Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 27 Feb 2014

Vol. 832 No. 3

Ireland's Engagement with Europe: Statements

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Deputy Paschal Donohoe)

As Deputies will be aware, the concept of Europe is an old convention. As a geographic term it reaches back to the time of Homer in the 5th century B.C. It stretches from the Azores to Severny Island and covers 10 million square miles, 750 million people and 37,000 years of civilization. As impressive as these facts are and as much as they provide a sense of perspective for debate for any discussion, such as what we will have this morning, they present us with some obvious questions.

What are we talking about when we talk about Europe? Why are we engaging with it? How are we doing it and to what end? These are important questions which go to the centre of the Government's actions in Europe as well as our overall engagement with European issues as parliamentarians and, most importantly, as Irish citizens.

This is why I welcome this debate, which is allowing the House to address the fundamental questions of why, how and what. Those are the three questions that I wish to address in my opening statement. I want to examine why Europe matters, how we are engaging with it, and what this engagement will deliver.

I will begin with the question of why. The great Scottish philosopher, David Hume, once said: "It's when we start working together that the real healing takes place... it's when we start spilling our sweat, and not our blood." I do not need to remind Deputies of the foundations of the modern European project, forged as it was out of the horrors of war. I do want to remind colleagues, however, of how precarious this peace is and what it is that keeps those horrors from resurfacing. We have all been gripped by the tragic events in Ukraine. Reflecting on why Europe matters could never be timelier when we consider the loss of life and anguish of the people in their longing and desire to be a part of what we all too often take for granted.

We should not forget that Europe does not consist purely of the EU, as important as that is. In addition, the EU is not purely about economics or financial markets, and is not solely about directives and regulations. It is, always has been and will to continue to be a project of peace. It is a catalyst composed of ideals, values and beliefs which transform our encounters with other countries into relations which produce the benefits many of us assume have always been there: the ability to move freely, to live, work, travel and trade across borders without restrictions.

This ability is tied in closely with the concept of globalisation - that interconnection, integration and interdependence which now characterises the world in which we live. That is the contemporary rationale for the European Union, which underlies what I have just discussed. It is the biggest current "why" of the European project.

I have spoken in the past about this contemporary rationale for the European project as the goals and objectives of the Union have grown and developed, and as its constituent member states have drawn together. We must continue to work together because on its own no country, no matter how big or small, can manage, prosper or hope to influence a world in which everything is now linked.

To quote another philosopher, Isaiah Berlin: "Injustice, poverty, slavery, ignorance - these may be cured by reform or revolution. But men do not live only by fighting evils. They live by positive goals, individual and collective, a vast variety of them, seldom predictable, at times incompatible." This is the "why" of our engagement - a Europe based on values, enabling countries to best manage challenges and opportunities which are too big to grasp on their own. These are the positive goals we live by when we engage with Europe.

This leads directly to how we engage with Europe, which has two fundamental and interwoven strands: our engagement through the institutions of the Union and directly with other European countries. There is a tendency to view Ireland's relationship with Europe solely within the framework of the European Union. Given the events of recent years, this is entirely understandable. However, in so doing we must not overlook the importance of the bilateral dimension of our relationships with all European countries and risk failing, in turn, to fully appreciate the extent to which strong bilateral links helped to generate goodwill and positive sentiment towards Ireland.

The Government is strongly committed to enhancing Ireland's bilateral political, trade, economic and cultural relations with other European countries. This is, and will remain, a key feature of our engagement with Europe. How will we do this? The most important component of Ireland's agency in Europe is our network of bilateral diplomatic missions. With the opening of a new embassy in Zagreb, we will have a presence spanning all EU member states and covering the entirety of Europe.

It is because of this that I have invested significant time in undertaking bilateral visits across Europe. To date, I have made well over 20 visits to European countries and EU institutions to further develop Ireland's profile and advance our national interests. For example, I will travel to Poland later today where I will have meetings with my counterpart, the Minister for European Affairs, Piotr Serafin, as well as with the State Secretary at the Ministry of Infrastructure and Development. The week before last, I visited Germany to meet my new counterpart, Minister Michael Roth, for the same objective of advancing and developing our national interests within Germany, which is a key European ally.

Beyond the EU, I have also paid particular attention to developing Ireland's relations with the countries of the western Balkans. In the past two months, I have visited Tirana in Albania, and Sarajevo in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as meeting the Foreign Minister of Kosovo during his visit to Dublin. I also intend to visit Serbia and Kosovo in the near future.

The second strand of our engagement is through the European institutions: the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament. This engagement is interwoven with the direct contact with other member states, as I have outlined. The Government has prioritised - Deputies will recognise this from our record of attendance - active ministerial participation at the Council of Ministers and regular, substantive engagement with the Commission. The Government has also committed to regular engagement with the European Parliament, including a ministerial presence at each plenary session.

I have just returned from Strasbourg where I met a number of influential MEPs from various countries who are active in committees that have a material impact on our national interests. I also had the opportunity to meet Commissioner Stefan Fuele to discuss the outcome of my own visit to the western Balkans and have an update on events in Ukraine. I recognise the value of the work by MEPs of all political parties and none which is undertaken in advancing our interests within the European Parliament. A key feature of all my visits to the European Parliament is to engage directly with MEPs from Northern Ireland, all of whom respond positively and constructively to this form of engagement which is based on our mutual interests.

Having outlined the why of engagement, and focused on how we are doing it, I want to conclude by explaining what this will achieve. The future of Europe is never far from the minds of anyone involved with or interested in European Affairs. Everyone wants to know where Europe is going and what is the ultimate goal of all these efforts.

I acknowledge the work of Deputy Dooley and Deputy Crowe in travelling abroad to represent Ireland, as well as representing their political parties and constituents. Their work through bodies like COSAC and the Committee on Foreign Affairs involves actively engaging in detail with the work we do abroad. Their work as Members of the Oireachtas continues through their engagement with parliamentarians from other countries. They will be aware, as I am, that there is no end point to this kind of engagement.

The European project is a perpetual vehicle of collective action designed to enable countries to continually work together to the benefit of all and to overcome difficulties through compromise and negotiation. By means of the wheels of democracy and those of bureaucracy, both of which turn slowly, this is what Europe does each day. To make this engagement effective, we have clear priorities. I wish to focus on two of these, namely, creating jobs and stability in Ireland and throughout Europe and maximising our national influence during a period of considerable change. In the context of our agenda for creating jobs and stability, three clear priorities stand out. These are fostering an environment for investment; developing the Single Market; and harnessing the semester process. The concept of the banking union is crucial to this because it encapsulates our engagement with Europe. It is not that long ago that the collapse of the euro was openly and widely predicted by some and discussed by nearly all. That collapse did not happen because of the actions taken by a number of Europeans institutions, including the European Central Bank, and the Irish Government, among others, in respect to the crisis. We now have a much more robust and stable architecture in place and a larger eurozone. Clearly, however, our work is not finished and we continue to face into a huge crisis, particularly in the context of unemployment.

Restoring and reinforcing economic growth and securing the stability of the euro remain the key tasks for Ireland and the Union. Delivery of what has been agreed in regard to the banking union, not least the June 2012 agreement to break the link between sovereigns and banks, is key. To complement this we must continue to press for growth-enhancing measures, including the deepening of the Single Market, enhancing business access to credit and stimulate external trade. The European Investment Bank, EIB, is a prime example of how a constructive method of delivery can be adopted in respect of this agenda. In 2013 alone, the EIB agreed to provide €600 million to Irish projects. This included €200 million for SMEs, as well as support for DIT's Grangegorman campus development. In total, this represents an increase of over four fifths in the level of investment Ireland received from the EIB in the past.

The European semester process is another area in which our engagement with Europe will yield significant benefits. As the House is aware, this fourth European semester cycle is the first in which Ireland will be a full participant on foot of our exit from the EU-IMF programme. The Government's second priority is maximising our influence during a period of major change and this will be to the fore in everyone's mind during the European elections in May. As co-legislator with the Council, the European Parliament's role in shaping and determining European policy has never been stronger. It matters like never before and the Government has recognised this via its direct engagement with the Parliament. As already stated, we have ensured that Ireland has had a ministerial presence at each plenary session of the Parliament during the past six months. We will continue to pursue this agenda. The scale of the institutional transition will be huge. It is vital, therefore, that we maintain and develop strong relationships with the presidents of the Commission, the European Council and the Eurogroup. We must draw on the goodwill and strong connections we have generated through our bilateral relations, and which have been reinforced by our programme exit, in order to deepen our influence and enhance our effectiveness within the EU. In the past year the resilience and adaptability of Europe have been evident. More importantly, however, the resilience and adaptability of the Irish people has also been on show.

I have endeavoured to explain the nature of our engagement with the European Union. Our approach has a single objective, namely, to support the Irish people and to ensure that our economic recovery accelerates and that the benefits from the progress we make will be shared fairly and equally among all citizens.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

I welcome the fact that time has been allocated in the House in order that we might discuss Ireland's engagement with Europe. I also welcome the fact that the Minister of State is present. He has shown considerable zeal for developing Ireland's position in Europe, particularly in the context of his constant travelling through the European Union each week to meet our partners, to network and to maintain and build upon relationships which were first established when we joined the European Union. The approach he has taken is the correct one and I wish him well with it.

Our discussion on the European Union during the past four years has continually and understandably focused on our engagement with the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund and their implementation of the bailout programme. Thankfully, that programme is now in the past. Not forgetting that experience, I hope that our discussions on this topic will broaden again. We need to begin to focus on the future of Europe and on Ireland's place in that future. In the context of current debates, we often forget how far the European Union has come in the short ten years from 2004 to 2014. Ten years ago, Ireland led one of the most successful presidencies in the history of the European Union. On 1 May that year, ten new states, many from the former Soviet Union, joined the European Union. If anyone wants to understand the importance of that development, he or she need only consider what is happening in Ukraine at present in the context of the battle taking place between Europe and Russia for the hearts and minds of a people who want to progress, to embrace that for which the European Union stands and the principles of democracy and who want change for themselves and future generations. I welcome the support taken by High Representative Catherine Ashton and others, with the assistance of the Irish Government, in assisting in bringing about a peaceful resolution to the crisis in Ukraine. It is worth noting that, yet again, Europe is somewhat powerless in this instance. Thankfully, however, there has been an easing of the tension in Ukraine. It has not eased to the degree most people would like but the country has retreated from being on the verge of outright war. Europe is still ill-equipped to deal with a crisis of the magnitude which could have developed in Ukraine. Yet again, the US began making statements directed at Russia and suggested that it might involve itself in the crisis. Europe has a long way to go in the context of reaching a point where when issues of this nature arise in states on our borders, it will be ready to deal with them.

Ten years ago, when the countries to which I referred earlier joined the EU, our neighbours and friends who had previously been kept apart from the rest of the Continent by the Iron Curtain were finally welcomed home. The official ceremony to welcome them to the EU took place in Áras an Uachtaráin in the Phoenix Park and it represented a high point in Ireland's engagement with the European Union. At that time, the President of the European Council, the President of the European Parliament and the Secretary General of the European Commission were all citizens of Ireland. We often lose sight of the level of engagement we have had at the centre of the European Union's decision-making process. That level of engagement speaks volumes for the way in which successive Governments have engaged with the European Union project. They did so in a way which encouraged senior civil servants and senior Government advisers to identify a path towards becoming part of the administration of the EU. They did so because they saw the benefits which could accrue to Ireland. As part of that process they have made moves designed to allow them to work within the structures of the various institutions of the European Union. This has been of immense assistance to Ireland, not because those to whom I refer have done us favours but because - from an Irish perspective - they have played a role in developing the thinking relating to the direction which the Union should take. The engagement to which I refer is real and tangible and it ultimately benefits this State. Such engagement means that we can have a real and permanent influence on the direction in which the EU is going to go.

My concern, which is probably shared by the Minister of State, is that over time we will lose that unless we continue to remain engaged at a political level and until we continue to regard it as important as it was when we joined Europe. This is more difficult now because the engagement is different. When we joined we looked to Europe as being the cash cow that resolved issues we were unable to resolve from our own Exchequer returns. The funding streams from Europe provided the capacity to build up our infrastructure that had been left in a relatively diminished state. I refer to the social gains that resulted from our co-operation with other European states. Now the tangible benefits do not seem as obvious to the people. The financial crisis has created a level of dissatisfaction and the blame game has developed. In many cases politicians are responsible for this dissatisfaction. When measures in our interest need to be dealt with, it is very easy to go back to the constituency and blame the bad Europeans for foisting this upon us. That is a negative attitude which will not be helpful in the long run to the attitude of the people to the European Union.

Under the 2004 Irish Presidency the treaty establishing a constitution for Europe was agreed which eventually led to the comprehensive reforms of the EU contained in the Treaty of Lisbon, a treaty regarded by some academics as the final treaty change in Europe for decades to come. We know now that has not been and will not be the case. The financial and economic crisis which engulfed both sides of the Atlantic was to threaten the very foundation of the European Union. The constitutional and economic framework of the Union was to prove grossly inadequate at a time of extreme turmoil and led not only to a financial and economic crisis but to a political crisis from Lisbon to Athens. This crisis has left a deep scar on the societal fabric of the Union. This will take time to heal. One of the biggest scars is that of unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, which hit 23.5% in 2013 within the EU. Parts of Europe are now threatened with the possibility of a lost generation. Many young people view the EU in a very negative light. Where the Union was often associated with opportunity, it is now viewed with great suspicion and often fear. If the Union is to have a future, it must address these problems with greater urgency than has been the case. It must ensure the benefits of EU membership are spread equally among the member states and citizens of the European Union. The EU must reform itself if these goals are to be achieved.

This links to my earlier point that when we joined the European Union we saw the benefits because they were real and tangible. We have reached a level of infrastructural development on a par with many states of our size. We are in a different phase now and the demands are different. If we try to explain our engagement with Europe by pointing to what it has done for us and arguing that we should stick with the programme, that argument will not be sufficient to hold this current generation. We must show that the European project, which is all member states working together, has the capacity to address the challenges facing today's generation. This must mean finding an appropriate resolution to the youth unemployment crisis.

Fianna Fáil firmly believes that the reforms which have been enacted do not go far enough to guarantee the future prosperity of the EU. Key elements are missing from the constitutional and economic framework of the EU which leave us all vulnerable. Despite some significant reforms enacted to battle the financial crisis, the EU has still found itself asking the same question of where it goes from here. That question has yet to be answered by those who are driving the European project. The only constant since the economic and financial crisis in Europe began five years ago, is the absolute lack of leadership being shown by the European political elite. This is a great shame as the potential of unlocking the energy and talent of 28 countries with more than 500 million people has been lost in those years.

Thankfully, we have moved away from the continuous crisis model of management, thanks more in part to actions in Frankfurt than in Brussels. However, many deep problems remain for Europe. As a small but highly respected member state which has been the poster boy in both the good and the bad times, Ireland must engage with Europe and seek to offer credible solutions to those problems.

I reiterate my party's position regarding Ireland's future in Europe about which there should be no doubt. Fianna Fáil is committed to Ireland remaining at the core of the European Union. We must ensure we remain at the centre of the European Union and the eurozone while being at the vanguard of further institutional and political developments. With this in mind, Fianna Fáil is determined to restore the Community method of decision-making in the EU institutions. We believe the EU must rebalance the institutional powers of the EU back in favour of the European Commission and away from the intergovernmental approach which has become increasingly prominent in recent years.

The Minister of State and I have discussed this issue in the House. During the crisis the European Commission was not equipped to deal with the crisis that befell the European Union. I remind the Minister of State of the weekly spectacle of the premiers of France and Germany holding crisis summits in each other's country which, in my view, did very real damage to the citizens' perception of how the EU was managed. Confidence in the Community model was eroded and the Commission was sidelined with decisions being taken by the two big countries. This did more to damage the entire perception of the European Union than the economic crisis. Crises come and go. The measure of a man or a woman or an institution is in how crises are dealt with. Sadly, we were found lacking. While the Community is progressing in dealing with the banking crisis by establishing a banking union that it is hoped will deal with any future similar crisis, I still do not believe the Commission has an appropriate level of confidence in the Community model and the level of support is not sufficient.

As the guardian of EU treaties and the common European interest, including protection of the interests of smaller member states, the European Commission must be restored as the guiding force in European affairs. Otherwise, the unfairness inherent in intergovernmental leadership will create a great division between large and small member states. This would threaten the stability of the EU in the long run.

My party is of the view that Ireland should lead the call for rebuilding the economic and monetary union. Now is the time to re-examine the structures of the EMU as well as the mandate of the European Central Bank. The architecture to ensure the long-term sustainability of the eurozone is still absent. This must be corrected and provide a basis for the future prosperity of the EU. The ECB's mandate must require policies for targeted growth as well as targeting inflation. Its adherence to German economic theory may well work for Germany, but this is a monetary union of 18 member states, not one. This should be reflected in ECB policy-making.

I hope the Members opposite will agree when I state that a fully functioning banking union is also an extremely necessary part of the rebuilding of the EMU. Any future banking union must include common regulation, common deposit insurance and a common resolution mechanism. Without these elements, a fully functioning banking union will not be achieved and we risk repeating the very serious mistakes of the past.

While I accept that achieving agreement between 18 member states on banking union, including the agreement of member states who have not suffered the same kind of economic crisis as Ireland, is difficult, it highlights the lethargic approach to achieving banking union. A key element for Ireland in these developments is the separation of sovereign debt from banking debt. Fianna Fáil believes the EU must fulfil its commitment to separate sovereign debt and banking debt within the EU. The euro area Heads of State or Government agreed in June 2012 to break the vicious circle between banks and sovereigns. It is time to fulfil this commitment by retroactively recapitalising Irish banks. Although banking union needs to be agreed before these commitments can be implemented, it sends out the wrong message to the citizens of this State and other states. It shows that Europe is not equipped to deal quickly and succinctly with a problem.

If we are serious about this, we have to be far more progressive and efficient in getting decisions made. Ireland must continue to play its full part in all of the institutions of the European Union. Decisions made in Brussels, Strasbourg and Frankfurt have dramatic implications for our country and our citizens. We must remain engaged in the discussions on the future development of the EU and play our part in shaping that future.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I apologise to the Minister of State for being late. Deputy Dooley and I were involved in a conference call to colleagues in the Scottish Parliament to discuss EU matters. The first question we were asked was about Ireland's experience of joining the EU, to which each of us gave our own impressions and memories. It was amazing to hear such a range of views and perspectives on the type of country we lived in at that time. Ireland was one of the poorest countries in western Europe in the early 1970s. On the global stage, the United States and the Soviet Union were facing up to each other and nuclear weapons were pointed on capital cities throughout the world. The apartheid regime in South Africa was still in place, as well as the old colonial regimes across Africa. There was huge upheaval in Latin America. In our own country there was conflict across the Border, which went from marching for civil rights to war on the streets.

We have seen major changes in Ireland in the past 40 years, many of them very positive. At that time we joined the EU there was a major unemployment problem. I was arrested later in the 1970s for putting up posters showing a graph of the unemployment rate since our joining the EU. People tend to have a rosy view that Ireland was somehow transformed overnight after joining the Union. That was not the case. In fact, large numbers of jobs were shed in those years. The open market opened up new opportunities for Ireland, but there were also many factory closures and so on. This was a world without laptops or mobile telephones. The young people in the Gallery would be amazed to hear that people had to go to the local telephone booth to make a call. Contraception was not readily available and then only to married couples. Women in the Civil Service lost their jobs when they got married. Many of the positive changes we have seen have come about at least in part from our involvement in the EU because there was a lack of political will by politicians to address the issues. Indeed, it proved useful in many cases to cite our EU obligations as justification for pressing forward certain controversial changes. EU membership helped to drag us into the 20th century and on into the 21st century.

No observer in the early 1970s could have predicted the massive changes that would see the European Economic Community growing into the 28-member European Union we have today. Ireland has seen positive and negative effects from its EU membership. Irish people, while generally not concerned with the day-to-day business of the EU, which seems very removed from their lives, remain sceptical of the increasing powers the EU is giving itself. That disconnect is a common theme when talking to people. The EU and its workings are often seen as something that does not really affect people in their day-to-day lives, with surveys showing that many citizens cannot even identify their MEPs. It is an issue we need to address. That apathy can be seen in the rejections of several EU treaties in a series of referenda. The Lisbon treaty was passed only at the second attempt, after the Irish people were subjected to scaremongering by the EU, the Government and most of the mainstream parties.

The free movement of people, goods and services has undoubtedly helped the Irish economy to escape its former isolation and attract new business and investment. Numerous human rights cases taken to the European courts have forced Irish Governments to improve protections in the human rights area and update archaic law. However, the gross mishandling of the economy by successive Governments by way of light-touch or non-existent regulation of business and banking operations ensured our economy went into free fall. Instead of burning the unsecured bondholders who were gambling with the Irish market, as Sinn Féin argued for, the Government, strong-armed by an EU which was afraid of contagion, chose to burden our taxpayers with the gambling debts of these bondholders.

The bailout programme has been a disaster from start to finish. We have seen a huge increase in youth and long-term unemployment and a massive increase in emigration. I was in Madrid at the weekend where there is 40% youth unemployment. People there are angry at what they see as corrupt governance not just by the current conservative Government, but also the previous socialist Government. There is much talk among citizens of quitting the country. That lack of hope that things will change is familiar to Irish people. Here at home we see increasing homelessness and a housing crisis that the Government will not face up to. We have seen the introduction of a family home tax and the imminent levying of water charges. Our health service is in serious crisis, but the Government is cutting more than €600 million from its budget.

While we have seen a small improvement in the economic climate in recent weeks, there can be no certainty that this potential recovery is based on solid foundations. Despite economic growth and improved trade figures, our domestic economy is still extremely stagnant. Families cannot continue to endure wage cuts and job losses while indirect taxation increases and new forms of taxation are introduced. Most families are barely keeping their heads above water and have very little at the end of the month to spend in the domestic economy. We may have exited the bailout programme, but for ordinary people, very little has changed or will change. As long as private banking debt remains bundled up with our sovereign debt, exiting the bailout programme will not change the reality of austerity for people. On the basis of our current loan profiles, Ireland will remain under surveillance until 2032. Even thereafter the Commission can choose to prolong that surveillance. Moreover, during that period the Council may impose on us whatever measures it deems fit.

The parties in this Government have always enthusiastically supported the diminution of Irish economic sovereignty in treaty after treaty. There has been no critical analysis from the mainstream parties, with everything that comes from Europe deemed positive and welcome. We know to our cost that this is not the correct approach. Those who adopt an unthinkingly positive approach to Europe are effectively opponents of Irish economic sovereignty. Their record is clear on that point, even though the primary aim of current EU economic policies is to ensure member states do not deviate from the neoliberal economic ideology the Union is pushing. The fiscal compact treaty and other EU economic decisions such as the two-pack and six-pack arrangements see a continuation of this erosion of economic sovereignty for EU member states.

Other small states such as the Scandinavian countries have done well in working for their own interests in Europe. Irish Governments, on the other hand, have continually failed to stand up for the Irish people. This Government seemed for a time to exist only for the amusement of the troika. It never stood up for Ireland and failed to get our banks recapitalised, despite the Eurogroup commitment of June 2012. The troika's legacy throughout Europe is mass unemployment, emigration, increased poverty and the devastation of communities and public services. Exiting the bailout will change little for hard-pressed working families.

Let us not pretend that the Government or the EU have any intention of ending austerity. The message is all about continued belt tightening.

The EU will continue to push its economic programme, which prioritises the needs of big business over those of hard-pressed citizens. Ireland's engagement with the EU needs to focus on standing up for a better and fairer economic model that benefits citizens and is not focused on appeasing business lobbies.

Many key EU personalities are continually calling for greater European political union and, more worryingly, a united states of Europe. People across Europe are concerned about this move towards EU federalisation. While I agree that more mutually beneficial co-operation between European states is always welcome and has led to huge progress for the Continent, we have to ensure that Ireland, as a small state, does not become overwhelmed by an increasingly centralised and undemocratic political union that is dominated by a small number of large countries. I want the EU to be a true partnership of equal sovereign states that co­operate in social and economic development. During the conference call I mentioned earlier, reference was made to Connolly's view of Europe as a "federation of free peoples". I think people across Europe want the EU to develop in such a way.

The Government could and should do much more to ensure Ireland's voice is heard in Europe and Irish interests are respected and listened to. The EU continues to suffer from a democratic deficit and a lack of accountability. Decisions continue to be made without oversight from ordinary people. This lack of scrutiny prevents ordinary people from actively participating in the decision-making process. It is important for us, as part of this debate, to examine the extent to which European legislation is scrutinised. The European Parliament's travelling circus, which moves between Strasbourg and Brussels at a cost of €200 million, needs to be scrapped. Brussels should become its permanent home, as the European Parliament has voted on and supported. Aside from the economic cost, it just does not make sense to ask people to physically move from one place to the other.

The gap between ordinary people and the European Commission, the European Council and the European Parliament is growing. As a result, the decisions taken at EU level do not reflect people's real concerns or needs. There is a view that the EU has shown a lack of urgency regarding the crisis of recent years. People are not responding to it. The European Commission is living in a bubble. The EU institutions are not coming together to assist those countries that are experiencing difficulties as a result of the crisis. There is a clear disconnect between the lives of European bureaucrats and the reality that faces millions of struggling working families across the EU. Member states do not have the flexibility to implement alternative policies which would support investment, growth and jobs. In effect, the EU is working to deny citizens real political choices when electing their Governments. I will give an example of that. At a time of crisis throughout Europe, the EU decided to pull back on the European budget rather than expanding the stimulus programme across Europe. Progress is not happening. Cuts are being made in relation to connectivity, etc. The budget is largely the same, if not smaller.

It is important for the EU to become a project of its people, rather than remaining a project of the elites. Irish foreign policy should reflect this when this country is engaging with the EU. The EU has a significant role in this regard. I am concerned that since the Single European Act in 1987, successive EU treaties have corroded independent foreign policy to the point where our neutrality is virtually all we have left. The Nice and Lisbon treaties, which were initially rejected by the Irish people, have transferred political, economic and military power away from member states and granted it to centralised EU decision bodies. The Lisbon treaty, in particular, took a great deal of power from EU member states in the areas of foreign affairs and defence. It is shocking that in 2010, at a time when the citizens of EU member states were being crippled by brutal austerity policies, the EU's military expenditure totalled €194 billion.

Lobbyists from the whole military industrial complex in Europe continue to pontificate about the huge risk of disaster if EU member states were to cut their military expenditure. In fact, high military spending by countries such as Greece, Italy and Spain helped bring about economic disaster. I am proud that Ireland has one of the lowest military spends in the EU. There have been some military spending cuts since the financial crisis hit the EU, but there has been a focus on personnel cuts, troop reductions and recruitment freezes, etc. This State stands out in the EU for its significantly low level of military expenditure. It is a record we should be proud of. Ireland's engagement with European countries should focus on opposing the further militarisation of the EU. The Government should ensure Ireland does not participate in EU battle groups or support the increased push to create a standing EU army. Irish neutrality is extremely popular among the vast majority of Irish people. The State should reflect that by opposing any forms of further EU militarisation or erosion of our sovereignty.

Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan

I would like to share time with Deputies Mick Wallace and Richard Boyd Barrett.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy)

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan

I am glad to have this opportunity to talk about the country I now live in. I never wanted to live in it. I always wanted to live in Ireland, not in the European Union. I found it interesting to hear Deputy Dooley speaking about "when we joined the European Union". I remind him that we did not join a Union - we joined a Community. I was only born around then, but in the years after that I was always a fan of the European Union. The whole idea was that states would co-operate with each other, not that they would all become a single state. I think many Irish people feel the same way. One of the most rampant eurosceptics I know - Tom Ward, who is a member of the Turf Cutters and Contractors Association - canvassed for Ireland to join the European Community. As far as he is concerned, it is now an abomination. This view is shared by many people I know. I do not like the term "eurosceptic" because I love Europe. I accept that "hate" is a very strong word, but it is because I love Europe that I hate and despise the EU and what it is doing.

I hear over and over again that the European project started out because France and Germany could not stop killing each other. If they want to fight wars against each other, that problem will not be solved by tying us all together in one country, especially if everyone is not on board. If one wants proof that the effect of the EU is far from bringing peace, all one has to do is look at what is happening in Greece. The same mistakes that were made after the First World War, when the kicking that was given to Germany produced extremism, are now being made in the case of Greece. The EU has also produced extremism. As a result, a party like Golden Dawn seems to be getting away with being openly racist. If the European project is about peace, I would love to know how we have ended up with such a situation.

Two years ago, I joined many other people at Clonmoylan and Barroughter bogs to defend our right to keep our homes warm and cook our food as we have done for hundreds of years. We were met by 30 police vehicles, approximately 40 members of the Garda Síochána and 18 members of the armed response unit. They were deployed, in the European Union that is supposedly looking for peace, to stop us from keeping our houses warm. The same State that basically declared war on people who cut turf benefits all over the world from postcards of piles of turf. It is clear from the fact that guns were brought to a bog to stop people from cutting turf that we are now so far up Europe's posterior that we are tickling its tonsils. How is that bringing about peace?

One of the biggest mistakes we ever made was to join the euro. I have to say I did not understand it at the time. My simplistic view was that it was great. I have never been to Spain - I could never afford to go there - but I thought that if a time ever came when I could afford to do so, it would be great if I was able to use the same money. I thought the euro looked lovely.

That was my level of analysis at the time, but people such as Anthony Coughlan were quite clear about where it would lead. I believe he said at the time, "You're all smiling, but this will end in tears" or words to that effect. How right he was. It has ended in tears and ended up with us having €70 billion worth of debt on our shoulders which we should not have. How have we benefited from that? That €70 billion worth of debt is a drag on every activity in this country, including electricians going out to fit a lock on a door. The Government has set up the PSA to bail money out of them and throw that back at the debt. The same is true of any activity, even going out to buy an egg. People are taxed on the petrol they put in the car to get to the shop; they will pay extra tax on the egg when they get there; and there will be extra tax on the fuel in the shop where it is being sold. Where are the benefits from this Union?

It is time to reverse gear and put an end to this European Union. As I love Europe I believe it is time to do it soon because otherwise we will end with having more wars and problems, not fewer.

Deputy Mick Wallace

I listened to the Minister of State's opening statement and my attention was caught by the following remark: "The European project is a perpetual vehicle of collective action designed to enable countries to continuously work together to the benefit of all and to successfully overcome difficulties through compromise and negotiation". It is not fair to say that the decisions made in Europe are to the benefit of all. The Minister of State would have to admit that they are to the benefit of some more than others. The "some" are the smaller group and the "others" are the bigger one.

As my previous friend outlined-----

Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan

Am I not the Deputy's current friend?

Deputy Mick Wallace

It is okay, Ming, we are still friends.

Austerity has been shoved down our necks by Europe. The bailout was shoved down our necks and as Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan said, it impacts on just about every citizen on the island, which is unfair.

When we signed the Nice and Lisbon treaties, we paved the way for big business to flourish at the expense of the ordinary citizen. It now wants far greater control of our social services and those two treaties facilitate it. We will see far more privatisation in the next ten years, which will be permitted under the terms of the Nice and Lisbon treaties.

On Tuesday night the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, explained why, because of EU law, it would be very difficult to stop Tesco taking over a large chunk of our post offices. He is right; that is what will happen. Despite all the nice talk in here last night about saving post offices, EU law will ensure there is no impediment to Tesco getting its way and God help the poor post offices.

Most big decisions are money related. A road to bypass New Ross in Wexford is planned. The Government has boasted that it can borrow money at an interest rate of 3.5%, which is good and fair play to it. However, we are not allowed to borrow money at an interest rate of 3.5% to build a bypass in New Ross because of EU rules. We are allowed to do a PPP, where the cost to the State will be closer to 20%. While it might be over a longer period of time, it means that if we want to spend money on infrastructure we are driven into the hands of the markets and investors.

Speaking of big decisions being money orientated and related to the maximisation of the accumulation of profit, the latest trouble in Ukraine is frightening and I hope the EU plays a responsible role. At stake in Ukraine is a battle for economic control by Russia on the one hand and the US and EU on the other. It is the usual colonial carve-up. The losers will be the people of Ukraine. Ukraine's problems will be solved better by non-interference. The less that Russia, the EU and the US interfere in Ukraine, the better are the chances of the Ukrainians reaching a good solution. There will be a sad story there if the EU, the US and Russia continue on their present paths.

The same problem applies in Syria. The conflict there escalated when Russia, Iran, the US and Saudi Arabia got more interested in what was going on. They decided to play out their games, which is great for the arms industry because so many of them are used there. However, the devastation there is unbelievable. The devastation in Ukraine will also be unbelievable if Europe does not play a responsible role - and the same applies to Russia and the US.

From reading the mainstream media here, one would believe that there were good boys and bad boys in Ukraine. I would have no sympathy for the man who was thrown out, but the crowd that will replace him are seriously anti-Semitic and very right wing. Many of them have come from organisations that supported the Nazis during the Holocaust. Bad things are coming down the tracks and the EU should be careful about taking sides. Ms Yulia Tymoshenko has been released from prison but one of them is as corrupt as the other. It was interesting to see that Ms Tymoshenko bought a beautiful house for her daughter in one of the most expensive parts of London not long ago.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

To follow on with the same theme, there is an extraordinary disconnect between the rhetoric and the aspirations that often surround discussions about the EU by the supporters of the EU, such as the Minister of State, the Government and the main Opposition party, and the reality of what is going on in Europe. It is not an exaggeration to say it is Orwellian. That term is often thrown around, but I recommend the Minister of State to go back and read 1984, because what we are seeing is starting to look alarmingly like that. We hear talk about peace and that Europe is promoting peace, but what we get are battle groups, and the very intense push to develop and expand the European arms industry selling weapons of mass destruction. It is trying to involve Ireland in the arms industry in producing components and so on.

Some of us pointed out the enormous irony at the time of the peace agreement in the North. The big talk was of taking the gun out of Irish politics. Within weeks of those statements, an arms plant was established in Derry to produce components for patriot missiles. We take the gun out of the North and are putting missiles into countries throughout the world. That is the contradiction.

Deputy Wallace is right about Ukraine - there are no good guys. There are many ordinary people who were rightly angry about corruption and joined those demonstrations. However, some of the leading forces in those were vicious, pro-Nazi and scary people. The opposition and government there are rotten and they are being stirred up by cynical manipulation by both Russia and, sadly, by the European Union as well. The EU's assistance to states is always conditional on those states essentially moving into its camp.

We saw this previously with the Balkans. It is well worth remembering what happened in the Balkans - of course it also happened at the beginning of the 20th century and led to the First World War. The manipulation by the big powers and big empires led to the crisis in the Balkans that produced the First World War.

We saw it again at the end of the 1990s when there was an economic collapse in the former Yugoslavia and legitimate anger against the rotten old communist regime and so on, but that anger was channelled in a nationalist direction by people who sidled up to forces in Europe. Those forces in Europe actively encouraged them. The unilateral decision by Germany to recognise the independence of Slovenia and Croatia was the direct spark that led to the Balkans crisis. Then the literal partitioning on a map, in line with the various accords, of what used to be a multi-ethnic society along ethnic lines led directly, whether intentional or not, to the brutal civil war and all the horrors that followed. Then there were the NATO bombings afterwards and all the rest of it. That is the reality.

Similarly, we hear talk of social and economic justice but what we actually get is a European Central Bank and European institutions that insist that, at all costs, we bail out banks, corporate entities and so on which are driven by nothing but greed and which have driven the European economy, including this country, to the edge of the abyss and demanded that ordinary citizens pay the bill with vicious and brutal austerity and mass unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, across Europe.

I want to mention the transatlantic trade and investment partnership talks that are taking place, on which I hope journalists and the wider public will focus. No doubt the Minister of State would probably trumpet those talks as a wonderful development in terms of big trade deals between the EU and US. In reality, at the centre of these is that new courts of arbitration will be set up between states and corporations to give investors even more protection than they already have and to circumvent the environmental, social and labour laws of individual states such that governments would be precluded from enacting laws that protect the environment, workers' rights, social equality or in any way infringe on the right of big corporations to make profits. It is more of the same. It is Orwellian and we should reject moving in that direction.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Hear, hear.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy)

The next speaker is Deputy Seán Kyne who I understand is sharing his time with Deputy Simon Harris. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Seán Kyne

As a member of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs, I am delighted to say a few words on our engagement with Europe. Intensive engagement with the European Union is essential given the sheer breadth of the legislation and policies which originate in Brussels and have such an impact on the lives of the people in this country. Some three quarters of our social and economic legislation has come directly from Europe via regulations, directives or other EU instruments and much of our domestic legislation has been influenced by our membership of the Union.

The European Union has grown immensely since we joined in 1973. Where once we were a partner among 12 member states, we are now one of 28 in a Union which embraces most of the continent of Europe and involves more than 500 million people. When put in this context, the challenges facing a country of our size for establishing effective engagement become very clear. The reality is that as a small nation we have to work that little bit harder to ensure our voice is heard and our views are known. It is due to the diligence and dedication of our representatives in Brussels and in the European institutions as well as various national public representatives here that we have been able to have the impact that we have had.

One of the long-held criticisms of the European Union has been its apparent disconnect with the ordinary citizen. Long before the Treaty of Lisbon, which consolidated the various treaties legally underpinning the Union, this was an issue. It was with the Lisbon treaty that the relationship between citizen and the Union was examined in great detail for the first time. Accordingly, with the passing of that treaty, each citizen of each member state became a citizen of the European Union with new rights and responsibilities as identified in the cases undertaken by the European Court of Justice. I believe the enthusiasm in the Lisbon treaty to reflect on the role of the citizen within the European Union has been born out of the recognition that for any organisation or institution to succeed, there must be involvement of the members. In an increasingly evolving Union it has been correctly realised that the success of the Union is tightly connected with the inclusion of its citizens in shaping and deciding its direction and future. The Lisbon treaty saw increasing the role of national parliaments as a way of achieving this buy-in and inclusiveness.

However, the Lisbon treaty was drafted at a time before the economic and financial crisis which struck in 2008 and 2009. The result was a sudden and understandable preoccupation with financial and economic matters which in turn left little room for considering the many other aspects of the EU. National parliaments were concerned first and foremost with stabilising national finances and in drawing up and implementing measures to deal with ravages of the recession. There was little scope for national parliaments to spend time fulfilling the role envisaged for them under the Lisbon treaty.

Following the 2011 general election it was decided that each Oireachtas committee would undertake scrutiny of various European legislative measures and proposals in their subject area. With the limits and constraints on time, it is understandable that this course of action was taken rather than creating a European Union committee to do all EU scrutiny. As a result, those of us on the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Union Affairs have been able to examine the other issues such as the role of EU in various areas, the future direction of the Union and the different perspectives and views of other member states. As a committee we have been able to hear from different organisations, academics, journalists, business leaders, policy­makers and ambassadors on a variety of issues concerning the European Union. All of this has been very positive and has deepened our understanding of the Union and the issues facing it. In turn we have been able to impart many of the views held by Irish people on the Union. However, given the amount of legislation that originates from Europe, the impact it has on our legislation, I wonder if we could do more in the Oireachtas to ensure the Irish voice is heard from the outset and at every stage of the decision-making process.

As I have said previously, a reformed Seanad could lead a much enhanced level of engagement between the Oireachtas and the European Union, if we elected Senators for each of the various directorates in Europe - agriculture, competitiveness, foreign affairs, education and so forth. The Senators would be able to devote more time and energy to scrutinising and shaping European proposals, an outcome that would benefit not just Irish citizens but all of the citizens of the European Union. The opportunity is there for us to build on the engagement we have with the European Union.

At a time of uncertainty concerning the Union, with the deepening financial union, the impending UK referendum, the question of Scottish independence, the instability towards the east of the Continent, meaningful inclusion and engagement with citizens is crucial to a successful European Union, a Union which has championed peace and co-operation among Europeans for longer than in any other time throughout history.

I have spoken previously on the single market for energy and that area needs to be tackled. The Minister, Deputy Bruton, appeared was before the Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and attended the Competitiveness Council meeting this week. There are huge threats to European businesses regarding the lack of competitiveness vis-à-vis the United States which has much lower energy costs. It will be a huge challenge for the future in terms of attracting and maintaining foreign investment in this country. The single market in energy offers huge opportunities. I would point to the debate on wind energy. We need to ensure there is proper infrastructure in place across Europe and that we can tap into those markets and the interconnection among member states of the Union. That is a great challenge and it is needs to monitored and embraced.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy)

As Deputy Harris is not here, I propose that the debate be adjourned.