Written Answers. - Convention on the Future of Europe.
John Gormley
Question:
74
Mr. Gormley
asked the
Minister for Foreign Affairs
if he will outline the main provisions of draft constitution from the Convention on the Future of Europe and its implications for Ireland; his views on the call by the President of the Convention, Mr. Giscard D'Estaing, for a United States of Europe; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
[21502/02]
Bernard J. Durkan
Question:
79
Mr. Durkan
asked the
Minister for Foreign Affairs
the degree to which Ireland intends to influence the political, economic and social landscape in Europe in the future with particular reference to the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
[21605/02]
Bernard Allen
Question:
124
Mr. Allen
asked the
Minister for Foreign Affairs
if he anticipates a further referendum on the European Union following the report of the Convention on the Future of Europe.
[21519/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 74, 79 and 124 together.
The work of the European Convention, which has been meeting since February, has increased in pace, particularly since the summer. The recent publication by the Convention's President, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, of a preliminary draft constitutional treaty was a significant development.
The draft proposes that the existing treaties would in effect be replaced by a new, consolidated and more coherently structured single treaty, reflecting the fact that the European Union would have a single legal personality. The treaty would begin with a preamble; there would then be a first, constitutional, section setting out the basic principles, objectives and structures of the Union; a lengthier second section would set out the detailed policies and their implementation; and a third section would contain the normal final provisions. This seems a sensible approach, particularly if it resulted in a treaty which was more accessible and intelligible to the ordinary citizen. The draft also suggests greater simplicity and uniformity in setting out the different areas of the Union's work – the so-called ‘pillar' structure would no longer apply. Providing this does not suggest a homogenous approach across all of the different policy areas, it could be a useful step towards greater clarity.
However, it is early days and the draft is very much in headline form. It lists many possible areas for inclusion which have yet to be discussed at any level in the Convention. It very much remains to be seen how this initial ‘skeleton' will be fleshed out.
As regards a possible name, this is one of those areas which has yet to be discussed in any substance by the Convention. The draft sets out four possible alternatives – European Community, European Union, United States of Europe and United Europe. From the little that has been said to date, it is clear that there is no great support in the convention for change. People have expressed a view that the wider public is comfortable with the name ‘European Union' and that there does not appear to be any reason to move away from this. I share the view that United States of Europe would not be appropriate, and would have a strong preference for keeping the name ‘European Union'.
Ireland is working hard to influence the shape of the convention's work, which will be a key input to the subsequent Intergovernmental Conference. The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, as the Government's representative, is playing a full and active part, as are the representatives of the Oireachtas, including Deputy Bruton who is a member of the convention's praesidium.
The Government is approaching the convention, and will approach the Intergovernmental Conference, in a positive and constructive manner. We recognise the need for reform if the European Union is to rise to the new challenges ahead and if it is to sustain and develop public support across the member states. However, the Union has been an overwhelming success and we should not lose sight of this. In moving forward, we should take great care to protect the institutional balances and the broad policy mix which have served us well to date. There is wide support for this view across the convention, and on the basis of its proceedings to date some very useful proposals, including for enhancing the role of national parliaments in the Union, are likely to gain consensus support. It will also be necessary to monitor developments on matters of particular sensitivity very carefully.
With regard to the need for a referendum, obviously the convention will only bring forward recommendations. A decision to bring forward a new treaty for ratification by the member states would be for unanimous decision by the subsequent intergovernmental conference. In due course the Government would have to make a final decision, on the basis of the scale, scope and legal implications of such a treaty, on whether a referendum was required to enable Ireland to ratify it. At this stage, however, it seems highly likely that there will be a referendum.
Question No. 75 answered with Question No. 66.
