Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I would like to deal with why we have tabled this issue regarding decisions in Ireland. I believe that it should be considered that we have reached a new stage in the development of the European Union and in the integration of the economies in the European Union. Today twelve Member States make up a Common Market with a single currency. A domestic market in the original sense. It is imperative that economic policy in this European domestic market is drawn up in accordance with common guidelines. In this respect, we are pleased that the European Commission and the Ecofin Council have taken action in this area. It is the first time that a decision regarding one of these Member States has been taken in this way and this decision concerns the stability of the European currency. As you are aware, in all debates in this House my group has repeatedly granted the utmost priority to the stability of the European currency and we shall continue to do so in future. We believe that a stable currency is one of the key building blocks for a social market economy and that this is also necessary for the European currency. Let there be no doubt that this shall remain a priority for us in the future. However, I would ask whether the European Commission and the members of the Ecofin Council have picked the right target for this, the first decision of its kind. Ireland is without a shadow of a doubt one of the European Union’s model children. It is questionable whether other countries are in the position to reduce their deficits. Ireland achieves surpluses. Other countries still have a huge total debt of over 100% while at the same time Ireland is in the process of reducing its debt to under 40% and so can likewise be held up as a model for other European Union Member States. While other countries are battling unemployment, Ireland has made exemplary progress in this regard with the creation of new jobs. While other Member States are battling with slow economic growth, Ireland is enjoying growth rates that other Member States can only dream of. It should be said, however, that the Irish economy is overheating as a result of this strong growth and that, consequently, there is a risk that this could be to the disadvantage of the Irish people. For example, if I take rent and property prices in Dublin and compare these with those in Frankfurt it becomes quite clear that the development of these prices also has a detrimental effect on the Irish people. In this respect clearly something must be done. The question is, however, who shall take the action? Should it be the European Union who intervenes or is this a matter that should and can be settled by Ireland, the Irish Government or the Irish Parliament themselves? This then raises the question: who should be responsible for European economic policy in the future? We must work towards ensuring that this responsibility is set out quite clearly. We must be clear on who is responsible for what, so that where there is success praise may be given and where there is failure, which may also occur, we are able to say that a particular country or a particular institution is at fault. A clear division of tasks is now emerging within the European Union. The European Union is without doubt responsible for competition, the competition between businesses in the European Union. As Commissioner Mario Monti has demonstrated time and time again, the European Commission takes this task very seriously indeed. The European Commission is also responsible for currency stability, on the one hand through the strong European Central Bank and on the other hand through finance ministers, charged with monitoring the stability and growth pact. The European Union, is therefore responsible for competition and currency stability. Responsibility for taxes, on the other hand, still undoubtedly lies with the Member States of the European Union. The same applies to social security systems and education. This then raises the question: what is happening with currency stability or, more precisely, have occurrences in Ireland jeopardised currency stability within the eurozone? Just imagine a different situation. Imagine that the inflation rate in Germany stands at 6 or 7%. As Germany makes up one third of the gross national product in the eurozone, this would instantly lead to a sharp increase in the average inflation rates in the European Union, to such an extent that the European Central Bank would be forced to spring into action and thus the economy would be curbed. Ireland is however a small economy with a gross national product little above that of west London. The overheating of the Irish economy has no influence whatsoever at a European level, so there is no need for action at the level of the European Central Bank. Ireland no longer has the opportunity as before, when the Irish Central Bank could raise interest rates, of contributing to the deceleration of the economy. Therefore, Ireland must themselves be responsible, also for the Irish people, for reducing the overheating of the economy somehow or other. How this is to be achieved I leave up to the Irish. I do not wish to raise this at the level of the European Union. Now, turning to my second question. On 12 January a decision was made by the European Commission to pay EUR 401 million to Ireland. EUR 726 million in supplementary funds followed, funds that were also pumped into the Irish economy. In this regard I would like to ask whether a conversation took place between Commissioner Solbes and Commissioner Barnier with a view to resolving this obvious contradiction. In other words, what is happening in Germany, in France and in Italy gives much more cause for concern regarding the stability of the euro. I hope that the European Commission will have the same courage, when it comes to dealing with these large countries. (The President cut the speaker off) IN THE CHAIR: MRS FONTAINEPresident

Political group: PPE-DE