Put the deal to the Irish people

The EU agreement is not just bad for Ireland, it’s bad for Europe too, writes Gerry Adams

TODAY if you don’t like the economic or fiscal policy being pursued by the Government you can choose to vote for someone else who will implement different policies.

However, the agreement reached last Friday in Brussels will significantly reduce the ability of any future elected Irish Government to implement any policies of its own.

The deal hands over significant control of fiscal and budgetary matters to unelected and unaccountable EU officials.

This is bad for democracy and bad for the Irish people. Irish citizens must have their say on any agreement with such far reaching consequences. The Government must now commit clearly to a referendum on this issue.

Additional powers are to be given to the European Court of Justice and the European Commission to police the new 0.5% deficit ceiling and the existing provisions of the stability and growth pact.

These powers will enable the court to adjudicate when member states are in breach of the new austerity rule. This is a very significant development the implications of which are as yet very unclear.

They will also empower the commission to impose specific fiscal and budgetary policies on democratically elected governments. The fact that the commission has been one of the driving forces behind many of the policies that created the economic crisis, raises serious questions regarding its ability to devise credible solutions to our current difficulties.

But more importantly, transferring this power from democratically elected politicians in European member states to unelected judges and civil servants in Luxembourg and Brussels takes real power away from Irish citizens.

I do not believe that the deal struck by 26 EU leaders last Friday in Brussels will solve the eurozone crisis but will make matters worse.

There is still time for the Irish Government to reconsider its support for the deal and work with other EU members to secure a real solution to the eurozone crisis.

But if Labour and Fine Gael insist on sticking to this bad deal then the people must have their say. The constitutional, political and economic long-term implications of this agreement are such that a referendum is essential.

Introducing a new 0.5% of GDP deficit limit in our Constitution, which the agreement requires, will mean that the Government will have to implement austerity budgets, not just to 2015 as required by the EU/IMF programme, but for its full term of office and beyond.

Alongside this, the agreement explicitly rules out any private sector involvement in future debt write-downs. This means that all toxic banking debts will be paid, and paid by the taxpayer, irrespective of the social and human cost.

This will lead to a decade of crippling austerity and economic stagnation. Unemployment and emigration will rise.

This is not only the very opposite of what Ireland needs, it is the opposite of what the eurozone needs.

Imposing severe austerity on the economies of the EU, as the region as a whole enters a recession is economic madness.

As if undermining member state democracy was not bad enough, the agreement last Friday also seeks to emasculate the economies of the EU.

There are alternatives to the deal agreed by Fine Gael and Labour last Friday in Brussels.

Instead of austerity, Governments should be promoting investment in jobs and growth. Increasing the lending capacity of the European Investment Bank and working with member states to stimulate activity in the real economy is the best way of achieving this.

Instead of bank bailouts governments should be promoting debt-restructuring agreements for over-indebted economies to assist them return to debt sustainability. Ending the obligation on the state to pay the Anglo Irish promissory note and unguaranteed senior bondholders in Anglo and other banks is the best way of achieving this.

In any case the Government must call a referendum and allow the people pass judgement. This should not be decided on a legal premise or indeed for political reasons. It is a more fundamental question than that. It is a matter of democracy and the rights of citizens.