{"id":412,"date":"2012-05-04T19:39:02","date_gmt":"2012-05-04T19:39:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/karlwhelan.com\/staging\/?p=412"},"modified":"2012-05-04T19:50:35","modified_gmt":"2012-05-04T19:50:35","slug":"will-this-treaty-imply-more-austerity-for-ireland","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.karlwhelan.com\/will-this-treaty-imply-more-austerity-for-ireland\/","title":{"rendered":"Will this Treaty Imply More Austerity for Ireland?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The debate in the opening week of Ireland’s referendum campaign on the Treaty on Stability, Co-Ordination and Governance<\/a> has largely been driven by those advocating a No vote. These campaigners argue that the treaty will lead to additional austerity in Ireland and hence advocate a No to the “Austerity Treaty”. The Yes campaigners respond by asking where Ireland will get the money to fund budget deficits.\u00a0 This morning<\/a>‘s discussion on RTE’s Pat Kenny show between Joan Burton and Mary Lou McDonald largely conformed to this pattern.<\/p>\n

What is odd about this pattern is that Yes campaigners have failed to highlight that the treaty does not, in fact, imply additional austerity in the coming years relative to what would occur if there was a No vote, even if the EU did decide to fund Ireland via EFSF or some other vehicle. The fiscal parameters laid down in the treaty are all part of the existing EU fiscal framework that Ireland is already operating within and would continue to operate within after a No vote<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Here I’ll focus on three different numbers that come up time and again in the treaty debate:<\/p>\n