and President Sarkozy have met in advance of the European Council meetings. It is as if we do not have much say anymore. No doubt the fiscal compact will cede more power to Europe and fewer decisions will be made in this country. I am not sure that is what the people of this country want. In fairness, they will have a decision to make and it is their call.

On whether we want more or less democracy, there is a serious democratic deficit in Europe at the moment and it seems to be on the increase. If Chancellor Merkel has her way we will go further away from real democracy. Sadly, a directly elected European Parliament has failed to bridge the divide between the people and the European Union. I am not sure what the answer is, but I do not consider that the EU is functioning in the manner we anticipated.

Will the Government accept the vote of the people, be it “Yes” or “No” or will we be asked to vote again if we do not get the right answer the first time? It would be interesting to hear the Government make a pronouncement in that regard in advance of the referendum.

The bank bailout is an issue for people. Taxpayer-funded capital injections into otherwise bankrupt banks are bailouts but the country did not get a bailout. We have loans that we are expected to pay back. It is disingenuous to call what the country received, a bailout, in contrast to what the banks are getting. Unfortunately, the main reason the banks got a bailout from the taxpayer and the country got it in turn was in order to ensure that the European banks got repaid.

It is a big concern that the treaty is not the end of the European programme, it is more like a new beginning. We are told that Paris and Berlin are awash with blueprints for wha

I am not convinced selling State assets is a good idea, especially at the current time. The Government has assured us it will get value for money but it is obvious that getting a proper price for anything is practically impossible. The short-term benefit will be outweighed by any long-term damage. There are many reasons that a state should retain some control over its assets.

I was surprised to see how many State companies have been privatised. The current list stands at ten. It has been a problem in Ireland, England and Europe. Many public assets in Europe have been sold off, which has left countries far less capable of dealing with unemployment now that we are in a recession. I do not want to compare everything to China, but it was able to deal with the crisis. It was able to control its banks and tell them what to do in order to maintain funding. It had far more financial and industrial leverage to drive economic growth because it had such control over its state organisations.

It is a pity we do not have more control of ours. I understand that Government has signed up to a deal by whereby it is obliged to sell something. I do not think there is much economic logic to it. I would be suspicious that the aims of the troika are more neo-liberal than economic, given that we will not get much of a price for our assets.

Earlier this week, Mick questioned Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore on the use of Shannon airport by US forces as a stopover point for extraordinary rendition; he asked if the Tánaiste accepted the evidence presented by Amnesty International and others in relation to this matter and called on the government to initiate an enquiry into the State’s participation in this illegal activity. See below for the transcript or watch the exchange in full by clicking here. The debate was also featured on RTE’s Oireachtas Report which you can watch here (15 minutes in).

Eamon Gilmore: The programme for Government states that “we will enforce the prohibition on the use of Irish airspace, airports and related facilities for purposes not in line with international law”. I have placed on record on numerous occasions my abhorrence at the illegal activity known as extraordinary rendition. There is no evidence that Shannon or any other Irish airport has ever been used for this purpose. There is no basis whatsoever for the Deputy’s suggestion that the State has participated in this illegal activity. Under our legislation, no transfer of prisoners may take place without the permission of the Irish authorities. Furthermore, the United States has provided assurances at the highest level that it would not transport prisoners through Irish airspace without seeking our permission. I assure the Deputy that no permission has been sought or granted in respect of any case of extraordinary rendition and, equally, that such permission would never be granted.

We understand that a small number of commercially leased aircraft which have been involved in legitimate commercial activities have also been involved, at various times, in activities relating to extraordinary renditions. However, there is no evidence to suggest that they were carrying prisoners at any time when they transited through Irish airports. Should the Deputy or any other person be in possession of evidence which suggests that Irish airports have been used for the purpose of extraordinary rendition, I would urge them to bring this to the attention of the Garda Síochána.

Mick Wallace: I remind the Tánaiste that in June 2006 he said that the European Court of Human Rights, the United Nations Committee Against Torture and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights had all indicated that:

[I]t is insufficient to accept the diplomatic assurances of another state that nothing illegal was happening on planes being used and chartered by the CIA, which are going through Irish airports. There is a positive obligation on the State to investigate, inspect, send gardaí on board, and establish independently that the law of this country, international law and the Convention on Human Rights are being upheld, and that nobody is being transported through an Irish airport or through Irish airspace to undergo [torture].

Does the Minister still not think it would be a good idea for us to check the planes? When he was in opposition he was not as convinced that everything was above board. If there was even a 1% suspicion that people were bringing drugs into the country we would be keen to inspect the planes, and we would be right to do so. We should also inspect these.

Eamon Gilmore: We have a procedure in place. It is not just a question of accepting assurances. There is a procedure in place whereby if prisoners are to be transported through any of our airports, the permission of the Irish Government must be sought and obtained. No such permission has been sought or granted and I have made it absolutely clear that under no circumstances will we grant permission for the transport of prisoners who are subject to extraordinary rendition. 

Mick Wallace: The chances of the Americans asking us for permission to bring through prisoners who they will torture are pretty slim. We have seen what has gone on Guantanamo Bay where only a handful of people have been convicted despite the numbers held in custody. I draw the Minister’s attention to a comment by President Michael D. Higgins in December 2010, only 14 months ago. He stated:

The disclosure that the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dermot Ahern, was ‘quite convinced’ that Shannon Airport had been used on at least three occasions by aircraft involved in extraordinary rendition of prisoners strongly reinforces the case for a change in the law to ensure that Irish airports are not used in this way and that any such aircraft are subject to proper inspection by the Irish authorities.

On the previous occasions Tánaiste Gilmore told me that the law is very robust in respect of control of airspace. Why did President Higgins%2 aircraft involved in extraordinary rendition of prisoners strongly reinforces the case for a change in the law to ensure that Irish airports are not used in this way and that any such aircraft are subject to proper inspection by the Irish authorities.

On the previous occasions Tánaiste Gilmore told me that the law is very robust in respect of control of airspace. Why did President Higgins, when he was a Labour Party Deputy, propose legislation to close the loopholes in Irish legislation to ensure rendition flights could no longer be possible if the Labour Party now believes everything is grand?

Eamon Gilmore: Rendition flights are not possible. They are illegal. The use of our airports for rendition purposes would be illegal. If any country wants to transport prisoners through our airports, they must seek permission from the State. As I stated, no such permission has been sought or granted and no such permission will be granted in the case of possible rendition.

Mick Wallace: Why did President Higgins suggest it when he was a Deputy? The Minister did not answer my question.

 <