In regard to the appointment of Mr. Jean-Claude Juncker to his present position, the Taoiseach has stated clearly that he has confidence in him. Would he agree, however, that the Luxembourg papers, which were mainly from PricewaterhouseCoopers, revealed a system of tax evasion on an industrial scale? A huge number of companies, including Pepsi, Ikea, Heinz, JP Morgan, FedEx, Deutsche Bank, Macquarie, Shire, ICAP and Dyson, had arrangements with Luxembourg which were seen to be facilitated by this country. People might say this is legal tax avoidance, but is it not shameful that Mr. Juncker, as Prime Minister of a small state which is approximately the size of County Meath and which was a founder member of the European Union, presided over and managed a massive system of tax avoidance and tax evasion by these multinationals?

The Taoiseach referred to a vote by the European Parliament in which his own grouping, the EPP, as well as the Party of European Socialists, supported the appointment of Mr. Juncker. They also refused to support a vote of censure. Does the Taoiseach not think it is inappropriate for this person to be President of the European Commission, given that almost any pronouncement he might make about tax harmonisation or countries such as Luxembourg, Ireland or the Netherlands will be tinged with hypocrisy? Is it not appropriate that, as my colleague Nessa Childers, MEP, has called for, a special committee of inquiry be established to investigate the role he played as Minister for finance and Prime Minister of Luxembourg over the two decades in question? Would the Taoiseach support the European Parliament in conducting such an inquiry? To the general public, there is no question that Mr. Juncker is totally unsuitable and inappropriate as leader of the European Commission.

President Juncker is a politician with considerable experience. It is not for me to comment on the tax structures of any individual country. We have our own structures, and we have been forthright in defending them. There were some comments internationally about the concept of the double Irish and the concept of statelessness. We got rid of that. The only way of having a system that really stands up is where all countries work together within an overall framework for a global economy, and that is where we are. The European Council has agreed on that.

I remind the Deputy that on 24 October the European Council, as a representative of the 28 countries, ratified his appointment as President of the Commission and, earlier in the week, there was a free vote in plenary session of European Parliament, whereby the 751 Members, who represent all countries and shades of political opinion, voted strongly in favour of President Juncker and the 27 other Commissioners.

I obviously do not speak for the European Parliament. It is well able to make up its own mind and its decision was clear.

I wish him the best in his Presidency. He has appointed a number of former Prime Ministers to look after groups of strategies. The reason for that, which I discussed with him, was to appoint people who understand politics and that when decisions are made they should be followed through, not swallowed up and strangled in bureaucracy, red tape and administrative obstacles. I hope that when this Commission makes its decisions politically, it will be able to follow through on them on a clearly defined path that will make them effective. Deputy Broughan is well aware of issues that were decided by the European Commission but that subsequently got bogged down in mounds of paper which made them unworkable. The reason for having Vice Presidents of the Commission who were former Prime Ministers in their individual countries was that they understand that political decisions should be followed through in a way that makes them workable and effective for what they are intended to do.