Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 23 Apr 2008

Vol. 652 No. 3

Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed).

Atairgeadh an cheist: "Go léifear an Bille an Dara hUair anois."
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

In February 2008, Commissioner Kuneva's office said that the Commission and Council were getting negative feedback on a health directive and President Barroso instructed the Commission not to take unpopular initiatives during the Lisbon treaty discussions. On 1 April, Androulla Vassiliou, the Health Commissioner, told MEPs that the Commission will publish its long-delayed proposal for a cross-border health care directive in June. We find — surprise, surprise — that the publication date will be 25 June, after the Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty.

On Monday, 14 April, the Daily Mail outlined a briefing by Dan Mulhall, a senior official in the Department of Foreign Affairs, stating that the referendum is being held in June rather than October due to likely “unhelpful developments” during the forthcoming French Presidency, particularly with regard to defence. Mr. Mulhall also acknowledged Margot Wallstrom’s reassurances that the Commission was willing to “tone down or delay messages that might be unhelpful” to the Irish referendum.

Also revealed last week was a letter from the powerful EU constitutional committee chairperson, Jo Leinen, stating that he was writing to chairpersons of EU committees advising them that "any documents concerning implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon which addresses politically sensitive matters be examined only when it becomes sufficiently clear that the Treaty will enter into force" — i.e. after the Irish referendum.

On Thursday last, 17 April, the EU Observer reported that a public debate on EU budgetary reform launched last September has been given two additional months, with diplomats suggesting that the additional time comes as a result of the “EU tip-toeing around Ireland” as the controversial debate includes possible cuts in farm subsidies.

It was reported on Sunday last that President Barroso has confirmed that the Commission will not now be pursuing a case against Ireland for alleged breach of EU rules on equal opportunity due to religious schools refusing to employ teachers who do not adhere to the religious ethos of the school. It is believed that this climb-down reflects the intense pressure on the European Union to avoid antagonising the Irish in advance of the referendum. Deception is the name of the game for the "yes" camp, but the old saying should be remembered: "what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."

Deputy Ruairí Quinn said we must support the treaty, that it is not perfect but "it is the only Europe around". That is patently false. We have a choice. We can say no to the drive towards the type of Europe envisaged by Jose Barroso, President of the European Commission who said last July:

Sometimes I like to compare the EU as a creation to the organisation of empire. We have the dimensions of empire.

Sinn Féin Deputies set out the arguments against the Lisbon treaty. We set out the direct implications for Ireland if the Lisbon treaty is passed in terms of the loss of power, neutrality, public services, workers' rights, rural Ireland and the economy. We also set out in clear terms what the Irish Government should do in negotiations for a new treaty. I would like to add to my contribution a call on the electorate to participate in the debate, to come out and vote "no" and send the Government back to secure a better deal for Ireland. It is my firm view that the Irish Government absolutely failed to protect Irish national interests during the negotiations both on the EU constitution and the Lisbon treaty.

People should consider carefully what they are being asked to support. The Lisbon treaty includes more than 100 additional powers for EU institutions, including the loss of vetoes in key areas like the economy; the ending of our automatic right to a Commissioner — this means no Irish voice at the table for five out of every 15 years; a 50% reduction in our voting strength in the Council of Ministers; and Article 48, which gives the EU powers to amend its own treaties without recourse to an intergovernmental conference or a new treaty — this would give the Commission and the Council significant scope to acquire more powers in the future.

The effect of all of this is to substantially weaken Ireland's position within the European Union institutions. This loss of power will have serious implications for our farming community; fisheries, as already demonstrated;r small businesses; and the economy in general. We are told that all countries are being treated equally, but of course this is not the case. While our voting strength is being cut in half, the voting strength of larger countries such as Britain and Germany nearly doubles. We are told that it is not practical to have 27 Commissioners, that it would be too cumbersome, but in the Dáil there are 15 Ministers and 20 Ministers of State for a population of fewer than 5 million people. It seems more than credible and necessary to have 27 Commissioners to represent more than 500 million people.

There has been a lot of scaremongering during this debate about the economy, with some suggesting that foreign direct investment will dry up if the Lisbon treaty is rejected. This is nonsense and serves only to distract attention from the content of the treaty. In France, following the rejection of the EU constitution, inflows of foreign direct investment reached historic highs for two consecutive years. Ireland will remain an attractive location for investment and our position in the European Union will be secure long into the future.

However, there are issues in the Lisbon treaty that will negatively impact on key economic issues, such as competitiveness, growth and social inclusion. The loss of a permanent Commissioner could have a serious impact on agriculture and rural communities. Not only is the Commission given greater scope in the negotiation of international trade agreements, but Ireland loses its veto in all but a small number of cases. The Lisbon treaty provides for qualified majority voting on laws governing foreign direct investment and international agreements on foreign investment. There are also growing concerns about the EU desire to create a common tax base. Ministers claim that Ireland's veto will block measures from the EU, but as it stands Article 48 of the Lisbon treaty allows the EU to move from unanimity to majority voting on key areas, including company tax.

This is not a shock to the Irish Government. It has known about this issue for many years but has failed to take action to protect the national interest and instead tried to bury the issue until after the Lisbon treaty. Charlie McCreevy has talked about the long-term hidden agenda for a common corporation tax base and said it was a sinister idea that refuses to die. French finance Minister Christine Lagarde let the cat out of the bag during this past week when she said that the French were determined to push through a common corporate tax base during the upcoming French Presidency of the European Union.

In the view of this Deputy and that of my colleagues and many more people with a variety of political opinion and none, the Government seriously mishandled the Lisbon treaty negotiations. Decisions regarding taxation are a matter for this State to decide. The Government ought to have ensured that issues such as taxation were exempt from the application of Article 48, but it failed to do this. This could be properly addressed in a new treaty.

If we look at the position of the other parties, the situation is even more worrying. MEPs from both Fine Gael and the Labour Party supported the Bersani report in the European Parliament, which called for common corporation taxes. I believe that a better deal is possible. The Lisbon treaty should be rejected and Irish negotiators should be sent back to the table to secure a better deal, including Ireland keeping a permanent European Commissioner and our voting strength on the Council of Ministers being maintained; a specific article recognising and protecting neutrality; opt outs ending support for nuclear power, the European Defence Agency and other contributions to EU military expenditure; working with other EU countries to strengthen democracy and create new provisions promoting public services; specific protocols serving this State's right to continue making its own decisions on taxation; specific measures exempting health and education from privatisation; and specific measures promoting fair trade over free trade.

On behalf of the Sinn Féin Oireachtas team in the Dáil and the Seanad, I again encourage people to take their courage in their hands on 12 June——

——not to be bullied or frightened but to consider all the points before us. We have the right and the responsibility to point out the deficiencies in what is proposed. I encourage people to consider these carefully but, above all, to exercise their vote. I want to see a high turn-out and I hope that all people, irrespective of what views we represent on this issue from the "Yes" and "No" camp will encourage the electorate to employ their franchise. I want to see a resounding rejection and I encourage people to take the courage to do so.

I wish to share time with Deputy Seán Connick.

I am pleased to contribute to the debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008, which sets out the legal basis of the Lisbon treaty referendum, which will be put to the Irish people on 12 June. I acknowledge the importance of Ireland's participation in the EU since 1973 and the enormous contribution that membership and participation has made to Ireland's social and economic parameters since 1973.

Listening to Deputy Ó Caoláin state that the "Yes" campaign has been characterised by deception is rich coming from him and Sinn Féin. That party has opposed every European treaty referendum to date. For the argument on the Lisbon treaty to have any credibility, Sinn Féin should have the courage to say that it got it wrong in the past, that it underestimated the importance of Ireland's involvement and participation in the European Union and understated the benefits that Ireland has derived from membership and participation in the Union. Its arguments would have greater credibility if it acknowledged it got it wrong many times in the past in terms of Ireland's involvement in the European Union. If there has been any deception to date in this campaign, it has been on the "No" side, which has been characterised by conspiracies, falsehoods and ignorance of what the treaty states. It has completely disregarded the assurances given by the European Commission, the President, individual Commissioners and our Government. It is a source of great pride to me that it was the Irish Government, which held the Presidency of the European Union in 2004, that successfully concluded the negotiation of the draft constitutional treaty, which forms the basis of the Lisbon treaty as it has emerged. It has been put on the record by the Taoiseach and others that 90% or more of the contents of the Lisbon treaty derive from the constitutional treaty which the Irish Presidency secured agreement on in June 2004. That is not something we should hide but rather we should be proud of it. There have been changes since and those have been clearly articulated in the campaign thus far. It is important to have this debate in the context of our overwhelmingly positive contribution since 1973.

I take issue with some of the criticisms that have been made of the Lisbon treaty. The number of Commissioners will be two thirds the number of member states, totalling 18 Commissioners. It is an enormous sacrifice for countries the size of France, the UK and Germany to relinquish the automatic right they have to a Commissioner. It is not very long ago since those countries had two Commissioners each while smaller countries such as Ireland had one. As larger countries in the European Union, their sacrifice is much greater in that they are agreeing to relinquish their automatic right to have two Commissioners. The "No" side has consistently ignored the fact that the treaty recognises, for the first time, the role of national parliaments in the conduct of European affairs. It significantly enhances the role of the European Parliament by providing co-decision making with the Council in a number of areas. It is important that a President of the European Council will be appointed for a two and a half yearly term, with the possibility of his or her time in office being extended for a total of five years. This would provide continuity in terms of the European Commission being represented in all its international affairs.

The charter of fundamental rights, which is being given legal recognition under the treaty, is also a significant improvement and must be commended. Many of those on the "no" side have talked about the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy, completely ignoring the fact that participation in any mission will be voluntary for every member state. They ignore the fact that Ireland's neutrality is copperfastened in this treaty, which provides recognition of our constitutional provisions in this regard. They also refer to the solidarity arrangements, whereby in the event of a member state being attacked other EU countries have the right, if they choose, to come to its assistance. I see nothing wrong with that. If Ireland came under attack at some future date, for instance, we would all like to believe that our neighbours and friends in the European Union would come to our assistance. The view has long been proffered by opponents of European engagement and the European project that Ireland's neutrality would end. I am very proud that our military personnel are participating in humanitarian missions in Chad and are saving lives.

It should be reaffirmed too that unanimity and the right of veto is retained in all sensitive areas. Deputy Ó Caoláin was disingenuous in what he said on taxation. Ireland will retain a right of veto on any proposed changes to corporation tax rates, and to suggest otherwise is wrong. At odds with the facts also is the assertion that in some way the adoption of this treaty may lead to the introduction of abortion in Ireland. Members will know that Ireland has secured a number of protocols in previous treaties, which apply to the Lisbon treaty, particularly as regards Article 43.3 of the Constitution. These stipulate clearly that nothing in the treaties or any Acts modifying or supplementing them will affect the application in Ireland of Article 43.3 of the Constitution as regards respect for the right to life of the unborn.

On modernising and changing decision-making structures that will be brought about by the adoption of the Lisbon treaty, the double-majority voting system, which will be introduced in 2014, provides an important safeguard for smaller member states. It effectively means that the large European states cannot gang up on the smaller countries and impose decisions that we would not support. The requirement for 55% of countries to support measures under qualified majority voting, QMV, representing 65% of the population, effectively means that 15 of the current 27 member states must agree on a particular initiative under QMV before it can be adopted, and those countries must represent 65% of the population. That is a very important safeguard for small countries. It enshrines the equality of member states in the decision-making process in the European Union and I very much welcome this.

The essential point of the treaty is that it copperfastens the view that 27 member states, working together and collectively, on issues such as climate change, the WTO negotiations and the security of future energy supplies, are much more effective. Our bargaining strength is enhanced significantly when we act as a bloc of 27 member states. The European Union is now a bloc of 500 million people. The Single Market has allowed us to break free from the shackles of economic dependence on the UK and has provided us with tremendous opportunities which many Irish businesses and entrepreneurs have seized on enthusiastically and with great success since Ireland joined the EEC. The European Union is the most affluent bloc of consumers in the world, with its 500 million people.

It is important that all parties play a constructive and positive role in this campaign. The Joint Committee on European Affairs will be held in Cork on Thursday night next and I encourage as many people as possible to attend and participate in the debate. I call on the Irish people to vote, as they have done in the past, in favour of the treaty in this referendum, to enhance and copperfasten Ireland's role as an important member of the European Union.

The challenges facing Irish jobs, the environment and Ireland's competitiveness today are global. Against climate change, rising energy costs, transnational crime and global economic downturns, our capacity to defend our interests on our own is minimal. Ireland's sovereignty, power and strength lie in the capacity to act for its people, to defend its prosperity, safeguard its environment and protect the jobs and livelihoods that families have worked so hard to build. That capacity to act, though minimal on our own, is enhanced extraordinarily through the unique partnership that is the European Union. This ensures access to the Single Market, practical co-operation and greater clout on the world stage.

The reform treaty will increase Ireland's capacity to act even further in its own interests. It will cut bureaucracy, tackle inefficiency, speed up decision making and deliver a Union that is more responsive to its citizens and more answerable to the Oireachtas. The EU empowers us and this treaty will empower us further. We have done well from the EU and the Lisbon treaty will enable us to deliver even better outcomes for Irish people. In the words of Pope Benedict, it gives a boost to the process of building a European home.

In the 40 years before the European Steel and Coal Community was formed in 1952, Europe suffered two devastating world wars, which left tens of millions dead and destroyed large areas of the Continent. Wars involving many of the European powers had broken out every 50 years on average for several centuries before this. Europe was an area in turmoil with constantly changing national borders and international alliances created with the sole intention of waging war. The European Coal and Steel Community and its subsequent incarnations leading up to the European Union were created in part to normalise relationships between the countries of Europe and to try to end the devastating cycle of war that was ripping the Continent apart. The success of the European Union is demonstrated by the fact that Western Europe has not seen war fought on its lands in over 60 years and is unlikely to see it again in any of our lifetimes.

Since Ireland joined the European Economic Community in 1973, the Irish people have been among the most enthusiastic supporters of the European concept. On several occasions over the past 35 years, the Irish public has been asked to adopt treaties that would change the nature of Europe and Ireland's role therein. However, every one of these treaties has brought changes that have been good for Ireland. The Single European Act lead to the establishment of the Single Market and the investment of Structural Funds in Ireland at a time when our economy needed it most. The Single Market and Structural Funds were among the most important contributors to the start of the Celtic tiger. The Maastricht treaty gave us the euro. The treaties of Amsterdam and Nice helped to end permanently the divisions between east and west in Europe and the Lisbon treaty will equip both Ireland and Europe to meet the challenges of today's changing world.

The Lisbon treaty completes a process of internal reform that began in 1990. When it became clear that the European Union would grow rapidly from 12 countries to upwards of 30, it became obvious that the existing structures would not be sufficient to administer a union of that size. A lot of time and negotiation has been devoted to this matter and the Lisbon treaty was the best compromise that could be obtained. It will bring an end to debates on the structure and future of the European Union, and its unique reliance on inter-governmental agreements will ensure that the Union will never become a superstate. The principle of subsidiarity, enshrined in this treaty, which is based on the principle that decisions should, if possible, be taken at a local, regional or national level, guarantees national sovereignty.

Article 1.4 of the treaty is one of the most important and it will be quoted frequently as the debate continues over the coming months. The article contains the essence of what the Union is about. It states: "The Union's aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples". Article 1.4 is very important and I will be highlighting it as I travel around the country to promote the passage of the treaty.

In 1973 Ireland joined the EEC and I therefore have been a proud citizen of the Union for 36 years, which is most of my life. Every aspect of our experience as a member to date has been positive. All sectors have benefited greatly from membership, including the agriculture and business sectors, as has the peace process and infrastructure in terms of roads, bridges, and sewerage and water schemes.

We hear arguments that the treaty is complicated. Of course it is; we are bringing together 27 different countries. We must not forget that the European Union is a work in progress. I am proud to say Ireland is playing its part in the development of the process. We are part of a great tapestry of different countries, peoples and cultures, all working towards a common goal, namely, unity of purpose and movement towards peace, prosperity and progress.

I really cannot understand people who are opposed to this treaty. Let us counter some of the myths they are generating. There is no doubt that our neutrality is protected. This has been ensured by virtue of the triple lock. Our taxation law is protected. Unanimity will continue to apply to all taxation matters and approval of all member states will be required to make any changes in this regard. Ireland will not give up its tax advantage. We have fought for this and it has afforded us an advantage that we will not relinquish.

Increased co-operation in the European Union, particularly in areas related to criminal law and policing, is to be welcomed. Increased economic security and stability and the upholding and strengthening of the principle of subsidiarity are also to be welcomed. The world is now a global village. I travelled to Vienna some weeks ago and it was amazing to sit alongside the main street there listening to the different languages of citizens of different nationalities and to watch people wander through the streets peacefully. One can do the same in Spain, France, London or Dublin. Europe has become multicultural throughout.

Most of the groups and people speaking out against the treaty are from the extreme left or extreme right and they are very strange bedfellows. Most, if not all, of them have benefited from our membership of the Union, yet they are against the further development of this great project. It is inconceivable that people will vote against this treaty and Europe. It is essentially voting against a movement for peace, prosperity and progress. We must not let these people hinder or prevent the ongoing development of the Union. A "yes" vote is a vote for jobs, peace and progress.

Our opponents state that this treaty enshrines in law increased militarisation, ends our military neutrality and cedes a whole range of competencies to the European Union. One party that is opposing this treaty has made the same arguments about militarisation in respect of every referendum on our involvement in Europe. When we were voting to join the EEC in 1972, it stated:

Irish people will be compelled to fight wars the European powers decide to wage. Neutrality will go and compulsory military service will be introduced.

When opposing the Single European Act in 1987, the party said the treaty would surrender power completely to the NATO-dominated EEC. We were told by the same party that the Maastricht treaty will be a death knell for Irish neutrality while the Amsterdam treaty would ensure the nuclear-armed Western European Union would be integrated into the European Union structures. During our last referendum, on the Nice treaty, the party told us that Nice would "bring us closer into a European Army". Thirty-six years and six treaties later, our neutrality is still secure. In respect of the Lisbon treaty, we are still being peddled the same arguments on neutrality that have been proven to be wrong time and again.

One of the biggest changes in approach that the European Union will take as a result of the Lisbon treaty is having a more co-ordinated response to foreign policy. The treaty represents a very good outcome for Ireland on issues of major sensitivity, such as unanimity in the taxation area. One of the strangest claims being made by opponents of this treaty is that it will somehow be self-amending, that is, that once it is passed, nations will no longer have the power to decide whether to accept or reject any further changes to the structure or powers of the European Union. Article 48.4 of the Lisbon treaty states quite clearly that any decision "shall not enter into force until it is approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements". I do not understand how any opponent of this treaty can credibly claim it will become self-amending when Article 48.4 is so clear.

No Irish interest would be served by creating a political crisis in Europe, by turning our backs on a treaty that was to a considerable extent made in Ireland and responds to our needs and aspirations. As we face current and future challenges on our domestic front, such as the need to safeguard the livelihoods and quality of life of our citizens, Ireland's membership of the Union is as vital as ever. Imagine if we had to face the current uncertainty in the global economy on our own, outside of the European monetary system.

The treaty contains concrete measures that will enhance democracy within the Union. It strengthens the role of national parliaments by giving them direct input into European legislation. The provision whereby a sufficient number of national parliaments can object to a particular proposal is a genuine step forward. It will enable national parliaments to ensure that the Union does not exceed its authority. As Vice Chairman of the newly established Oireachtas Committee on EU Scrutiny, I have seen at first hand the power that has been given to national parliaments to amend, influence and even object to European legislation. This treaty actually strengthens the role of national parliaments in this regard.

A central feature of European democracy is the protection of individual rights and freedoms. The reform treaty raises the protection of the rights of Europe's citizens to a new level. It will do so by making the Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding on the Union's institutions and on the Member States when they are implementing EU law. It will also allow the Union to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights, which, together with the European Court of Human Rights, is the foundation stone of human rights protection in Europe.

So many of the issues on our national agenda today have major European and global dimensions. Issues such as climate change and spiralling energy costs transcend national borders. On its own, a small country such as Ireland cannot solve these problems. However, working together with our European partners, as part of the richest domestic market in the world, will help us to address them. It is therefore in our interest to support the European Union in this endeavour. It would not make sense for us to turn our backs on Europe by blocking sensible changes to the functioning of the Union. We have the opportunity to guarantee Ireland's position at the heart of Europe. Let us not throw that chance away.

I understand Deputy Connick has made his maiden speech. If so, it is on an auspicious day in the House, on which a serving Taoiseach attends for his last day. I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Ahern, has seen a few Taoisigh move on in his time and I have seen all the outgoing Taoisigh since 1975.

I am honoured, as leader of the Fine Gael Party, to say that we strongly support the EU reform treaty. We are urging our supporters all over the country to come out and vote "yes" for it. As things may not be going so well in the country economically, or from a health, education or other perspective, it would be very easy in a party political sense to use the opportunity to encourage people to use their vote on Europe against the Government here. Long before this debate started I said publicly, just as my predecessors in this party always did, that we would put Ireland first in the context of Europe and leave aside any partisan party political differences that I might have with Fianna Fáil, the Progressive Democrats or the Green Party in Government.

This is about ourselves, our children, our country and our Continent. From that point of view it is fundamental that the politicians understand that their remit, role and responsibility in this matter are to explain to people as clearly and as understandably as possible what this treaty is about, what it contains, what its implications are and why it is necessary. It is important that the people be properly informed when they go to make their decision. There are people who may have a different point of view and have an articulation as to why they want to vote against the treaty, which I respect. However, between now and 12 June, this debate should take place on the facts in the treaty and not on the misinformation that is being peddled about in various locations. That is not the way to conduct our business. While it is always easy to be negative — it is always easy to generate coverage or publicity by claiming to be a "no" person on the treaty — it is not in the interests of our people.

While I serve as leader of my party, in a European context I also serve as the elected vice president of the European People's Party, which as Members will know forms the largest voting bloc in the European Parliament with more than 272 Members. That bloc provided the President of the European Parliament, Hans-Gert Pöttering, MEP, who recently spoke in the Seanad. The President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, is also from that party as are Chancellor Angela Merkel and a number of other Prime Ministers, some of whom were here last Monday to discuss the challenges facing Europe economically. They did not come here to tell us what we had to do. They came here to demonstrate solidarity with this country as we move forward to face these challenges, which are not confined to Ireland alone.

From that perspective when I attend those meetings approximately every two months, I get a very clear picture of the problems, challenges and opportunities that face Ireland, Europe and the world in a global sense in the coming period. Over the next 20 years we will see major changes economically and around the world. Often in a place like Ireland we can become very focused on our own immediate problems without looking at what is staring us in the face in the next 20 to 50 years. A recent advertisement in some of the financial newspapers asked who is responsible for the weather in 2050, the answer to which is "You are, so do something about it now". The challenges we face include climate change, energy security, energy cost, food security, food production cost, water supply and the geopolitics of oil.

In the next 20 years there will be five presidential elections in the United States. Regardless of whomever the people might want to elect and whatever might be the political message or the consequences of that, there will be serious difficulties in many countries between now and then, including the great humanitarian crises we are facing and the implications of political decisions made around the world. We are witnessing the phenomenal advance of China with its 1.4 billion people, the advance of India economically with its 1.2 billion people, the coming again of Russia because of its energy reserves, the emergence of Brazil and South Africa, and the powering ahead of the United States. It would be a mistake for us to assume that 4.3 million people can afford to stand by and watch all these events from the sidelines. That is why the referendum on this treaty on 12 June is unique.

The Irish people are the only ones having a referendum, which is required following the Supreme Court decision in the Crotty case many years ago. It gives every elector the privilege and responsibility of deciding the fate and future of the main institutions of Europe to cater for a population not of 250 million, as it was when we had 15 countries, but of 500 million. As the eyes of Europe are on Ireland, it is important that this debate be healthy, robust, true and based on the facts in the treaty.

I have attended some of the 30 or 35 meetings the Fine Gael Party has arranged around the country. These are well attended. I recall the campaign for the first referendum on the Nice treaty. People did not support the treaty in that referendum because they were confused and did not understand it. On the second occasion my party arranged a series of public meetings around the country. Some 500,000 more people voted on the second occasion and the Nice treaty referendum was passed. As I see the same trend now, it is vital that people be encouraged to come to these public meetings so that they can stand up and ask the questions that are in their heads about this treaty if they have any interest in it. If they have no interest, it is our duty to try to stimulate an interest so that they can ask these questions because it is about themselves, their children and our future.

I recall, as in the campaign for the referendum on the Nice treaty, people saying they went to a meeting and witnessed a really good row about neutrality, abortion or whatever it was. Those people found they left the meeting much clearer in their minds about their position, either for or against. At least they had participated in a healthy, democratic and robust debate and were therefore in a much stronger position to make up their minds.

The usual stuff has been peddled about on this occasion suggesting that a vote for the European reform treaty is a vote for the backdoor introduction of abortion, euthanasia, single-child families etc., which is complete nonsense in the context of this treaty. As everybody should know we have protection in Bunreacht na hÉireann and a specific protection written into the protocol of the Maastricht treaty which is legally binding. In any event health is a competence of each individual country and no European dimension can influence that without the Irish people making the decision themselves.

The same applies in the case of neutrality. I have heard people of prominence and others claiming the treaty would introduce a European army with enormous costs for militarisation and that therefore we are likely to face the ravages of being invaded or whatever. We have a very clear position on the matter. We have differed with the Government in some aspects of neutrality and how we would approach it. However, we have always said the triple-lock mechanism that applies here requiring a UN mandate, Government clearance and Dáil approval in each case is very important.

A few years ago I went to Kosovo with Deputy Timmins, who is a former member of the Defence Forces and who saw service abroad. South of Pristina we met troops, and saw them on parade and doing their duty. We travelled out with them to the villages and townlands in the area. They were operating under Finnish command carrying out a peace-enforcement, peacekeeping exercise in which they wanted to participate and in which they excelled. People from different walks of life there in what was a political tinderbox said the Irish troops were manifestly able to command respect on both sides of the political divide. While the mission in Chad is difficult as were the ones in Liberia and Lebanon, these matters are all cleared by the Government and must accord with a UN mandate. There is no question of Ireland being forced into a military alliance. That is protected and requires unanimity. In our case there is respect and understanding for our constitutional position and the legal protocol inserted into the Maastricht treaty. That is not to say that we might not require help in the area of terrorism, which is a transborder phenomenon.

Leaders from the European People's Party, EPP, group discuss the problems they foresee and immigration, for example, presents both a challenge and an opportunity. It can be a divisive issue and just now I was outside with the Taoiseach for the Show Racism the Red Card campaign. Many countries, including Greece, Malta and others, have sent back many people who entered illegally. The point has been made that if the population of Africa doubles in the next 25 years, which it will, and if even 10% of young males decide to emigrate from Africa to Europe, no single country could withstand the pressure. There must be a fair, equitable and reasonable European response to this. When one examines the scale of the problems that exist one realises that Ireland is in a position to influence this matter greatly.

Two points in the treaty are fundamental to strengthening democratic links, namely, increasing accountability and improving transparency in the interest of citizens. Members who serve in this Chamber are directly elected by the people and are given a mandate through the secrecy of the ballot box. When people, hopefully, endorse the treaty we will enhance accountability and transparency. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny, which has been elevated to the status of a full Oireachtas committee and is chaired by Deputy John Perry from my party, will be responsible for ensuring that initiatives that come from the Commission and are sent to parliaments eight weeks before anything happens are scrutinised. The members of the committee, who were directly elected by the people, can call in officials and ask what the implications of initiatives are, what they will mean in Brussels and what they will mean when they come back. If an initiative taken in the Commission is not in accordance with the wishes of this Parliament or the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny there will be a facility, shared with other countries, to have it changed or withdrawn. This is an important element for the citizens of Ireland to understand. The European Commission is entitled to introduce initiatives, directives and regulations but the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny is an important element in scrutinising them. The committee can see that people are informed of what is going on and that things we do not want are not imposed on us. It should be clearly understood that nothing can happen in Europe unless that competency and authority is given to it by member states.

The co-decision making process between the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers is an enhanced responsibility that is very important. Members know that at the moment MEPs have little or no influence in terms of decisions that are made by the Commission. They have always had responsibility in dealing with the Parliament's budgetary position and there is a measure of co-decision there but this will be enhanced and increased. This means that when the treaty is, hopefully, passed, MEPs, elected by the public and, therefore, transparent and accountable to the public, may be lobbied by groups, agencies, organisations and individuals about issues that matter to them. It is important that every Irish citizen knows that MEPs elected to the Parliament will have this responsibility placed on them. In terms of increasing democratic accountability, transparency and responsibility these are fundamental areas.

The position of President of the Council is important. Over a number of years we held very successful EU Presidencies and the six months it is in our possession tends to be a very busy time for departmental officials and Ministers and Ministers of State. In 1996 we held the Presidency from July until the end of the year and it was an incredibly busy period that culminated, in my case, as Minister for Tourism and Trade, in dealing with the World Trade Organisation talks. I believe that what will emerge from this treaty is a better system that will see responsibility rolling on and the President of the Council appointed for two and a half years. The President will only be mandated to do what he or she must do through agreement by member states. This is a more effective and efficient way of dealing with business.

I mentioned World Trade Organisation talks and this is a matter of concern in Ireland. I have the privilege of chairing an ad hoc working group on agricultural reform in the European People’s Party grouping and this is an important element. Europe’s contribution to the Doha Round of talks, driven through by the former commissioner, Mr. Franz Fischler, was the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy until 2013.

The agriculture sector is now of increasing importance in the context of rising food prices, rising production costs and food shortages. There were riots relating to this in Egypt recently and the price of rice has increased by 100% in India, Thailand and other countries. This is due to changing demographics, the growing of crops for energy, the production of bio-fuels and deforestation. China has seen the greatest migration of people in history as people move to cities; they want rice to eat and food and production costs all affect this issue.

The agriculture sector here is important in this regard. Last Tuesday morning, at the ad hoc working group that I chair, I called the Irish Farmers Association, IFA, the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association, ICMSA, and the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association, ICSA, to give their points of view on how they see agriculture issues unfolding in the context of World Trade Organisation talks. They made clear statements and have legitimate concerns. However, the Government has confirmed, as did the European Commission President, José Manuel Barroso, when I put a question to him at the forum on Thursday, that when the WTO talks conclude they must be accepted unanimously. This means that every one of the 27 member states will have the power to veto any deal they do not see as fair and balanced.

The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Coughlan, did not speak clearly enough on this matter and Deputy Creed articulated the point of view of our party. This issue is of consequential concern for the country's agrisector and while people have the right to express their opinions strongly, their wrath should not be focused on the Lisbon reform treaty because every country has the right to veto the WTO talks if they not deem them fair and balanced.

I communicated the points raised by the agriculture and farming organisations to Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Barroso after the forum presentation in Dublin Castle. The agriculture sector has always voted, and farming organisations have taken the view that they are better equipped to deal with coming challenges as part of a strong Europe. From this perspective we support the treaty on the basis that CAP has been reformed until 2013. I believe that it is better to be part of a strong Europe and deal with WTO subsequently. There will be a presidential election in the United States and I will not dwell on the fact that the US decides what it will and will not deal with in the WTO. I saw evidence of this approach when I dealt with the United States.

When I attended those meetings, observer status was granted to other countries which want to join the European Union for a number of reasons. It is not just because they see Ireland as a development role model as a result of co-operation with and finances from Europe. They also want enlargement for other reasons — for the benefit of their peoples.

The EU Commission President José Manuel Durão Barroso explained when he was a young lad in Portugal he could not listen to the music or read the books he wanted to because it was a dictatorship at the time. The Ukrainian President, Victor Yushchenko, explained at another meeting how the Ukraine would love to do business with the West as it has lived under Russia for so many years. He made the point that when Stalin was in charge of his country, he issued an edict which resulted in 2,000 people starving to death every day for over two years. These countries want to join with Europe. They see the EU as a force for good in the world, given the challenges we face in the future.

I was struck by the question from the Polish Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, of what do we have to offer our young people. He replied: "Freedom." The EU and Lisbon treaty is fundamental to this.

Every Irish elector must remember that for the first and most important time, 500 million people look to our small country of 4.3 million to decide the future flexibility, efficiency and professionalism of the large EU institutions in which we are all part. We all have a part to play in these institutions, which will not be able to do anything against our consent.

I urge everyone to understand the fundamentals of the Lisbon treaty. My party supporters, Deputies, Senators and councillors should not be concerned by this treaty because I believe in its integrity, quality and consequence. That consequence will be for a better Europe and a better Ireland for all our people.

I wish to share time with Deputy Calleary.

A host of challenges and opportunities face the European Union and its member states. Meeting these collectively is in all our interests. The Lisbon reform treaty will improve the way the EU works, making it more effective at national and European level and on the world stage.

The EU has helped build an unbroken peace in Europe for 50 years. It has helped guide Greece, Portugal and Spain on the road from authoritarian to democratic rule. It has contributed to the peaceful transition of ten central and eastern European countries from the tyranny of communism to democracy.

Little is heard about how the Union ensured we adhere to better environmental standards or secured equal pay for equal work for women across Europe. What is heard is plenty of rhetoric about bloated and faceless bureaucracies. In the face of such charges, it is worth reminding ourselves of the truly profound, historic and progressive dynamic created by European integration. It has transformed our Continent and country, setting standards that people both near and far wish to emulate.

I accept the Union is not perfect. As an organisation made up of 27 member states, each with its own national interests and traditions, compromises must be made. However, the Union has shown time and again that national interests can be accommodated and that our shared interests are strong.

Since joining the then EEC in 1973, Ireland has been transformed. Our economic, political, social and cultural horizons have broadened. The economic contribution the Union has made to Irish life is perhaps the best documented aspect of this story. The EU has also opened other doors to us, both here at home and in the wider world. It has given us an opportunity to bring our own distinctive views to the table of the most important political and economic bloc in the world. It has also provided us with an important new context in which to address the Northern Ireland conflict and to build better relations between all the people of this island. As a small nation, it has given us confidence to sit as equals among the biggest players on the world stage.

I will encourage people to vote "Yes" in the upcoming referendum because the treaty will reform the EU's structures to take account of a membership of 27 states, reform and improve the democratic deficit in the EU and further copperfasten our neutrality.

The reform treaty is an important achievement for the Union. It responds to the needs of today's Union with its increased membership numbering 27 member states. It will equip it to meet the emerging challenges of the 21st century. The treaty contains several institutional provisions which will make its structures more effective and give it a stronger voice on the world stage.

One major change is the proposed full-time president of the European Council who will co-ordinate the Council's work, a function currently carried out by the EU Presidency which rotates between member state governments every six months. The treaty provides for a dedicated chair at the highest level, in a position to direct the Council's discussions and provide valuable continuity. At present, different countries holding the EU Presidency every six months often bring their own priorities and to-do lists which can lead to a disconnect and a lack of medium to long-term planning and discussion.

The proposed post of high representative for foreign affairs and security policy will act to increase the visibility and influence of the EU in international affairs. This is an essential development as many of the challenges we will face in the coming years will be external ones. A concerted European response to such issues as energy, security, climate change, development aid and immigration will be vital. Contrary to claims, the high representative will not set foreign policy. All 27 member states will continue to set policy acting unanimously.

A further reform in the treaty is the plan to reduce the number of Commissioners by one third from 2014. Much has been made of this by the treaty's opponents. These new rules will affect all member states equally. Ireland, nor any other smaller member states, is not being singled out. When we joined the then EEC, the larger member states nominated two Commissioners while the smaller countries nominated just one. The Nice treaty has already made provision for this change and it is to be welcomed.

Climate change, drug-trafficking and pollution are just some issues that do not recognise borders. They need trans-European and cross-border co-operation. Passing the treaty will allow the EU be more effective at tackling such issues.

The "No" campaigners claim the proposed voting system will halve Ireland's voting strength. The truth is that under the new system, double-majority voting will give proportionate weight to population while protecting the interests of small and medium-sized member states. This is particularly good news for Ireland.

This will be achieved by specifying that a qualified majority would require 55% of member states and 65% of the Union's population. Sinn Féin's claims against this proposal are based on counting only one part of the voting in its calculations. Recently at the National Forum on Europe event in Monaghan, I stated this is like failing to count the goals when deciding who has won the match.

The treaty will see an enhanced role for national parliaments. Despite misleading claims by those opposed to it, the treaty actually gives a greater role to national parliaments. This will give the EU the legitimacy that some feel it lacked in the past. For the first time, national parliaments will have a direct input into the evolution of European legislation. It will do much to address the so-called democratic deficit. Under the treaty, national parliaments will be able to bring their influence to bear by offering reasoned opinions on the appropriateness, or otherwise, of proposals coming from the EU Commission.

There has been much scaremongering in the media that ratification of the treaty would result in the introduction of tax harmonisation and threaten our favourable corporation tax rates. There are scare stories that a "Yes" vote will give the EU permission to make decisions that will threaten Irish interests. This is simply not true. All Ireland's key issues will be protected. As taxation, defence and foreign policies require unanimous voting, Ireland will have a veto. We will also retain our protocol on abortion.

Irish neutrality has been the subject of countless scare stories and has been hijacked by the "No" camp to encourage the electorate to reject the treaty. The treaty will have no effect on our military neutrality. Under the Constitution, Ireland cannot participate in an EU common defence. This position will remain unchanged under the reform treaty and will be reaffirmed in the 28th amendment of the Constitution. The triple lock arrangements that have governed the commitment of the Army to any overseas operation will remain in place in that any operation would require Government and Dáil approval and a United Nations mandate. There is nothing in the treaty to change that. We have heard this red herring argument at every treaty referendum, but it is yet to be the case. The reform treaty will put in place structures for EU-led military missions, but each member state is free to participate as it chooses. None can be forced into participation in any mission. Claims of a new European army are bogus.

The EU has been good for Ireland and our active role within Europe has played a vital part in improving our standards of living and our quality of life. Membership of the Union has been crucial to our social development. For example, an entire generation has grown up expecting to be treated fairly and equally regardless of gender, race or religion. The quality of life for hundreds of thousands of our people has changed for the better because Ireland is part of Europe. Better conditions of employment, safety regulations, maximum working hours, protection of young workers, equal treatment for men and women and the introduction of maternity leave, parental leave and child care have all come about because of our collaboration with Europe.

Sinn Féin opposes the treaty as it has opposed every referendum on Europe. Its Members say that they are pro-Europe. Following their logic, however, it would be better for us either not to be in Europe or to be in Europe but only to such a peripheral extent that we might as well not be in it. Opposed to this is the Fianna Fáil stance, which is to be involved at all stages, to punch above our weight and to earn respect for being prepared to compromise while standing strong on fundamental issues instead of huffing and puffing on the sidelines.

I encourage people to vote "Yes". I welcome the opportunity to debate and discuss the issues, but there is an onus on us all to do so in a truthful manner instead of dealing with innuendo or anecdotal evidence. We must present the facts as they are to the public, which deserves it. I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to contribute.

Gabhaim buíochas as ucht an seans seo chun cainte ar an reifreann. Reifreann stairiúil atá ann, mar is é an chéad reifreann a bhéas againn i ndiaidh stádas oifigiúil a bhaint amach don Ghaeilge san Aontas Eorpach.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on Second Stage of the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill. We are in the run-up to referendum day on 12 June when the issues that have been under discussion in the House and around the country in recent months can finally be put to rest. I pay tribute to the National Forum on Europe on its work since its foundation in 2001 under the chairmanship of former Senator, Dr. Maurice Hayes, and his directorate and on the work it continues to do in the run-up to the referendum on the Lisbon treaty. I pay tribute to the work of the Joint Committee on European Affairs, which is travelling around the country to present arguments in a fair and balanced manner so as to engage with and involve people and to encourage them to vote on 12 June. All political parties in the House are mobilising their activists and voters, such is the importance of a "Yes" vote on 12 June, not just to Irish interests, but to European interests generally.

Those who oppose the EU reform treaty do so from a number of points of view. We must respect that some are genuine, a fact we cannot dismiss, but other points of view have been held unchanged for the 35 years of our membership despite all the benefits and evidence to the contrary. Ireland has punched far above its traditional weight in that time. From the late Dr. Patrick Hillery, to whom the country paid rightful tribute last week, to Mr. Charlie McCreevy, our Commissioners have generally occupied top level posts and have been instrumental in changing the face of Europe and the lives of Europeans. Our Commissioners will continue to do this in future.

Despite our relatively small European Parliament delegation, an Irishman, Mr. Pat Cox, served as President and Irish parliamentarians serve as group leaders regularly. For example, Mr. Brian Crowley, MEP, serves as the leader of his group in Europe. Irish people such as Mr. David O'Sullivan and Ms Catherine Day have served in the top levels of the Commission's civil service. Irish people throughout the directorates are putting their cases forward and fighting a European cause from an Irish viewpoint.

We paid tribute to the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, on this historic day, but Irish Presidencies of the European Council from all sides of the House have delivered significantly. The Tánaiste referred to his pride when the Taoiseach was able to put together a deal of 27 countries, something that only an Irish person could have done. That deal will continue post Lisbon via the treaty's significant and important reforms. They will strengthen the EU bloc, its powers and its global presence at a time when it needs to be strengthened. Equally, the democratic foundations that serve the bloc and on which it is built — an EU of nation states — will be strengthened. The directly elected European Parliament will be given more power, thereby enhancing its role in the making of EU legislation. The treaty will enhance the role of voters. The Oireachtas will be given more power in anticipating and commenting on legislation before it is tabled at the Commission and European Parliament. Through the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and various other committees, we will have a chance to influence EU legislation that we do not currently have.

Instead of the "one for everybody in the audience" approach adapted to date, the Commission will be more effective, better equipped to deal with global challenges and better able to deliver for the people of Europe. We should not fear the loss of an automatic right to a commissioner. Rather, we should look forward to it and know that we will continue to punch above our weight. Other structures are in place to ensure that our interests are represented when we do not have a Commissioner.

The challenges the Lisbon treaty is intended to address are considerable. As a small nation of 4 million people, we have no hope of dealing with them effectively without full participation in a reformed Europe. As Vice Chairman of the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security, I am learning at first hand of the challenges we face in those respects. The threat to energy security from blocs and influences outside the EU is significant and we cannot continue to take for granted that we will always have oil and gas. Unless we strengthen and equip the EU to act as a strong bloc, we will no longer be able to guarantee supply. Unless we address climate change, all the European structures may be useless in 100 years. The global challenges presented by climate change can only be dealt with on a bloc-by-bloc basis and through a strengthened EU.

For 35 years, we have been told by opponents that Europe will be bad and that there will be a European army. I am one of those people who should have served in that army 35 years after Ireland's joining, but I have not done any service, nor will anyone after this treaty. We were told that all types of things that go against our national character would be forced upon us, but there has been none. We were told that we would be taken over by all types of cultural influences and that our culture would diminish, but has Irish culture ever been stronger than it is now in terms of arts, language and traditions? This is because we have gained a confidence from and have not been afraid of embracing EU membership. Those of us who propose a "Yes" vote are proposing a continuation of this approach to Europe. This approach would tackle it head on and sees every part of our EU membership as an opportunity for Ireland, rather than as a challenge. As a nation and a people, we have the ability, brainpower and strength to make the most of European Union membership and we will continue to do so.

On 12 June, we can say to the people of Europe that we are at its heart, are in its engine-room and wish to remain there. Alternatively, we could pull back and decide that, in future, we wish to be on the edges of Europe. While we will not be thrown out of the European Union if we vote "No", our influence as a player would be considerably diminished and damaged. Such a vote would considerably damage our ability and chances to grow our economy, services and culture further. This chance is not worth taking on foot of opposition based on not being able to read the treaty or not being able to understand what it means. That is not a reason to vote "No" and nor is opposition based on allegations and mistruths that have been spread around for 35 years and which, 35 years later, remain untrue. I intend to vote "Yes" and I encourage my constituents and supporters to do so. We will be working hard to this end, as will the majority of political parties in this House. We do so from a position of strength and look forward to even more strength in future.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Paul Kehoe.

I welcome the chance to say a few words on this campaign and to discuss the proposed amendment to the Constitution and the Lisbon treaty, which is a very important subject. It is also worthwhile conducting a frank debate about facts because despite some posters that have appeared, this issue pertains to facts and not to politics. Some campaigners must realise that democracy requires the involvement of good politicians. Democracy needs people and that is what politics is about. Unfortunately, some cases and campaigns lack facts and the media should give proper and worthwhile coverage to all sides in this regard. Hopefully that man and his bus will continue on his own around the country.

I will refer to a couple of areas in which Ireland has gained significantly apart from Ireland's transformation since its accession to the EU. As I was not born until 1978, I was not present before that. However, I read about it and talk about it on a regular basis to my grandparents, parents, other family members and the people I represent. Everyone tells me that Ireland has been utterly transformed since joining the EU all those years ago. Consequently, this area is extremely important. I refer to the benefits of markets, new labour laws, greater rights for people and access to travel, for young people in particular, as well as for opportunities that now exist for people of all ages and people's rights.

Apart from such benefits, however, one forgets that the European project's greatest original contribution was peace. This aspect also helped us in talks regarding Northern Ireland. While we have benefited greatly since 1973, the idea behind Europe pertains to peace and this point appears to be forgotten in our nationwide debates. People appear to leave this aspect to one side and talk about peace as though it always was present, which is not the case. Moreover, we did not always have the right to free travel or to move around to avail of opportunities in many countries. These are positive aspects. Were a treaty to have negative aspects — I can find none in the treaty under discussion — it sometimes would be worth certain sacrifices to be part of that greater market and that great force in Europe in future.

However, this is not the case. I can only find positive aspects to this treaty and am unable to find any negative aspects. This message should get across to the people and they should engage in this issue. Now that an approximate date has been set, six to eight weeks remain for Members to debate this issue properly. People should become interested in it because it is highly important. It will be very important for Ireland in the future to be seen to be proactive and pro-European. Our friends and counterparts, predominately in Europe but also in other parts of the world, including businesses and so on, are watching Ireland. We have a good reputation and enjoy strong good will in Europe and its markets. However, this will not continue were we to continue to say "No" to certain matters. We must work with them and give other countries a chance to benefit from a greater Europe in the future. I hope we will do so and I will vote "Yes" in respect of a range of issues. Those who are campaigning for a "No" vote should realise, by reading the document, that what they say is not always true. They should engage in proper debate rather than trying simply to scaremonger and put people off. It is very important to do so.

I referred to a range of issues. Speaking as Fine Gael's spokesperson on labour affairs and small business, this treaty does nothing negative in respect of our markets, Irish jobs or the economy. It can only help to expand it and will bring more benefits. It proposes a faster and more efficient Europe, which is always to the benefit of business. There will be even greater access to markets. Our businesses, exporters and those who seek jobs will have access to far greater opportunities and this can only be a good thing. We will retain our veto in respect of tax policy. We will retain our own tax policy and corporation tax rate and we will choose whether to reduce or raise it. This is not being taken away from us, despite numerous assertions to the contrary. Such assertions constitute scaremongering because it is untrue. Moreover, in many other areas, including neutrality, we will be able to make our own choice in this regard. This Parliament, together with the people of Ireland, will make the decision at any given time in this respect.

By ratifying this treaty, Ireland will remain a highly attractive location for multinationals to set up and to continue working. Business will prosper under this treaty. There is an onus on the Government, as Members have asserted many times in this House, to do certain things to help business prosper. While it has done some, there are more to be done. However, that is a separate issue to Europe. This treaty can only enhance the areas of job opportunity, business expansion and growth and access to greater markets. It has helped and will continue to help in respect of employment rights and other issues that Members, including the Acting Chairman, have discussed in recent years. Various Bills have been implemented in the House regarding maternity leave, adoptive leave and so on, all of which come from a proactive Europe. Sometimes we lag behind slightly but we are getting there and are catching up. Hopefully we will adopt EU initiatives more expeditiously in future, but that is for another day.

Last weekend, I was disappointed to see a prominent businessman backing the "No" campaign in this regard. Again, the aforementioned Libertas bus is still going around with only one or two people aboard and I hope it remains empty. I will name five or six different business people and leaders in society who have positively campaigned against this. They are Turlough O'Sullivan, director general of IBEC; Maurice Pratt, group chief executive, C & C Group plc; Paul Nolan, group development manager at Dawn Meats, Waterford; Patricia Callan, director, Small Firms Association; Brian Goggin, group chief executive, Bank of Ireland; and Paul Rellis, general manager, Microsoft Ireland. These business people have stepped up to the mark, put their names to it and have campaigned for a "Yes" vote. The media also should give them coverage and get that message out there. Previously, at Question Time, I stated that business people have a major role in helping politicians to get the treaty across the line and to spread the good word because they are in tune with it. Their voices, along with many others, should drown out the one or two individuals who probably have different agendas than simply blocking this treaty. There is more to their agenda and proper coverage should be given to the comments of the aforementioned people in future.

The European Union has expanded using stop-gap measures in recent years. The current structures of the EU were designed for a Union with significantly fewer member states. Over the years, the EU has welcomed many new member states through a number of short-term reforms introduced by the Amsterdam and Nice treaties. As a result of this stop-gap approach, it now is necessary to update the workings of the EU for the 27 current member states and any future accession states. It is an accepted point that the European Union must adapt some of its structures to operate in a more efficient and effective manner with greatly increased membership. This must happen by way of the treaty under discussion, the Lisbon treaty, which is beneficial to us all. It provides for faster decision-making, as well as value for money savings.

The Lisbon treaty contains a number of institutional changes that are designed to improve the coherence and efficiency of the Union that, in turn, will give it a stronger voice on the world stage. For example, there will be a high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, who will act to increase the visibility and influence of the Union in international affairs. This position is necessary to increase the Union's presence along with the powerhouses of the United States of America and Russia, as well as the emerging powers of China and India, on the world stage. The Lisbon treaty introduces into the European Union the concept of double majority voting arrangements that, in turn, will make for the more efficient decision-making system that is necessary for the existing worldwide political and economic landscape. The Lisbon treaty will make the EU more democratic by strengthening the role of Dáil Éireann and the European Parliament, both of which are elected by the Irish people.

Ireland, in relative terms, is a small State by international comparisons. The Lisbon treaty is needed to ensure that it can prosper in a more efficient major economic and political bloc that is otherwise unavailable without the ratification of this treaty. Ireland has been a great beneficiary of EU integration and the Union will continue to be of benefit to the State. This treaty is required to provide a more efficient and effective Union for Ireland to participate in.

Cuireadh an díospóireacht ar athló.

Debate adjourned.
Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Top
Share