Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 7 May 2015

Vol. 877 No. 2

Challenges Facing the European Union: Statements

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Deputy Dara Murphy)

In marking Europe Day in the House today, it is appropriate to begin by surveying the political and economic European landscape. Our Union, it is fair to say, is in a very different position from where it was a decade ago. Financial uncertainty, conflict on our borders and a heightened threat from terrorism mean that the EU is facing challenges beyond what we could have imagined in 2005. However, the European Union is no stranger to challenge and adversity. After all, this is a Union which was forged in the wake of a brutal and devastating war. As we look to the challenges of today and of the future, I am confident that the Union will draw strength from our vision of a shared future and from the shared interests and values which have successfully bound 28 member states together.

Over recent years, the Union has had to grapple with the most serious economic crisis in its history. Tackling the crisis has required difficult and often painful decisions, collectively and particularly by individual member states. Today, we are in a stronger place. Faced with grave and systematic challenges, the Union's response has been enhanced economic policy co-ordination and oversight, together with the roll-out of banking union. This has helped both to weather the storm that originated in the 2008 global financial crisis and also to ensure that we are better able to respond to any future crises. Most importantly, a genuine, if fragile, economic recovery is now beginning to take hold across Europe. Ireland has been leading the way, with a growth rate of 4.8% last year. The economies in our partner states are also increasingly beginning to recover.

The challenge now is to ensure not just that this recovery is sustainable, but that it translates into real and tangible benefits for Europe's citizens, most importantly in the area of job creation. There is some evidence that the improved economic outlook is feeding into the labour market, but we must do more to get people back to work. We are particularly aware of the real difficulties faced by the Greek people. Notwithstanding the scale of the challenge, it is my sincere hope that the ongoing negotiations between the Greek Government and the three institutions will deliver a successful outcome.

For the European Union to be truly strong, it must have the trust and confidence of its citizens. Unfortunately, this trust has been eroded in some ways by the painful realities of the crisis as people, and particularly young people, suffered from its most serious effects. It is no surprise that there is a corollary between reduced economic opportunities and heightened levels of euroscepticism. Rebuilding trust means ensuring that people can have hope again for the future. It means supporting job creation, kick-starting investment and ensuring that credit can flow to small and medium-sized enterprises. I hope that governments and parliaments across the Union will take the opportunity afforded by Europe Day to reflect on their own role in enhancing understanding of the Union and encouraging a more positive citizens' engagement. The Union touches almost every aspect of our daily lives and it should, and must, be firmly part of our national dialogue.

The European Union's neighbourhood, both to the east and to the south, has become increasingly unpredictable and unstable over the past 12 years. This presents a challenge to the security and stability of the Union, but can also represent a challenge to our fundamental values and democratic principles. The Union has taken decisive action by imposing sanctions on Russia in respect of its actions in Ukraine, and it has unequivocally condemned the illegal annexation of Crimea. It also stands in solidarity with the Ukrainian Government as it works to roll out an ambitious reform programme; this support was reaffirmed at the EU-Ukraine summit on 27 April last.

Significantly, and notwithstanding some differing perspectives among member states, the EU has maintained a unified approach to this crisis in our neighbourhood. This will continue to be critical to our credibility and influence as we consider next steps, particularly in light of implementation of the Minsk agreements. Key to the Union's effectiveness as a foreign policy actor is our ability to bring an array of complementary strategies to bear in a comprehensive response, from diplomacy to development assistance to civilian and military crisis response. The world around us is being shaped by increased connectivity, but also increased complexity.

The terrible attacks in Paris, Copenhagen and Brussels earlier this year reminded us that security threats are not just beyond the Union's borders, but also within the Union. These were direct strikes against the values that underpin Europe. The threat of terrorism is a problem for which there is no easy solution or magic wand. Combatting it requires constant vigilance on the part of the EU and its member states and close and effective co-operation between our respective national policing and judicial authorities. It also demands that we address the factors which contribute to radicalisation of Europe's citizens. The EU's determined response to the attacks in Paris and Copenhagen has shown that such acts only serve to bring us closer together, rather than to divide us. Member states and the Union's institutions have resolved to work more closely together than ever before in fighting terrorism. A number of steps were agreed earlier this year and the European Council in June will review the progress achieved on these very serious matters.

On the issue of migration, the scale of the recent terrible tragedies in the Mediterranean rightly prompted widespread shock and sorrow. It was crucial that the EU responded with compassion and urgency; to do otherwise would have been to forsake the moral authority of our Union. On a basic human level, we simply cannot turn the other way when innocent people are drowning off our shores. At a specially convened summit, Heads of State and Government committed to a number of steps to help save lives, alleviate suffering and strengthen co-operation with countries in our neighbourhood. The member states have also committed to an ambitious plan to implement these steps. Ireland has been playing a key part in this. We have increased the level of our humanitarian assistance to those directly affected. We are also contributing a naval vessel to participate in the reinforced EU mission in the Mediterranean. We have made clear that we are standing shoulder-to-shoulder with our southern EU partners who carry a substantial load when confronting these challenges.

We are all aware that the British people go to the polls today. It is no surprise that the United Kingdom's future within the European Union remains the subject of speculation. British membership of the European Union is vital to Ireland's interests. It is important for our economic well-being, central to the continuing development of strong British-Irish relations and vital to our long-term strategic positioning within the European Union. We should not forget the positive influence and the benefits that joint Irish and British membership of the European Union has brought to Northern Ireland. Given that it is central to our interests, we have been very clear about our views and these are on the record. With today's election likely to have a significant bearing on how this issue is treated across the Irish Sea, we will be watching the results very closely. No matter who is elected and who forms part of the next British Government we will continue to put the case to our British friends as to why our particular and shared interests are best served with Britain playing a leading role in the European Union.

In considering the challenges which face the European Union today - I have only touched on some - we should not lose sight of the fact that in many of these challenges there are also very real opportunities for building a stronger and more comprehensive Internal Market, for building fairer and more equal societies, and for using our collective weight as a European Union of 28 member states to promote global peace, security and development. The interconnected nature of our world means that the challenges of today cannot be tackled by states acting in isolation. We must and we will work together as a European Union with focused determination.

On this important day for Europe, I assure the House that Ireland will continue to play a positive, active and engaged role as a proud member of the European Union in tackling those challenges and in harnessing new opportunities.

Deputy Brendan Smith

Fianna Fáil is committed to a democratic and accountable European Union of member states who work together for the mutual benefit of all Europe's citizens. We believe strongly in the principle of subsidiarity which guarantees the freedom of member states to act where they are most effective. In the past two decades we have seen a number of European institutional developments which have sought to deepen and enhance the process of European integration. While we do not wish to see any of these rolled back, we recognise that the speed and nature of some of these moves have left many citizens unsure and disconnected from the European Union. The EU must pursue policies which promote growth, equality and fairness for all its citizens. While we strongly believe that Ireland's best interests politically and economically are best served by our remaining at the centre of the European Union and the eurozone, we also believe that we must critically analyse all political developments in the European Union to ensure that the interests of the Irish people are best served by those developments. As the Minister of State said this debate takes place as the British people go to the polls today. The outcome would appear too close to call at this point. We must be conscious that the Conservative party has contested the election with a pledge to a referendum on continued membership of the European Union.

In the event of the Tory party leading the next British Government, there will be legislation in the first session of the next parliament for an in-out referendum to be held on Britain's membership of the European Union before the end of 2017. The Tories pledge to negotiate a new settlement for Britain in the European Union and then will ask the British people whether they want to stay in on this basis, or leave. A key part of this will be immigration and the Tories want to renegotiate welfare rules so that immigrants have to be working for a certain period in Britain before they can claim benefits. That is the pledge that has been made. Britain is Ireland's biggest trading partner and close ally in the European institutions. We can have strong, robust differences on particular issues but I know from my own experience, I am sure the Minister of State will agree, that Britain is a close ally on a huge number of important issues of mutual concern and interest to both countries. It is also the only country with whom we share a land border.

It is essential that we have a contingency plan in the event that the UK decides to leave the European Union. Such an action plan in place would outline the policy to be pursued to lessen the impact of any British decision to leave on our economy, on our position in European Union and our vital relationship with the UK overall. Coming from a rural parish that borders County Fermanagh I grew up with the customs posts and the permanent vehicle checkpoints. At our recent Ard-Fheis on a session on Northern Ireland, there was huge participation from the floor in regard to the question of British continued membership of the European Union. Many of the contributions from the floor were from people who live in Northern Ireland who are party members and people originally from the North of Ireland who are now living in the State. Their absolute concern was in regard to possible developments and Britain's continued membership of the European Union. It would be an absolute nightmare if Ireland was a member of the Single Market and Britain was not which would necessitate it leaving the Single Market if it left the European Union. We do not want customs posts back in south Ulster and along part of Leinster and Connacht. That would be a nightmare from the point of view of trade, commerce and developing business. Thankfully, since the mid-1990s we have had huge progress on a North-South basis and on an east-west basis also and we want that progress to continue. It has been asserted by some in Britain that they can quit the European Union but retain full access to the Single Market. This is a ludicrous contention. Membership of the European Union must have some distinct advantages and responsibilities.

The Greek situation remains very serious. We have consistently argued as a party that Greece needs further substantial action on its debt if it is to be given a credible path to growth. There have been encouraging signs in recent days in regard to dealing with the particular issues that will arise shortly in regard to debt repayments and hopefully the necessary progress can be made.

One of the very difficult issues the European Union has to face up to is relationships with the East and, particularly, with Russia. We should be developing stronger relationships with Russia. It is not the European Union's fault that there have been negative developments in the past 18 months. It is clear that all is not well with the political system in Moscow. Increasing Russian aggression towards its neighbours and internally towards political opponents is a most frightening development. There appears to be an increasing culture of fear in Russia. Current Russian foreign policy has resulted in war in Ukraine with untold devastation and the undermining of that country's sovereignty. Even Ireland, a country which has traditionally had a distinctly cordial relationship with Russia, has been touched by this aggression through the infringement of Irish controlled air space by Russian military aircraft. This we have learned resulted in commercial air traffic having to be diverted or suspended when travelling to and from Irish airports. That is not acceptable. Irish controlled air space has to be under the control of the relevant authorities. That abuse by the Russians is not acceptable. There is so much potential with regard to possible increased trade. We have witnessed the results of sanctions being imposed by the European Union and the negative effect they have had on various sectors particularly in the food area. We would like to see agreement reached from the point of view of commitments being made and conditions established to ensure trade can resume.

Fianna Fáil calls for a re-examination of the structures of the Economic and Monetary Union as well as the mandate of the European Central Bank. The architecture to ensure the long-term sustainability of the eurozone still needs to be put in place to provide a secure basis for the future prosperity of the European Union. The ECB's mandate must require policies for targeted growth as well as targeting inflation. The European Union must fulfil its commitment to separate sovereign debt and banking debt within the Union. The euro area Heads of State or Government agreed in June 2012 to break the vicious circle between banks and sovereigns. It is now time to fulfil this commitment by retroactively recapitalising Irish banks and recognising the unfair burden Ireland has largely due to ECB insistence at critical points of the financial crisis.

Europe must lead in the fight against climate change. We must ensure that the European Union supports sustainable, sensible and renewable energy policies at a European level. The European Union must also ensure that our international partners keep their commitments to reduce the causes of climate change internationally. The implementation of policies to tackle climate change must ensure the safeguarding of sustainable food production systems, which are vitally important in the fight against hunger and malnutrition. We support policies which reduce European dependency on outside energy resources. The EU must pursue policies which increase energy security and stability within the Union.

Fianna Fáil believes that the EU's enlargement policy is one of the most effective foreign policy tools the Union has at its disposal. Our party has, however, consistently outlined that it is important to consolidate the new EU legislative structures introduced in the Treaty of Lisbon and to continue to build economic stability in the EU in advance of any further enlargement.

I do not think the Minister of State referred to the proposed transatlantic trade and investment partnership, TTIP. Fianna Fáil supports the successful and balanced conclusion of the EU-US free trade agreement. It has the potential to boost the European economy but we have to be conscious of concerns surrounding food standards and safety. The EU must ensure that food standards are not diminished in Europe by this agreement. In that regard, the Irish Government must raise its voice to defend Ireland's interests in agriculture and the agrifood sector in the negotiation of this deal. Fianna Fáil is also opposed to any agreement which allows for the undermining of the Irish courts' jurisdiction through an investor-state dispute settlement, ISDS, clause. The EU must make a clear decision and commitment in the negotiations that there be no dumbing down of workers' rights in any proposed agreement. That has to be a kernel of our position.

This is the first time that a round of funding for the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, has been reduced, between 2014 and 2020. Thankfully, the milk quotas were abolished at the end of March. We secured a commitment at the health check of the CAP review in November 2008 to the ending of milk quotas at the end of March 2015. That was a very good decision but many members of the EU did not support it enthusiastically. We were one of the few countries that were very vigorous and forceful in demanding that the EU abolish milk quotas. Subsequently, and it was utterly crazy, many member states made an effort in late 2009 to pause that decision to abolish quotas, which would have sent a terrible mixed message to the farmers in the EU who would not know whether or not quotas would be abolished. We fought that vigorously. The decision confirmed in 2008 remained in place and, thankfully, that restriction has been removed from our farmers.

It is disappointing that the EU is imposing a superlevy on farmers just at the time when they need to invest to expand. All of us who represent rural counties are particularly conscious of the opportunity there is for farmers to expand but that needs investment. Unfortunately, the EU is imposing that superlevy on farmers which is most regrettable. The levy goes back into central funds and is not necessarily kept to support the dairy sector. I hope the Government will try to get the EU to change on this issue.

Deputy Seán Crowe

Seventy years ago today the remaining Nazi leaders signed a total and unconditional surrender order which ended the Second World War. Out of the ashes and devastation that the war brought there was a growing realisation that something needed to change in order to ensure that Europe never fought another war of this magnitude and the need for greater co-operation and solidarity was obvious. The evils of fascism remained in some European countries, but many others marched forward progressively, creating more inclusive societies by building public health services and welfare systems which worked to create a safety net for millions who were experiencing poverty and hunger.

This Saturday, 9 May, marks the EU celebration of Europe Day. There will be a handful of official parties but it will go unnoticed by millions of citizens across Europe. It marks the date of the Schuman Declaration in 1950, which proposed the pooling of French and West German coal and steel industries and led to the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community. The people of this State voted to join what was then the European Economic Community on 10 May 1972. Many who argued against joining highlighted issues such as sovereignty, independence, neutrality and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, NATO, the exploitation and use of natural resources, including mineral wealth, and the critical issue of jobs. There was also a discussion at that time about the direction of European and how it would evolve. Much has changed since then but many of the concerns raised at that time are equally relevant today. The EU is now made up of 27 members.

Two of the biggest challenges facing Europe now are the crisis in Greece and the drownings in the Mediterranean. At the heart of both issues lies the absence or the complete misunderstanding of the responsibilities and nature of solidarity. The Mediterranean is quickly becoming a graveyard. Last year, 3,200 men, women and children died while trying to cross the Mediterranean in coffin ships to reach the EU. Many came from impoverished countries in Africa and Asia and were fleeing conflict, persecution, and hunger. A total of 170,000 made the journey safely and landed in Italy in 2014. Over 1,700 people have died in the first four months of this year while trying to cross the Mediterranean. That is 100 times more than this time last year. How can we, as human beings and Europeans, turn aside and ignore this huge humanitarian crisis? This summer hundreds of thousands of tourists will be flying to the beaches of the Mediterranean to enjoy themselves. At the same time hundreds of thousands of adults and children will be making their perilous journeys, placed in overcrowded and unsafe rafts, dinghies and boats, desperately trying to reach the beaches, towns and cities of Europe. Thousands more face drowning.

We have heard that EU governments have planned to triple Triton’s mission budget to €9 million per month and provide some more rescue boats. As we face into this worsening crisis the plans for more money and rescue ships have yet to be realised. Just last weekend 6,770 people were rescued by the Italian coast guard. The Italian navy is still conducting search and rescue missions, while the EU’s Triton mission is primarily concerned with patrolling the EU’s borders. This is wrong and needs to be changed. It does not matter how much money is pumped into the Triton mission unless it has an active search and rescue mandate.

I welcome the fact the Minister for Defence is planning to send the LE Eithne to the region. However, we also need to examine and increase the number of refugees that Ireland accepts. For our population size we are taking far too few. We cannot rescue migrants and just drop them off in Malta and Italy and forget about them. We need to show greater solidarity with southern Mediterranean countries. There needs to be an EU focus on increasing our collective support and help to southern European countries which are on the front line and one of those initiatives must be to increase Europe’s refugee quota. The world is experiencing an unprecedented number of simultaneous humanitarian crises and the UN estimates that 50 million people are currently displaced. Ireland must play its part on the front line and at home.

The EU continues to mishandle Greece’s unstable debt and economic crisis. It is unacceptable that it fails to recognise that Greece’s debt is unsustainable and that this is also causing a humanitarian crisis, and needs to be reformed. The EU and the IMF are stalling progress on these vital issues. They continue to disagree on Greece’s reforms and debt, and this is to the widespread detriment of Greece and its people.

Where is the solidarity that was supposed to be the spine of the EU when it was established? The EU's decisions on Greece continue to be led by the Eurogroup. The Eurogroup is now a key body in the EU’s economic governance but it is not democratically accountable to anyone. Legally speaking, it is not an institution of the EU. It cannot make any laws. Regardless of that, however, no money will be released to Greece unless the Eurogroup says so. The Eurogroup does not have to update the public or the institutions on its work and no minutes of its meetings are kept. It is clearly in need of significant reform to tackle its lack of accountability and transparency. The Eurogroup, with the connivance of Europe’s finance Ministers, continues to bully and punish the Greek people for voicing their democratic wishes and seeking a fairer way forward.

Europe and its leaders would do well to reflect on the lessons of the past and to remember the issues that led to the rise of fascism in the past and that are leading to the growth of right-wing groups across Europe, as well as the decisions to cancel mass unsustainable debts after the Second World War and how this allowed European countries to recover and invest in their welfare states. This type of solidarity is hugely important in building a Europe of equals. Sadly, the EU is instead creating a two-tier Europe filled with inequality. It is a dangerous route and we need to learn the lessons from the tragedies that happened in the past. We can move forward.

People describe my party as anti-European, but it is far from that. We are critical of Europe and want to see a different Europe emerge. This message is growing across Europe. People want to see a different type of Europe - a Europe of solidarity. Those in need must be supported by all of us. The two issues I highlighted here this morning are clearly two messages that we can resolve.

Deputy Shane Ross

I am not sure why we are having this debate. I know it is Europe Day but it would be absurd to imagine that anybody in Europe is going to take the slightest bit of notice of what we say in this debate today. It is a grandiose title. We talk about the challenges facing the EU. The cursory speech from the Minister of State did not really paint any vision of the future. If this was of some significance, the German ambassador or someone like that might be in the Visitors Gallery listening to what we have say.

We know that this debate will cause no ripples in Europe. I will illustrate this with one incident that took place last week. Our relationship with Europe is one of supplicant and master. The Minister of State will be aware that last Friday, the former president of the ECB, Jean-Claude Trichet, came over here to appear before our democratic representatives at the Joint Committee of Inquiry into the Banking Crisis. It was a lap of honour by a man who is not elected but who is obviously more powerful than the democratically elected representatives here. Mr. Trichet appeared on his own terms before the committee. His appearance was prefaced by a 50-minute speech from him which was applauded by the europhiles in the audience. It was followed by two speeches, one by Michael Somers, the deputy chairman of AIB, which applauded Mr. Trichet, and another by a professor of European affairs. After that, a couple of tame questions were thrown in by people involved in European business, followed by the democratic representatives, on limited time, who asked questions that Mr. Trichet failed to answer. Unfortunately, this is the kind of relationship Ireland has with Europe. It was symbolic of the attitude we have. We do as we are told, bow and scrape and let them away with that sort of dictatorial attitude. That is not how it should be. The Minister of State's speech today should have spelt out the consequences of a victory for the Tories in the British general election, which is happening today, and the consequences for Ireland if the UK does leave the EU, because this is the most serious issue and the big challenge that faces us. There is absolutely no mention of what should be there, which is plan B. If this happens to us, we will no longer be semi-detached members. We will virtually cut off because of the decision of our biggest trading partner.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

If Europe is supposed to mean anything, it should be about international solidarity among the peoples of Europe and creating a beacon of progress and an agency of peace in the world. However, that is not what the EU looks like today. We have war in Ukraine, in which Europe has a hand, hundreds of people desperately trying to get into Europe to escape terrible situations in the developing world and losing their lives in the Mediterranean, and cruel austerity inflicted for the past seven years at the behest of the people who seem to really run Europe - the bankers, bondholders and money men. They are inflicting really vicious austerity on the ordinary citizens of Europe, to the point at which the EU is threatened with a break-up. This is what we are looking at with the possibility that the general election in the UK could lead to the possible exit of that country from the EU. There is also the very precarious situation in Greece, which could be forced out of the EU because of the really bloody-minded and vindictive attitude of the European authorities, and, behind them, the ECB and the financial markets in Europe, which find it acceptable to sacrifice the livelihoods, services, dignity and rights of the people of Greece on the altar of profit and maintaining the international financial system of speculation, banking and so on. Europe is in a very precarious situation, and one can add to that the very alarming rise of neo-fascist organisations in Germany, Greece and France and the rise of the far right in the UK. These are very worrying signs. One can add to that the shameful collaboration of the EU with Israel, which has been given favoured trading status. While Israel crushes the Palestinian people in a most obscene and brutal way, Europe does nothing about it but continues to do business with it.

If we want to save the European project, we must remember that human beings come first. Europe must not be a place of money men, bankers, bondholders and people who only see the bottom line. It must be a place that puts the rights and dignity of human beings front and centre, regardless of whether they are human beings trying to enter Europe or ordinary working people across the Europe. If we fail to do that, the EU is riding towards a crisis and a break-up, and the darker possibility of a return to the sort of crises we saw in the 1930s, with all the horrendous consequences that followed from that.

We are at a critical crossroads. Is it Europe for people or Europe for profit? Currently, it is Europe for profit and that is a Europe that will not last the distance.

Deputy John Halligan

I propose to concentrate on the critical situation in Ukraine, which we all know could have dire consequences for all of Europe. Like every other Deputy, I abhor the Russian aggression in Ukraine. However, there is a danger that the West will overlook the ongoing widespread corruption in Ukraine, which does not appear to have abated since President Yanukovych was removed from power. In 2014, Ukraine was ranked 142 out of 175 countries in the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, which puts it among what are considered to be the most highly corruptible countries and on a par with Uganda and Nigeria. I acknowledge that Russia has played an important role in bolstering this system of corruption. I have no truck for Putin's methods or his relationships with some of the oligarchs in Ukraine. However, besides a couple of stunts on camera, few meaningful steps have been taken by the current administration in Ukraine since taking office to tackle the imbedded system of corruption. A package of anti-corruption measures-laws were passed but the new coalition government comprises many of the same people suspected of having milked millions out of the system.

The old ways of doing business in Ukraine remain in operation. For years, an elite, ruthless few churned elicit profits into bank accounts around the world while the West turned a blind eye. These oligarchs are still holding the Ukraine economy to hostage. They will not hesitate to resort to additional legal means to maintain their sources of income and power. They have no interest in building a new country. As acknowledged by many governments across Europe, the infamous Right Sector still holds enormous power in Ukraine. Only two weeks ago, the press secretary of the Right Sector said in an interview that Europe needed to be told the right way to go so as to save it from the terrible situation of total liberalism. This is what members of the Ukraine Government are telling those who do not go to church or are tolerant of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights. It is crucial that we in the West take a strong position on the participation of the far right in the new government and on the uncontrolled rightist paramilitaries on the streets of Ukraine. The new government must run the country properly. Currently, Ukraine is crippled by war and corruption and there is no point in the West seeking an end for the former without a willingness to rule out the latter.

I take this opportunity to acknowledge the tremendous work being done by Deputy Dominic Hannigan as Chairman of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs. It is an honour to work with him on that committee. He does superb work right across Europe, which is recognised across Europe.

We need to monitor the situation in Ukraine, which may become critical in the coming months. We need to be careful how we line up in terms of our dealings with this absolutely corrupt regime that appears to have some influence with Europe. It would appear that we believe everything it says and does.

Deputy Dominic Hannigan

I thank Deputy Halligan for his kind remarks. I welcome this debate on the challenges facing the European Union. As Chairman of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs, it is a pleasure to speak on this issue on Europe Day. It is fitting that we mark Europe Day and recall that Europe, notwithstanding the flaws and many difficulties with which we are faced, about which we heard earlier from other Deputies, has developed into a place that values cultural diversity and has brought lasting peace to member states and religious freedom, fundamental rights and human rights to the citizens within its borders. I am delighted to be here today and welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Dara Murphy, to the House for this debate.

Europe Day is not just a one day event for the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs in that it engages in ongoing debate on issues of importance. Only last week, the committee held a debate with former EU Commissioner Peter Sutherland, the Italian Ambassador and others on the migration crisis in the European Mediterranean region and how we can react to that humanitarian crisis. As a result of that meeting, we will be sending a letter to the Taoiseach outlining the views of the committee in regard to what needs to be done in the region. One of the clear views expressed by all members of the committee was that Europe is not doing enough to tackle this crisis, including in terms of the number of refugees being taken in by all member states. We expect and hope that the Taoiseach will take on board our views and ensure that other European leaders are aware of the comments of the citizens of Ireland and act on them.

The joint committee tries to play an integral role on behalf of the Oireachtas in the developing role of national parliaments in the European Union and ensuring that national parliamentarians have a role at European level. The role of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs has evolved over time from that of a committee which scrutinises the laws and legislation coming from Europe to that of a committee which now also focuses on policy, which is one of the reasons for the meeting last week on the migration issue. The committee also addresses other issues such as the gap that exists between citizens and Europe and what Europe is doing.

This afternoon, the committee will engage in a discussion on changing attitudes towards the European Union. Members will be aware from talking to Irish citizens during various referenda campaigns that the level of support for Ireland's continued membership of the European Union has decreased. The committee is seeking to gain an understanding of the reason people are turning against the European project. The question of why support for the European Union is declining must be asked. As such, the committee will hear at its meeting this afternoon with the Irish Countrywomen's Association, the National Youth Council of Ireland and others what they believe can be done to combat the reduction in buy-in to Europe.

Another vital issue, which was raised earlier by Deputy Ross, is the reason nobody is speaking about the elephant in the room when it comes to Europe, namely, what Britain will do. As Members will be aware, a general election is underway in Britain today. For the past three months, the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs has been addressing the issue of a possible exit by Britain from Europe. Deputy Ross may not be aware of that but members of the committee, some of whom are in the House now, are well aware of the implications of such an exit on Ireland. The committee will in the coming weeks present a report on what it considers to be the implications for Ireland of a British exit. It is no secret that outgoing Prime Minister Cameron has said that if returned to government he will hold a referendum on this matter within the next two years. The view of the committee is that regardless of who is in government in the UK, a referenda will be held. There is a boil in terms of Britain's ongoing involved with the European Union that needs to be lanced. The implications of this for Ireland will be profound. This issue has been considered by the committee. I have no doubt the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs, other committees and the Department will be monitoring this issue on an ongoing basis to ensure there is clarity regarding the implications of such an exit for Ireland and how we should react to it, including what negotiation strategies to employ to ensure we mitigate any impact on our citizens.

When it comes to the role of national parliaments, we are trying to ensure that national parliaments utilise the powers given to them under the Lisbon treaty to the fullest extent. An issue often raised by national parliamentarians, not only by Irish parliamentarians but parliamentarians from other countries, is the relative shift in power away from national parliamentarians towards the European Parliament and European Commission as a result of the Lisbon treaty. The Lisbon treaty gives national parliamentarians additional powers, some of which were ground-breaking at the time of their introduction. The right of national parliaments to scrutinise and influence EU legislation on the basis of subsidiarity was enshrined in the treaties at the time of the adoption of the Lisbon treaty. There are issues in relation to what the definition means and what we can do with it.

After five years of experience there is a growing sense that we need to develop those powers further. My committee is dealing with a number of other national parliaments, notably with the British, Dutch, Danish and Polish parliaments. Next week a number of committee members will attend a meeting in Warsaw on the yellow card issue and how the role of national parliaments can be improved. I expect an outcome of that meeting will be proposals that can be put to the European Commission and to the new First Vice-President, Mr. Frans Timmermans, on how the role of national parliamentarians can be improved over the coming years. We have received a firm commitment from the new European Union Commission to better engage with national parliaments. There is an understanding on its part that national parliaments have lost out somewhat, relatively speaking, since the Lisbon treaty. This is acknowledged by the Commission and it is willing to see an improved and increased role for national parliamentarians. We will do what we can to improve our engagement with the Commission.

In the past two years we have set out a number of considered political contributions to the Commission. Last year, we put forward our views on how the Europe 2020 strategy could be improved. We also talked about how we wanted to see the social rights of European citizens more enshrined in European Union legislation and policy, looking at issues such as the pay gender gap, part-time work and the need to ensure that jobs, when created, provide a living wage. Conditions of work such as zero contract hours have a negative impact on the lives of employees. We have been making political contributions to the European Commission on a number of issues over the past number of years and we will continue to do so. We need to communicate better the message of the work done by the Oireachtas and by the European Union.

I note a previous speaker said that nobody would be watching this debate. However, I know that many ambassadors watch these debates all the time. They may not be in the public audience today but I can guarantee that they are watching on television as this debate is broadcast live on Oireachtas TV and on the Oireachtas website. People watch these debates and they find them very useful and I often get feedback from ambassadors and others as to the nature of our discussions.

Deputy Seamus Kirk

I am pleased to have the opportunity to make a brief contribution to this important debate at this time in Ireland's history. The Fianna Fáil Party is committed to a democratic and accountable European Union of member states who work together for the mutual benefit of all Europe's citizens. We believe strongly in the principle of subsidiarity which guarantees the freedom of member states to act where they are most effective.

I wish to focus on an issue that is coming down the tracks. David Cameron, the outgoing British Prime Minister has stated:

I am in favour of a referendum. I believe in confronting this issue - shaping it, leading the debate. Not simply hoping a difficult situation will go away.

The big question is if the UK votes to leave the EU, where does Ireland stand as Britain's largest trading partner? Our trade with Britain was clearly important in the process of economic recovery over the past three or four years. Where will the trading arrangement stand if Britain decides to opt out of membership? Given the close economic as well as geographical, political, cultural, social and historic connections between Ireland and the UK, we are extremely exposed if Britain decides to leave the EU. The UK is Ireland's biggest trading partner and close ally in the European institutions. It is also the only country with whom we share a land border. It is essential that we have a contingency plan in the event that the UK decides to leave the European Union.

The voting in the United Kingdom general election is being held today. The Conservatives have indicated that they are in favour of a referendum. The view has been expressed by previous speakers that other parties will opt for a referendum, given the general attitude prevailing in Britain towards EU membership.

Ireland and Britain trade over €1 billion worth of goods and services every week. Almost 200,000 people in Ireland are employed as a result of our exports to the UK. Recent data from the Central Statistics Office shows that 43% of exports from Irish firms were destined for the UK. To put this in real numbers, approximately €6.8 billion was destined for the UK. This is the same amount that the Government is planning to invest in commercial projects of benefit to the economy and which will be overseen by the National Treasury Management Agency over the next five years. The move could also lead to the re-introduction of border controls between Ireland and Northern Ireland. This would have a disastrous effect on the people of County Louth and the Louth constituency who travel across the Border for trade, business and family reasons, on a regular basis. A UK exit from the EU would also damage co-operation in tackling cross-Border crime and would put in jeopardy the strong relationship that has been built between the Garda Síochána and the PSNI in recent years.

It is for the people of the UK to decide for themselves in a referendum as to whether they want to remain part of the EU. However, Ireland has an obligation to highlight the profound benefits associated with EU membership both for them and for us. The Government needs to continue advocating the benefits of EU membership for both Ireland and the UK. Nonetheless, the Government needs to have a contingency plan in place certainly for the period of the referendum campaign. I call on the Taoiseach and the Government to develop a strategic position for Ireland that takes into account the risks for Ireland should the UK decide to leave the EU. These risks need to be identified and minimised as quickly as possible.

Another market in which Ireland and the UK are interlinked is the energy market. Ireland imports 89% of its oil products and 93% of its gas from the UK. The Irish electricity grid has been linked to Britain since 2001. The gas grids are also connected via Scotland. A UK exit from the EU could impact negatively on security of energy supplies and might increase the cost of connecting to the internal energy market.

Clearly, more than any other country, we want Britain to stay in the European Union. We have to ask how high a price we will pay in order to keep Britain in the EU. The undermining of the core of the Union, stripping away consumer and worker protections and restricting the ability to address clear problems in the Union, would be too high a price to pay. It has been asserted by some in the UK that they can quit the Union but retain full access to the single market. This is profoundly ludicrous. Membership of the Union must have some distinct advantages and responsibilities. We have no difficulty with the UK staying out of the eurozone. If it wishes to opt out of a broader budget there are means of accommodating it but the Union has to be about something more than trade.

Deputy Michael Colreavy

My colleagues will focus on different aspects of the challenges facing the EU while I will focus on TTIP and ISDS. The Government is claiming that 8,000 jobs could be created and GDP could increase by 1.1% through TTIP2. We have heard all the spin before. I recall all the jobs promised at the time of the Lisbon negotiations but these have yet to materialise for many in Ireland or across the EU. TTIP is aimed at stimulating trade. However, trade between the two blocs has never been better and goods worth €1.8 billion are exchanged every day between the US and EU.

Ireland has a strong and arguably unique alliance with America with a range of existing bilateral agreements. Irish exports to the United States grew year-on-year by almost 1.3% in 2013 and are now in the region of €18.4 billion. I believe the Government, probably to suit its own agenda, is drawing on best case scenario figures. It is suggested that figures used by those in favour of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership are vastly overblown and are being used to convince a sceptical electorate of the benefits of what is a risky agreement. TTIP could have an adverse effect on Irish exports to the European Union, which account for over 60% of total exports. One study has quantified this and suggested that in a deep liberalisation scenario intra-EU trade could fall by approximately 30%.

We are calling on the Government to commission an objective study and report to assess the real benefits and risks facing Ireland as a result of TTIP. It is not good enough that we sit on our hands and cling hard to bloated statistics. Rhetoric alone is not going to address this. We need informed negotiators who can show leadership and ensure a fair deal for people. The European Commission is negotiating this deal on behalf of Europe. The Lisbon treaty gave that power to the European Commission without any input or transparency. Furthermore, as a result of the Lisbon treaty, member states have lost the power to veto these types of agreements. The European Parliament only has the power to reject or approve the entire deal after it has been negotiated.

The negotiations thus far have been shrouded in secrecy. An EU mandate document was leaked in early October 2014 and was subsequently declassified. The EU is considered to have high regulatory standards, a characteristic some industries have long complained about as representing a barrier to trade. However, these standards are in place for a reason, that is, to protect communities and consumers. Some vested interests want TTIP to become a platform for making changes to regulation to make industry more profitable for companies. This would have negative impacts on public policy and would come at a great social cost. These behind closed doors negotiations are being carried out by people who are neither elected nor accountable to Irish or EU citizens. The greatest threat to democracy in all of this is the investor-state dispute settlement, ISDS, mechanism. The ISDS mechanism allows corporations to sue governments even for loss of expected revenue when government regulations are seen to affect expected profits. Through ISDS, companies can bypass the national court systems and appeal directly to international investor-based tribunals. For example, a company could potentially sue for loss of profits if a government banned fracking in its area. We know that Australia is being sued for damages by a major tobacco giant in response to public health measures to restrict smoking. There have been several threats by companies to sue Ireland to compensate for lost profits. Currently, there is no mechanism for companies to do this in Ireland but with the ISDS mechanism that will no longer be the case. Many member states, including Germany, have stated their opposition to the inclusion of the ISDS mechanism.

Irish people are becoming increasingly aware of the presence and activities of a golden circle of those in big business who always seem to benefit from Government decisions and choices. I maintain that TTIP and the ISDS mechanism represent a framework for a worldwide golden circle.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy)

I call Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan who, I understand, is sharing time with Deputy Catherine Murphy and Deputy Paul Murphy. There is ten minutes in total and therefore Deputy O'Sullivan has three minutes.

Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan

As I said yesterday during Leaders' Questions - I am continuing the theme of the previous Deputy - I believe that TTIP is a major challenge for the EU. In particular, the ISDS mechanism represents a challenge because it will enable foreign investors to directly sue state governments which have been democratically elected. These companies will have the legal right to challenge any regulatory or policy measures of a host state that interfere with their ability to make profits or access markets. There are consequences for the ability of countries to maintain domestic regulatory space. The question for Europe is how foreign investors will be held accountable for damage caused through their operations. Although we are told of the potential market of 800 million people for European business, this represents giving too much power to profit-making companies. There is an example of this from Canada, where gas and oil exploration companies have taken the Canadian Government to court for millions. The implication is that this will have an effect on that government's ability in respect of policy-making on the environment.

Yesterday, I referred specifically to education and the potential, through the ISDS mechanism, for an increased commercialisation and privatisation of our colleges and educational establishments. There is pressure to expand the scope of education commitments in TTIP. The EU must ensure that education is excluded.

There are also implications for culture and the arts. France was able to secure an exception for its film industry to protect it from the Hollywood blockbuster industry, but there are implications for the arts and theatre in this country. The challenge for Europe is to ensure the protection of workers' rights, food and the environment as well as to ensure that governments act in the public good. It is vital that we have an open and frank debate on the issue in the House.

The other challenge I am keen to explore is derived from my chairing of the Irish section of the Association of European Parliamentarians with Africa, AWEPA. This has to do with the EU relationship with the developing world. Despite the progress made on the millennium development goals, poverty and inequality remain major challenges in the world and for the EU, as do political instability and conflict. These problems are causing people to risk their lives. Today over 1,000 people who lost their lives on the Lusitania are being commemorated but we must think of the thousands who have lost their lives. Europe has been found wanting in this regard.

Part of the reason for this inequality is the multinational and transnational companies moving into the developing world. Through coercion, bribes, fraud and the use of military goods they are clearing people off their land. This is having severe effects on food security and the environment.

There has been a process at European level towards a more transparent international tax regime but Europe must face this challenge and continue to press for transparency, country-by-country reporting and ensure no illicit flows of capital. Moreover, EU member states must implement legally-binding limits to the vulture fund claims in national jurisdictions.

A new report to be launched next week will call for Ireland and the EU to make clear the level of human rights due diligence that they expect of Irish and European companies working in the developing world. The report will be about Africa but it should equally apply to Irish and European companies working in Asia and South America. Some of these companies have offices in the European countries. I offer one final statistic. International trade union conferences are claiming that 4,000 workers could lose their lives before a ball is kicked at the Qatar World Cup football finals in 2020. That is a major challenge for the EU.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I want to focus on debt, climate and social Europe. We need to get to grips with the European debt mountain and to reset our ambition away from the idea that has dominated Europe in the past seven years, that is, the sense that the EU has become an agency of fiscal control more than anything else. What of the Lisbon treaty, the social chapter, social solidarity and a European Union that puts citizens first?

A debt conference is absolutely essential. It is not only programme countries that have a problem with the debt mountain. For example, other countries above the 60% target include Germany, France, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Netherlands. These are in addition to the likes of Italy, Spain, Cyprus, Slovenia, Portugal and, of course, Greece.

We cannot grow the European economy without a fiscal expansion into key areas. In respect of our country, we need to appreciate fully the requirement to tackle climate change. We were told last week by the Minister that this would cost us €300 million per year in hard cash because we will not meet the 2020 targets. That cost will apply every year. We run the risk of these fines. Ireland is importing approximately €7 billion in fossil fuels annually and we are almost 90% dependent on these imports. Therefore, we need to invest in public transport. That is where the fiscal expansion is needed. We need to have a major programme of home energy retrofitting and we also need to invest in areas such as broadband. All of these areas would involve the kind of fiscal expansion that would make us a better contributor to the European Union.

With regard to the social crisis, as I have said before, we have achieved stability in our finances at the expense of society in Europe. We have saved the euro at the expense of democratic accountability. Inter-governmentalism has dominated the Council throughout the crisis. We have to move away from being led by politicians who are only concerned with the pragmatic present, and we need to have a vision for the kind of Europe we need to become.

I have quoted Jürgen Habermas in the past. He said:

If one wants to preserve the monetary union, it is no longer enough ... to provide loans to over-indebted states so that each should improve its competitiveness by its own efforts. What is required is solidarity instead, a co-operative effort from a shared political perspective to promote growth and competitiveness in the eurozone as a whole.

Such an effort would require Germany and several other countries to accept short and medium-term negative redistribution effects in its own longer term self-interest - a classic example of solidarity...

We need to see that kind of solidarity. It is a big challenge for Europe to combine and seek that solidarity, but there is no evidence that we have seen it. That is a huge challenge for the European Union.