Vol. 544 No. 5
14 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the initiatives he proposes at Laeken or elsewhere regarding the future of the Treaty of Nice, with particular reference to ratification by the European Union; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29322/01]
83 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the progress which has been made to resolve matters in the aftermath of the Nice Treaty referendum; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29415/01]
86 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he expects progress at Laeken with particular reference to the issue of the Nice Treaty; his plans to take a particular initiative in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29418/01]
87 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if research has been conducted to determine attitudes to the Nice Treaty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29419/01]
88 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if the debate at the forum has achieved progress in the aftermath of the Nice referendum; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29420/01]
89 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has sought changes to the Nice Treaty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29421/01]
90 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the timetable for the ratification of the Nice Treaty; if he expects the Government will meet the deadline; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29422/01]
100 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if the Government is fully committed to the concept of European integration and enlargement; the alternatives on offer in the absence of such commitment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29433/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 14, 83, 86 to 90, inclusive, and 100 together.
I refer the Deputies to the answer I gave to a previous priority question on this issue.
In relation to the enlargement process and the Treaty of Nice I commend the Minister and the Government on the work of the Forum for Europe. From the Minister's experience to date, allowing for the fact that some of our honourable Members opposite have chosen not to participate in the forum, is he satisfied that the participation of the voluntary pillar is adequate and if the views being promoted in the forum reflect the views of the Irish population? Enlargement must proceed and it is important to explore its ramifications. It is also important that anybody who participates in this debate does so in a balanced manner, bearing in mind the findings of the report of Professor Richard Sinnott published recently in relation to the attitudes of the Irish population to enlargement.
On a related issue, is the Minister aware that throughout Europe the view of members of other European parliaments, national assemblies, is that if a referendum were held in any other member state the result would be the same as that reached here? There seems to be a disenchantment among the European population as a whole with the process of continuously coming back and adding on to the original Treaty of Rome, the SEA, the Amsterdam and Maastricht Treaties and now the Nice Treaty. There is a sense that people are jaded with being asked the same question. Will the Minister agree it is time that in the EU there was a rewrite of all the treaties in a single consolidation document which, like the original Treaty of Rome, is readable and comprehensible to the ordinary citizen?
To respond to Deputy Carey, it is important to hear all points of view in this debate, in relation to the Nice Treaty, the Forum on Europe, the future of Europe debate. The purpose of this debate is to bring clarity and information to the public, not to continue with, perhaps, propagating shibboleths or a particular view which does not bear any political reality with the situation.
For example, much credence was given during the referendum campaign to the idea that enlargement could take place without the need for the Treaty of Nice to become operative. Since May it is clear that, with the recent publication of Commissioner Verheugen's report on the progress being made by applicant countries regarding the negotiations for accession to the European Union, up to ten applicant states, in his view, will be ready by the end of next year to become full members of the European Union. That being the case and given that everyone involved in the debate on the referendum confirmed they were in favour of enlargement, it is becoming the position that the institutional arrangements provided for in the Treaty of Nice to facilitate enlargement will have to be operative in order for those ten states to accede. The idea that there can be accession of a number of states at the end of 2002 without the Treaty of Nice becoming operative does not bear much reality to the situation as matters stand.
In the context of our Treaty of Nice deliberations as part of the Forum on Europe which we are discussing, which I welcome, it is important that we try to examine what concerns raised during the campaign can be dealt with in a way that will allow for enlargement to take place, of which the consequence will be to allow for the Treaty of Nice to be ratified in all 15 member states. That requires further consideration and reflection by Ireland, but our approach has been clear. We recognise that whatever problems we have can only be resolved when that debate is completed.
On a point of order, may I call a quorum?
Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present.
With regard to Deputy Roche's supplementary, the Nice declaration points out that one of the four issues that will be dealt with, among others, in the Intergovernmental Conference planned for 2004 is the question of simplification of the treaties. I take his point that the original treaty, in its reading and comprehension, is far easier to understand than the current situation where one must check a number of treaties that amend previous treaties to find out what the position is in any given situation. Work has been done by the Commission and the European Union Institute in Florence regarding simplification. The one issue about which we must be cautious is to ensure that should there be a simplification procedure, which consolidates and-or simplifies the treaties, it does not give rise to a new jurisprudence which is at variance with the existing jurisprudence which has arisen out of the treaties and the European Court of Justice interpretation of those treaties in the past. This is a very difficult and delicate task. While we all agree with the idea of simplification and consolidation, we have to make sure in doing that we do not create more problems than we solve.
