Written Answers. - Maastricht Treaty.
Roger T. Garland
Question:
37
Mr. Garland
asked the
Minister for Foreign Affairs
if he will outline (a) the status of the Maastricht Treaty if it were rejected by Ireland in the forthcoming referendum, (b) whether it could come into force without our ratification, (c) what would happen to existing EC treaties, (d) whether they would remain fully in being with Ireland's rights and entitlements under them unaffected, including our rights to any increases in the EC budget and Structural Funds that might be agreed this summer, as well as the Common Agricultural Policy and (e) if the present Treaty is rejected by any EC member state, whether the EC states as a whole have to renegotiate it in another treaty, if they wanted to retain certain parts of it.
The Maastricht Treaty on European Union will come into force only if and when it has been ratified by all 12 member states of the European Community who signed it on 7 February 1992. The relevant provision in the Treaty is contained in Article R.2 which reads as follows:
This Treaty shall enter into force on 1 January 1993, provided that all the instruments of ratification have been deposited, or, failing that, on the first day of the month following the deposit of the instrument of ratification by the last signatory State to take this step.
If Ireland, or indeed any other member state should decide not to ratify then the Treaty will not come into effect for any state. The existing EC Treaties would remain in force and current policies under the Treaties such as the Common Agricultural Policy and the Structural Funds would remain in place for the present.
That is the formal legal position. The political position would however be very different.
First, as regards the existing Treaties: the benefits currently accruing to Ireland under the Common Agricultural Policy and the existing Structural Funds would not immediately be affected but we could have no assurance that they would continue for very far into the future. These funds which have resulted in a substantial net flow of resources to Ireland each year are not simply there for the taking — they are to a great extent a matter for regular negotiation which involves action on our part to ensure that Community arrangements meet our specific needs, especially in the Common Agricultural Policy area. It seems to me very unlikely that our partners would be willing for very long to continue a funding arrangement which provides a substantial annual flow of resources to a member state which had blocked a new step forward for all member states of the Community and opted for its own part, to remain outside the new European Union.
Second, as regards the new union treaty not having been ratified by all member states it would not come into force for anyone. I believe that in this unprecedented situation all 12 member states would need in the first instance to meet to consider what should be done. What exactly would be decided must to some extent be a matter of speculation. However, there is no doubt in my mind that, in the event of one State deciding not to ratify the Treaty, the other member states would want to press ahead to create a European Union with a number less than 12. It is clear from the fact that an Agreement on Social Policy was concluded at Maastricht between 11 member states following the decision by the UK not to accept the social provisions of the new treaty, that most of our partners no longer feel constrained to halt the further development of the Community because of a blockage resulting from the position of a single member state. This was a reality which Ireland understood when we went along with the other 11 in accepting the Agreement on Social Policy. Accordingly it seems likely that, in a situation without precedent the other member states would wish to negotiate something very like the Maastricht Treaty between themselves and press ahead without us.
For a better appreciation of the consequences for Ireland, if it were to decide to block the coming into force of the Maastricht Treaty, and stay outside any similar new arrangement, it is necessary to summarise briefly some of the main elements which that Treaty contains.
First, there is the fact that the Maastricht Treaty provides a legal basis for Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). It puts in place a procedure to achieve full economic and monetary union by 1999 at the latest and, subsequently, a single currency which will replace the individual national currencies in use at present. European Monetary Union is a natural extension of the Single European Market and is necessary if the full benefits of a single market are to be realised. It is estimated that the long term benefit to the Community for European Monetary Union and the Single Market could be up to 15 per cent of GDP. Furthermore, if we were not part of Economic and Monetary Union, Ireland would not be able to participate in decisions which have the most fundamental consequences for our economy and currency.
A second feature of the new Treaty is that for the first time it includes the promotion of Economic and Social Cohesion as one of the aims of the Community. It also contains a protocol on Economic and Social Cohesion. This establishes a Cohesion Fund through which the Community will contribute financially to projects in relation to the environment and trans-European networks — transport, communications etc. — in less prosperous member states. These provisions were inserted to address the concern that the more prosperous central regions of the Community would gain disproportionately at the expense of the periphery.
A third feature of the new Treaty is that it has given the Community competence to deal with new areas such as education, public health, consumer protection, industry, development co-operation, trans-European networks and culture. The intention is that Community action should supplement national actions in these areas, thus taking account of what is described as the principle of subsidiarity.
Other important aspects of the new Treaty are the provisions for closer co-operation in the fields of justice and home affairs; and the provisions in relation to a Common Foreign and Security Policy which established systematic co-operation between member states in the conduct of foreign policy and joint action in certain areas where member states have important interests in common.
These are all important steps forward in European integration; they are important for the Community; and they would all, I believe, be important for Ireland. None of them however would be taken at this stage if the Treaty itself does not come into force.
If that were to happen, as I have said, our partners would no doubt find a way of going forward with very similar proposals without us. But we would, by our own decision have decided to turn aside from a path which the Irish people embarked on by a clear majority in 1972 when they approved our membership of the Community, which they confirmed in the referendum on the Single European Act in 1987. We would also have turned our back on the road now being taken by some six other European countries who have applied to join the Community. These countries, in joining, are willing to commit themselves to the Maastricht Treaty on European Union. They include several countries which, like Ireland, have had a traditional policy of remaining outside of military alliances.
I would add in conclusion that while a number of the points mentioned in the Deputy's question are legal ones, the fundamental question which the Irish people will have to answer in the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty is a political and economic one: do we move forward together with our partners towards greater prosperity; or do we block the whole process of Community integration for every one for a time at least and opt instead to isolate ourselves for the future with all the disastrous consequences which that could entail? If this choice is made clear to them I have no doubt but that a majority of the Irish people will decide to vote in favour of the new Treaty.
