Vol. 408 No. 1
4 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach his views on whether the principle of subsidiarity should be incorporated specifically in the treaty governing the European Community; if so, the form this would take; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
In my statements in the House on 1 November and 19 December last I indicated that we have no objection to the inclusion in the new treaty of an appropriate provision on subsidiarity subject to there being full clarity about the legal implications of such a definition and that this would not be used to limit the development of the Community in areas of national interest to this country, such as action to promote greater economic and social cohesion.
Would it actually mean anything to incorporate this into the treaty as some are proposing?
It could mean a great deal. There are two main concepts; there are a number of subsidiary concepts. One approach is to list all the things that will remain at national level and those that will stay at Community level. Another approach is to list all the things that will never be ceded to the Community. We are very far from agreement on the principle of subsidiarity.
We would favour a system of subsidiarity, in other words, that those things which are best done at member state level be left to the member states to do, subject to the very important qualification that the legal limits must be fairly clearly defined and, secondly, that it would not mean a reversal of important common Community policies to national level — policies such as the Common Agricultural Policy. We would be very anxious that the main Community policies would not be interfered with by any application of the principle of subsidiarity. We would also wish to see the new principle we are advocating in regard to economic and social cohesion would be very definitely a Community policy.
Would the Taoiseach agree that this is the most serious long term question facing the Government this year in terms of the political development in this country over the next 20 years? Would he further agree there is need for an informed debate on the subject and that in advance of the debate, to which he has agreed it would be useful if he would circulate to all Members the various proposals on the table currently in regard to this matter, subject to the requirements of confidentiality so that we can have a truly well informed discussion on the options?
I will consider that.
