JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS debate -
Wednesday, 24 Sep 2008

Business of Joint Committee.

Chairman

Item No. 2 is the European Commission White Paper on the integration of EU mortgage credit markets — contribution to the European Commission. We have gone through and considered the reports, made submissions and received submissions from the various financial representatives. I thank all those who have contributed. The joint committee should now consider issuing a contribution to the European Commission under the Barroso initiative. The draft contribution before us which encapsulates the committee's view and includes the concerns and views of the witnesses who appeared before it, where appropriate, generally supports the White Paper's objective to further enhance the competitiveness and efficiency of the residential mortgage market in Europe and make specific recommendations, including recommendations on consumer protection, early repayment, land registration and responsible lending. There are many issues on which I presume we are all now experts. Certainly, all of the institutions worldwide will become experts on them as time passes. Is it agreed that the contribution be forwarded to the European Commission? Agreed. Is it agreed that the report on the committee's consideration of this matter and appendices be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas? Agreed.

No. 3 is the Commission's Green Paper on future relations between the EU and overseas countries and territories, OCTs. The purpose of the Green Paper is to consult and obtain input from interested parties on the new partnership between the EU and overseas countries and territories. These are non-European countries and territories that depend constitutionally on four of the EU's member states, namely, Denmark, France, the Netherlands and the UK. They are Greenland, French Polynesia, Netherlands Antilles and the Falkland Islands.

The citizens of these territories are all EU citizens. These countries do not form part of the community's territory. The partnership between the EU and these OCTs seeks to promote their economic and social development and establish close economic relations between them and the community as a whole. The Commission wishes to consider substantial revision of the OCT-EC association with the intention of examining how to move away from the classic development co-operation approach. The first step in this review is the launch by this Green Paper of a global discussion on future relations between the EU and the OCTs. This public consultation process will end on 17 October 2008. While the launch of this process will have some limited impact on the European Development Fund which is of interest to Ireland, as a country with no OCTs there are no particular implications for Ireland. It is proposed, therefore, to note this document. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. 4 relates to the Commission's Green Paper on copyright in the knowledge economy, COM (2008) 466. The purpose of this Green Paper is to foster debate on how knowledge, research, science and education can best be distributed on-line while striking a balance with the need to ensure a reward for intellectual creation. This is fairly technical. It is not part of the knowledge-based economy. It essentially relates to regulation and technicalities.

The Commission's interest in this area is to ensure the proper functioning of the Single Market in respect of the knowledge. The Green Paper highlights the need to promote free movement of knowledge and innovation. The Green Paper looks at the existing directive in this area and poses questions such as whether a fair balance of rights and interests has been achieved between rights holders and users and if this is still in line with the rapidly changing environment. Through the Green Paper, the Commission seeks the views of all stakeholders regarding the issues raised and whether the current legal framework needs to be amended, targeting the practitioners and the operators within the sector and raises issues that are technical. It is proposed that the Green Paper does not warrant further in-depth consideration by this committee but that it be noted and forwarded together with the Department's information note to the Joint Committee on Enterprise Trade and Employment, being a more appropriate committee. Is that agreed?

Deputy Noel Treacy

The committee will need a presentation on this issue. This very much linked in to the original Lisbon Agenda of balanced economic development in all of the member states, information technology, expansion, knowledge economy development and so on. It would be no harm at this stage to review that and hear a presentation by experts. We could have a discussion on the Green Paper, taking into account the progress thus far under the Lisbon Agenda.

Chairman

That will happen. Is the Deputy suggesting that because of the Lisbon Agenda we should, in principle, have a discussion and make a submission on it?

Deputy Noel Treacy

We should receive a presentation and see how stands Europe vis-à-vis Ireland and the global world and make our own recommendations thereafter to see whether the Lisbon Agenda is deepening our economic opportunities.

Chairman

Is it agreed that we will have a presentation on the Lisbon Agenda involving that issue? Agreed. We will also refer this to the other committee when we have finished our deliberations. There is no deadline in regard to this matter.

Item No. 5 is the minutes of the meeting of 9 September 2009. The draft minutes of the meeting have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed.

Item No. 6 is correspondence. We have received correspondence from the chairmen of the European affairs committees of the Parliaments of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland requesting that EU-Russian relations be added to the agenda for the forthcoming meeting of COSAC. It is proposed that we note this correspondence. Under COSAC's rules a national delegation may suggest topics, but the final decision will be taken by the plenary session — that is, when the meeting takes place. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Michael Mulcahy

That matter is also linked to No. 208. The whole issue, not just of EU-Russian relations but Irish-Russian relations, deserves more attention. A few meetings ago I said we should send a delegation to Russia. To my knowledge, this committee has not sent a delegation to Russia for six or seven years. It is extremely relevant vis-à-vis the EU’s energy policy and Irish trade with Russia. Believe it or not, Ireland is the sixth largest investor in Russia. It is also relevant vis-à-vis the security situation in Georgia. Immediately after that crisis, Ireland said it would send some humanitarian peacekeepers or monitors. I was concerned about that because I felt we were jumping the gun. In general, however, we have not given as much attention to this area as we should have.

Skipping ahead from No. 208, I notice that we sent a letter with the wrong name for the Russian ambassador. Mistakes will occur but this is embarrassing. We should be careful when writing to ambassadors to get their names right. Russia is a major power and if we cannot get the ambassador's name right they will not take us seriously.

Chairman

The last matter has already been corrected and will not recur. Instructions have been issued to ensure that all personnel are updated, so that we know to whom we are writing.

Deputy Joe Costello

I agree with what Deputy Mulcahy said. I was somewhat worried by the tone of the letter that came to us from the Latvian chairperson in the sense that it refers to continued aggression by Russia in the Republic of Georgia. The countries involved are Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland all of which have some degree of an anti-Russian agenda. That would colour the debate on it. It should certainly be on the agenda but not with a view to having an all-out assault on the Russian Federation. We should ensure that the EU approach is a more balanced one. If the Russians are the bad boys in this, others were very much involved also, acting in a manner which was out of line with international agreements. From that point of view, there should be an open, wide-ranging discussion on the matter, rather than having an agenda that a particular group of countries might wish to pursue.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

Deputy Costello has articulated the point I wanted to make, which is similar — that we must be careful concerning what has happened in Georgia. A large amount of it concerned tensions fuelled by the fact that the western world, including the European Union and the United States of America, has not engaged with Russia in the way it should. It has neglected to foster positive, friendly relations with Russia over the past two decades. I support Deputy Mulcahy's call. It is important for the Irish economy and for the wider EU that attempts are made to develop a relationship with Russia. The idea of a delegation going there from the Oireachtas is constructive. Clearly, EU-Russian relations will be critical from an economic point of view due to issues such as oil prices. We should be trying to lead in the matter.

Senator John Hanafin

I agree with all of the previous speakers. There is a strong need to engage positively with Russia. In reality, we are dealing with a new Russia. No doubt the leadership is a strong one. In the Yeltsin years it was the wild east, similar to the Wild West, even though it was under a democratic umbrella. It was not surprising, therefore, that the Russian people moved towards strong leadership.

There is a mentality, which we all have had from the days of the Cold War, which is not easy to shake off. I can understand why the countries bordering Russia feel much as we did when we joined the European Union, with, possibly, enmity towards the old enemy. This has now dissipated and our relations have never been better with the United Kingdom. That must be the lesson for the new member states, that in the European Union they will be linked with Russia and the best we can hope for is good working relations with a major country which is no longer a superpower. Notwithstanding this — looking at it with a cold eye mentality — looking forward I suggest there is nothing but opportunities to the east and we should be looking for those opportunities in a land which covers eleven time zones over 17 million sq. kms and which has almost unlimited resources. I read reports that they take salmon from the rivers in Siberia with bulldozers. In a sense, one does not have a concept of it. On one occasion when I was in Moscow, I asked one of the guides how far we were from the Urals. He replied that they were 1,000 km away. At the Urals one is still in Europe and there are another 10,000 km to the Far East, reaching to Alaska. There is only opportunity. As a trading nation, our gross domestic product is approximately €200 billion. The figure for Russia is €1,000 billion. We are a significant player in the world economy and have always thought of ourselves as a significant player because of the solid moral stands we have been able to take. Europe's future lies in looking to the east and much better relations with what is a new Russia, despite the current difficulties.

Senator Terry Leyden

I have read much documentation on the Georgia-Russia conflict and there is wrong on both sides. Georgia moved to suppress difficulties in its own region but it woke the Russian bear. Its actions were provocative.

The aspect that struck many people was that Georgia had applied to NATO. It is provocative to have a NATO presence in Georgia. The Polish Government has allowed American missiles to be placed along the border with Russia; hence this relationship is difficult. The point made to me was that if Georgia applied to join the European Union, under the Lisbon reform treaty, we would have responsibilities under a common defence policy to defend a member state of the European Union. That is a matter which must be clarified before the next referendum, if a second one is to take place on the Lisbon treaty. This issue has raised considerable concerns. Under a common defence policy, we would have to defend neighbours such as Britain or France against attack and vice versa, rightly so. However, nobody envisaged the difficulties that would arise in the former eastern European countries in conflict with Russia. That is a matter we should look at in greater depth.

I have read all of the documentation from both sides to this conflict and the reasons for what has happened between both states in the space of a few weeks are complicated. We should be fair and assert total neutrality in this regard. If a Defence Forces peacekeeping unit is required in that area, there is no reason it should not be deployed, but that is another day's work for the Government.

Deputy Noel Treacy

I endorse the comments of colleagues, especially Deputy Mulcahy. It is important that Ireland maintains open, solid and improving relations with Russia, which is a key player in world. Russia is committed and singular in its determination to assert its position. It has a major role in conjunction with the EU going forward. Taking into account our experience of conflict resolution and our long relationship with Russia, we could enhance our position both within the Union and through the Union with Russia. It is important that a delegation would visit the Russian Federation and arrange a series of meetings to ensure our bilateral interests can be enhanced going forward.

Senator Feargal Quinn

I support Deputy Mulcahy's suggestion, the timing of which is important. If we travel, we should not travel on the basis of one issue, that is, the trouble in Georgia. I am not sure whether this is the right time but I am in favour of sending a delegation because Ireland can play a role that is in its interest. In the long term, that is clear but it is also in Europe's interest. It is the right time to send a delegation if the Georgian conflict can be dealt with separately. Concerns were expressed when the conflict occurred only a few weeks ago. The committee referred to the minority Russian populations in Latvia and Estonia, which are EU members. It is the correct thing to do but I question whether now is the right time, particularly in regard to the Georgian conflict.

Deputy Pat Breen

Russia is a powerful force, as Senator Leyden and I know from our membership of the Council of Europe. There was an anti-Russian situation at the council last year when Russia was due to take up the presidency of the council. Unfortunately, that was blocked by a number of states and the Spanish representative took over. We do not need to take sides in this conflict. Ireland needs to act as a good, strong, independent democracy and Deputy Mulcahy is correct that we should improve our relations with Russia. The timing is right. As Senator Hanafin said, it is a vast country covering 11 time zones. We can offer the Russian people a great deal in the context of information technology and so on. They probably need us a great deal as well given the advances made by Ireland in this sphere. I have attended Russia and Siberia with the Council of Europe and they are well behind technologically. We could offer them a great deal.

We should concentrate on Ireland's relations with Russia rather than the EU's, which is important. It is a vast country. Ireland imports oil from Russia, with most of the aviation fuel used at Shannon Airport imported from there. My constituency had a close relationship with Aeroflot in the days of the USSR. Ireland should improve relations with Russia. Perhaps the first move in this regard should be to invite the Russian ambassador to Ireland to appear before the committee since we made a slight cock-up of the letter.

Chairman

The views expressed by the committee were exactly the same as those expressed at the previous COSAC meeting regarding the need to improve relations between the EU and Russia and to recognise that Russia is a near neighbour.

We recognise that some of our EU member states have a history in so far as Russia is concerned and this is a sensitive question for them because Russia is bigger and more powerful. The Polish people have particular sensibilities in this regard as have the Estonians and the Latvians. It should also be remembered that 75% of the population of Russia live in Europe, amounting to approximately 240 million people and the rest live in Asia. It is a huge area with a huge population and it is important that good relations exist between the European Union and a trade bloc of that size. I agree that we should do our bit as a small country within the European Union to foster and promote a better relationship. The French strongly supported those views when we expressed them. An example of this was President Sarkozy's recent trips to Russia and Georgia. The French agree with the views expressed by the committee members but then the French do not have the same history as some of the other countries in their dealings with Russia so they are freer to agree.

The committee has already agreed to visit Russia and it is anticipated this will happen, depending on any other committee or sub-committee responsibilities with regard to the Lisbon treaty as it continues. Is it agreed to invite the Russian ambassador to attend the committee? Agreed. I suggest that as early as possible and as soon as arrangements can be made, we will visit Russia as previously agreed and subject to the availability of the necessary funding. Is that agreed? Agreed.

It is proposed to note item No. 203, correspondence received from the European Ombudsman enclosing executive summary of the statistics and annual report of the European Ombudsman. We may wish to review its work at a later time. Is that agreed? Agreed.

It is proposed to note item No. 204, correspondence received from the European Court of Auditors enclosing its annual activity report for 2007. We may wish to come back to this item in the context of the working programme and our proposed study visit to Luxembourg. A former Member of this House, Ms Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, invited the committee to visit. We could make further comments on the report in the course of a visit. Is that agreed? Agreed.

It is proposed to note item No. 205, submission received from the financial services of Ireland concerning the White Paper on the integration of the EU mortgage credit markets. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The submission received from the Irish Banking Federation was discussed previously and it is proposed to note it. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Item No. 207 is a copy of an open letter to The Irish Times from Anthony Coughlan, secretary of the National Platform. This item was sent to me, in keeping with his previous submissions in respect of the subject matter of Europe and the European Union. Is it agreed to note this correspondence? There is no requirement for a ——

Deputy Noel Treacy

The committee does not agree with it.

Chairman

No, we do not agree with it. Depending on how this can be accommodated and out of courtesy to people such as Mr. Anthony Coughlan, we should invite him before the committee to discuss the issues. He has been here before.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

Is there any correspondence from the Minister for Foreign Affairs or a Minister of State, regarding the proposed sub-committee of this committee to deal with the fallout of the Lisbon treaty referendum?

Chairman

We will refer to that matter towards the end of the meeting. We do not have final or conclusive indicators at this stage but we expect to hear from him before the day is out because it will be on either tomorrow's Dáil Order Paper or next week's Order Paper.

Deputy Joe Costello

The Order Paper for tomorrow has been publishedand it is not on it. However, the Order Paper for tomorrow may be amended. The Minister is away at the moment.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I do not want to move away from the agenda, but I understand the proposed sub-committee will have to do its work within an exceptionally short timeframe. A tremendous amount of work will have to be done in approximately eight weeks. The sooner we get on with it, the better.

Chairman

I will come to that in a moment.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

Yes.

Chairman

We will deal with the rest of the correspondence before doing so.

Item No. 208 is a letter received from the embassy of the Russian Federation concerning the visit of Mr. Sergey Lavrov, the Foreign Minister of that country, to Ireland. It is proposed to note the correspondence. I accept the point made by Deputy Mulcahy about the new ambassador. The names and functions of all diplomatic personnel are being updated. We sent a nice letter to placate them in case they got upset.

Item No. 209 is an e-mail inviting the committee to send a representative to a Friends of Europe policy summit, at which the need to define Europe's energy strategy will be discussed. It is proposed to note the correspondence. Perhaps it would be more appropriate for one of the members of the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security to attend the summit. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Item No. 210 is an invitation to attend a policy conference, organised by the European Friends of Israel, to be held on 6 and 7 November. Is it agreed to send a member to the conference, as long as funds are available?

Deputy Timmy Dooley

I second that proposal. I was about to propose that we send a representative to the conference.

Chairman

Is that agreed?

Deputy Timmy Dooley

I decided not to do so, on the basis of past experience.

Senator Terry Leyden

I have received a personal invitation to attend the conference, but I intend to decline it.

Chairman

Absolutely.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I will represent the committee, as I will be there anyway.

Senator Terry Leyden

I have parliamentary commitments.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

It will take place on a Thursday and Friday.

Chairman

I was asked to make a major policy statement at the meeting.

Senator Terry Leyden

Where is the conference taking place?

Deputy Joe Costello

It is taking place at the Marriott Hotel in Paris.

Chairman

Yes.

Senator Terry Leyden

The Chairman should ask Israel to release the people of Gaza——

Chairman

It is indicative——

Senator Terry Leyden

——and to stop murdering Palestinians.

Chairman

——of the role that the members of the committee will be asked to play. We should note the matter for discussion at the next meeting of the committee.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

Are we deciding whether to send somebody to the conference?

Chairman

Yes. One of the things——

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

We should engage with those involved, at least.

Chairman

Yes, we should.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I think we should send somebody.

Chairman

One of the things that people in the region are anxious to ascertain is the relationship between the situation in the Middle East and the situation in Ireland. We should bear in mind that there may be such an analogy. If the committee can be of any assistance, it has a responsibility to help.

Senator Terry Leyden

Those organising the conference have already invited two or three members of the committee to attend.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

Correct.

Senator Terry Leyden

They have offered to provide transport and accommodation. I ask the committee to bear that in mind as it makes its decision.

Chairman

We will do so. Is it agreed to review the European Friends of Israel invitation at the next meeting of the joint committee? Agreed.

Item No. 211 is an invitation to join a fact-finding mission to the Gaza Strip. While it is a somewhat similar invitation to the last one, it is not recommended that we take it up.

Deputy Joe Costello

It sounds interesting.

Chairman

The situation is volatile. I think we will examine the matter again. It appears that it might be a more appropriate matter for the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

Has the invitation been extended to this committee only?

Chairman

It has been extended to me only.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I think the Chairman should go.

Chairman

Is the Deputy hoping I will not return? There is no need to agree with such alacrity that I should go. She should consider the matter carefully before she sends me there.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I would be happy to deputise on behalf of the Chairman.

Chairman

I know. We will examine the matter and investigate it further.

Senator Terry Leyden

I am not sure the Department of Foreign Affairs would recommend that we take up the invitation to send representatives to Gaza to examine the situation on the ground which is volatile. Security matters need to be considered before we travel to such a high risk area.

Deputy Joe Costello

I think Senator Leyden should go.

Senator Terry Leyden

Nevertheless, if we can spare a Deputy or Senator, we should send him or her.

Chairman

Is the Senator suggesting we send someone from the Government side?

Deputy Timmy Dooley

He means that we could spare someone on a long-term basis.

Deputy Noel Treacy

Some of us might be surplus to requirements.

Chairman

I hope members are not suggesting there is wastage on the Opposition side. As this is a serious subject, we should deal with it seriously. I suggest, subject to the agreement of members, that we examine it further. We will have plenty of time to do so between now and November.

Deputy Noel Treacy

I agree.

Chairman

If it is advisable to send someone on the mission, we will do so. We have had to travel to similar places in the past.

No. 212 is an invitation to the briefing session for parliamentarians and policy-makers entitled, The EU, Africa and China, to be held in Brussels on 29 October 2008. Do any members wish to attend? It is proposed to note this for the next meeting.

No. 213 requests an estimated attendance for the COSAC meeting on 2 to 4 November 2008. Three members must attend. Is that agreed? Agreed.

We do not know the precise format the committee and proposed sub-committee will take in its deliberations on the Lisbon treaty. We expect to know it within the next 48 hours. It must be borne in mind that our European partners do not intend to renegotiate any aspect of the treaty. The serious business to be undertaken is to engage with the general public in a way that clarifies the issues that have been before the people. Research already undertaken concluded the public was not aware of what the treaty entailed. The public were confused after the debate on the treaty because of conflicting views. Until these conflicting views are addressed, there will be a problem coming to a satisfactory conclusion.

The other issue that has emerged is that the McKenna judgment has been cited as a serious stumbling block in ensuring other than a 50:50 debate. The point has been made that 95% of public representatives got 50% of media coverage, compliant with the McKenna judgment. It is ironic that is the way it is. It is extraordinary the courts decided that in this type of situation there had to be balance. I cannot understand why this has to be. Incidentally, the committee discussed several times in the past six months that it did not seem possible to come to a conclusion that was in the interest of the majority of the people, given the existence of this judgment. We have to be advised by the Government as to what will happen.

There will be a short debating period for the proposed hearings. There will have to be a concerted and intense debate, much in the same way as the DIRT inquiry of the Committee of Public Accounts some years ago. There will have to be a serious commitment from the members of the proposed sub-committee. It is in the public and national interest that this is done. This committee will not be found wanting, as we have already stated.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I assume the Chairman will consult with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his Department on how this proposed sub-committee will operate. The idea of providing clarity on issues which arose in the Lisbon treaty debate will not be as simple as members hearing evidence from a number of experts over several weeks.

I believe plenty of information was available on the treaty. It was the war of the media that was won by the "No" side and not the information campaign war. Plenty of information was available, predominantly from the "Yes" side, but it was not understood, disseminated or communicated. While there has to be a target of putting forward some formal proposals in advance of December's Council meeting, this group should have a wider scope. This must include examining fundamental issues of information and its dissemination on an ongoing basis, not only with regard to the Lisbon treaty but in educating the people on how the European Union functions.

A number of surveys carried out in recent months highlight the fact that of all of the EU member states, the Irish have a poor understanding of the European institutions and how they operate. If people do not understand in the first place how the institutions function and what is their relevance, it is difficult to explore or sell the merits of change to the system in order to win a debate on the basis of reform of the institutions and making them work more efficiently. If it is not fundamentally understood in the first place, the idea of making a positive case for reform is a waste of time.

This is the only observation I will make. A wide scope is necessary in terms of the recommendations which the sub-committee can make to the Government, not only with regard to the solution to the impasse caused by the "No" vote on the Lisbon treaty but also in terms of propounding European policy and an understanding of European institutions.

Deputy Joe Costello

I am disappointed that the sub-committee shall be announced tomorrow but we have not had prior notice and it is not on the Order Paper for today or tomorrow. We cannot see its precise terms at present. How will it proceed? I presume a motion will be presented to the Dáil. Will this motion be taken with or without debate? Will we have an opportunity to discuss the terms of reference in the Chamber? I am not sure whether this is clear. It will then be referred to this committee, which I presume will not meet until next week, and membership of the sub-committee will be established.

The only conclusion I can reach is that the sub-committee is not intended to inform the plenary session to be held in mid-October which the Taoiseach will attend. I understand he will be a major contributor and his function will be to make a presentation on the way forward in the aftermath of the vote on the Lisbon treaty. It is unlikely the committee would have any work done which would be of value in this respect. It will operate on another basis.

While the Lisbon treaty is a starting point, we are now into a whole new ball game and we have a broader agenda in terms of the future relationship between Ireland and the European Union and future challenges. I welcome the establishment of the sub-committee. I am not happy that we do not have direct knowledge of what will happen, although the Minister did consult on its general structure. It will be difficult for the sub-committee to conduct and complete its business within the short space of two months. It should be an ongoing committee which would produce an interim report with an opportunity for further consideration and to deal with matters which may arise.

The sub-committee must engage in a complicated exercise. Nobody else has the answers. If we are to conduct our business properly it must be as open as possible and we require as much information as possible. We need an opportunity to debate the terms of reference of the sub-committee and to know precisely where this committee and the sub-committee are going.

Senator Terry Leyden

I take it for granted that a sub-committee of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs will contain Senators and Deputies. Otherwise it would not be acceptable as a sub-committee of a joint committee.

Furthermore, the Millward Brown survey, which is very useful, is not an exit poll. Unfortunately we did not have an exit poll on the day of the referendum. Therefore, the survey is only of limited benefit. If we had an exit poll to find out exactly why people voted ——

Chairman

The European Commission did an exit poll.

Senator Terry Leyden

Yes, but Millward Brown was commissioned separately. There is no point having IBEC and similar organisations appearing before this committee again, going through the same formula. What we need is for those who were opposed to the treaty to come in and debate the issues here, with witness compellability, as has been the case in the past.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

Steady on.

Senator Terry Leyden

Under the rules of the Oireachtas we have a right to call witnesses to give evidence before a committee. Regarding those people who were so active on the ground and who were speaking out in different fora, surely the Oireachtas has a right to hear their views being expressed here, with committee members having the opportunity to question them.

Deputy Creighton made the point that the media fought this campaign but the war was won with posters. There were totally misleading posters erected all over the country, which I believe won the war for the "No" campaign. The posters from the "Yes" side were totally inadequate and did not get the message across. They did not compare with the propaganda benefit of the posters erected by the "No" campaign. Anyone examining the overall campaign would see that was where a lot of the damage was done. Statements were made on those posters which were very simple, short and inaccurate but which were not contradicted by other posters.

This must be dealt with very quickly and the committee has a very important role to play. We may have to meet at least four days a week for the next few months to get it wrapped up on time.

Chairman

There is no question about that. I also wish to remind members that before embarking on our countrywide tour, this committee identified the issues that had to be dealt with, in terms of challenging the opposite view to that held by the majority of elected Members of the Oireachtas. We were prevented from doing that because of the McKenna judgment. There hangs a tale. Whatever happens in the future, we must recognise that.

Senator Leyden mentioned the question of the compellability of witnesses, which is already governed by legislation. We invited certain members of the "No" lobby to attend and address the committee but they did not respond at all. Furthermore, during the course of the campaign, a certain number of so-called personalities were approached to give their views on the treaty and to indicate how they intended to vote. That had a hugely damaging effect on the outcome of the referendum. Despite the fact that 96% of the elected representatives of the Houses of Oireachtas were in favour of the Lisbon treaty, the public took their advice from people who not only alleged that the European Commission was not elected, but who were not elected themselves.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

The fact that the Taoiseach and our European Commissioner both said that anyone who read the treaty would have to be bonkers had a much more profound effect on the outcome than the involvement of Gay Byrne, Ben Dunne or anybody else.

Deputy Joe Costello

Ben changed his mind, as far as I know.

Chairman

Has he changed his mind? That is excellent.

Deputy Joe Costello

He still has not read the treaty, though.

Deputy Noel Treacy

At our first post-Lisbon treaty meeting, I described the whole operation as a comedy of errors. Democracy is very precious and it is important that we sustain it. What baffles me is how the McKenna judgment can be used to manipulate the democratic process and also how organisations can simply sprout up, at either national, regional or local level. There are still posters in my constituency erected by small, ad hoc organisations containing ferocious, frightening statements. A4 sheets of paper were stuck up on poles and are still there. Nobody knows who printed them or put them up and nobody has been prosecuted for the fact that they are still up, even though that is in contravention of the Litter Act. If those posters belonged to a political party, then the person whose name or photograph was on them or the party itself would be prosecuted for not taking them down.

Senator Terry Leyden

One cannot prosecute the three monkeys.

Deputy Noel Treacy

I appreciate that, but it shows the cynical attitude and how the law is being manipulated. Somebody should visit this issue and ensure only registered operations are allowed to participate in these activities in future. We cannot have this ad hoc approach that manipulates facts, creates fiction and confuses the electorate. If we continue down this road, it will have serious ramifications in the next 20 years for the country.

Senator Feargal Quinn

I would be very reluctant to introduce more restrictive steps such as those we have just heard. This was an example of very clever marketing. The "Yes" campaign was an example of very poor marketing. Senator Leyden said this very clearly.

I also have great difficulty with the McKenna judgement. Not long ago we had the referendum on Northern Ireland and although 100% of the Dáil and Seanad were in favour, we had to give a 50-50 viewpoint. Although there is clearly a problem, I would be slow to suggest changing the rules. We need professionalism on this. The case can be made very well. It was very badly done by the "Yes" side and very cleverly done by the "No" side, which also used a lot of money. On that basis we must think this through. I am not sure how we can best handle it at this committee. I was interested to hear the Chairman say how the Committee of Public Accounts handled the DIRT investigation some years ago. It will not be easy.

Yesterday I returned from another visit to Brussels, where there is clearly a different viewpoint. There was a very interesting article in one of yesterday's newspapers about a person who was almost reluctant to show his Irish passport because of how it was regarded. Although I voted "Yes", in Brussels I found myself almost defending the "No" voters. I would begin to explain that we did not vote "No" because we did not like the European Union. Then I would stop because I am not quite sure what to say. We have a problem and it will not be easy but it is a reminder of the very clever use of marketing and how it can change attitudes.

Chairman

One very prominent journalist, Stephen Collins, wrote a very interesting article last Saturday on the implications of the result, the issue ahead and the responsibilities thrust on the country and the elected representatives. It was very profound, identified all the issues involved and particularly referred to the issues we had discussed at this committee. It also mentioned the friendly hand of our colleagues across the water that seems to be descending on us in a friendly fashion, to which Senator Quinn referred at the last meeting. It was a very good article and summed up precisely the problem. We must await direction from the Government. Obviously, the members of the committee will be very anxious to ensure that whatever is required to be done will be done. I have every confidence in them to do this.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

We have all skirted around one point to a certain extent. In a recent interview on Today FM Deputy Costello revealed information none of us was able to unearth in the last six or eight months, namely, how Libertas received its funding. It was via a loan which clearly circumvents legislation on funding of political campaigns, perhaps legally, perhaps not, I do not know. While this is not exclusively a matter for the Joint Committee on European Affairs, it is a more general matter for campaigning in any future referenda. We may or may not face a referendum on children's rights in due course, probably not. The committee should take up the issue, perhaps by recommending that the Joint Committee on the Constitution examine it to determine how we can ensure this type of activity does not recur. It is completely undemocratic that an individual can loan €200,000 to an organisation campaigning on a referendum. It is shocking.

Deputy Joe Costello

That was the first one.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

There was a subsequent one.

Deputy Joe Costello

He denied it.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

We did not get the detail on that one, but I heard him. This is a hugely important issue and somebody has to raise it. This committee should make a recommendation to deal with the issue and explore legislative options in the future. There can be clever marketing, and hats off to those who ran clever poster campaigns on the "No" side, but buying public opinion is a shocking indictment of our democracy.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

I support wholeheartedly what Deputy Creighton said. From a political perspective we must be careful. While there has been an attack on the individual in recent days by the media and by some politicians, the reaction I get on the ground is that people are saying the politicians lost, this guy beat us and we are now showing sour grapes. Perhaps that is something that should be referred to another committee for review. The point regarding clever marketing is one we need to address. We need to the capacity to condense our message and it will not be easy. Whatever the work or terms of reference of the subcommittee will be, they will have to be about translating those elements of the treaty that are relevant to people's lives in a sound bite manner that people want to hear and will understand. I do not suggest we involve ourselves in misinformation but we have to synopsise the information and make it relevant.

While the treaty in itself may not appear relevant, it affects people's lives and we must distil that down. We have to decide an agreed message and get it across. That is basic politicking. Unfortunately Libertas and others were not truthful. They made what can only be described as assertions on the treaty that were baseless and totally false. We failed to counteract those assertions with clear and concise information on the treaty. It is difficult to explain to people about reforming something they know relatively little about, and research supports this view. Part of any work the subcommittee does will be to put forward clearly, in a relatively small number of areas, the key benefits of Europe, the key challenges for us going forward and how Lisbon will impact on us. We do not have to get into all the detail of the reform, but to clearly communicate the effect or impact in dealing with the key and critical areas we know about. We must use clever marketing to get that across and I hope we can take a balanced approach on it.

It was interesting speaking to somebody over the summer from outside Europe who could not understand that there were so many people in Ireland who went the other way, when effectively 98% of politicians were in favour of something. Maybe we need a much closer level of campaigning between the parties. I am not suggesting that there was not close work, but not to the extent their should have been,

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

There was no engagement at all.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

The bipartisan approach of this committee, and the focus on it through the subcommittee, can form the genesis of a much more cohesive approach to fighting a campaign for people who believe in Europe and the importance of it. I hope that might come out of the subcommittee and set the seeds of a fairly cohesive campaign.

Senator John Hanafin

I agree with the views expressed. The marketing of the "Yes" campaign was particularly ineffective. We were humbled by political amateurs. The purpose of the McKenna judgment was to ensure fair play, but there cannot be fair play when €200,000 can be lent to a campaign. I did not hear anyone on the "No" side objecting. If it was discovered after the referendum that one of the political parties had received a donation in the form of a loan from any group, there would have been consternation and constitutional challenges, but there has not been a word from those who would pick out a gnat in a square kilometre. The way they campaigned was very unfair. As politicians we know we must do better next time.

However, the questions must be asked, and the committee is a good place to ask them, how a person can lend a campaign €200,000 and what other sources of finance there were, given that it was previously suggested there is an interest on the part of the American military establishment. If right-wing groups are involved, whether in the UK or elsewhere, we should know who they are. I know a little about fund-raising and the limits are quite clear. The requirement to declare is stated in law. If a person can circumvent that, we have left ourselves wide open.

Deputy Joe Costello

Valid points have been raised which have not, perhaps, been raised before. I am aware we are not going around the table discussing the issue again. However, all political parties are bound under the ethics legislation to account for all their donations and must, therefore, make statements and have made statements regarding the money they used in the campaign. On the other hand, neither Cóir nor Libertas has revealed the source of its funding and does not have to under existing legislation. That is not a level playing pitch. The one thing the McKenna judgment created was a situation whereby both sides would be treated equally. Now we have had a situation in which there was an enormous imbalance in funding, and the quantity of money available contributes enormously in deciding on a marketing strategy. In the past we set up tribunals because of the perceived improper relationship between big business and politics. Now we find that a wealthy business person with an agenda is able to subvert a constitutional referendum using large quantities of money without having to declare the source of it. There is a serious question to be answered.

I was pleased to hear that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley proposes to introduce amending legislation to ensure full transparency in regard to all donations to all parties in respect of any future referendum. That is a very practical proposal that should be on the top of this committee's agenda.

Deputy Noel Treacy

There was clever marketing but it was manipulative.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

That is what marketing is.

Deputy Noel Treacy

It is to a degree. I have no problem with clever marketing if one is marketing a product, a service or a message and the aim is to get that message out. However, in a pre-Queensberry rules operation where the situation is manipulated by non-factual statements and there is no one to adjudicate on them, I cannot see how we can sustain democracy. The Referendum Commission or someone else must be in a position to contradict publicly, emphatically and regularly any false document, false poster or false statement within an hour of it going out until the clear truth gets across.

We have a serious problem, apart from the fact that we have to get the rules changed to ensure that anybody campaigning in the future must be able to account for the source of all funds used. If politicians use State resources in an election, whether they are office staff, telephones or Oireachtas mail, we must account for those. These people can put posters up all over the country to distort things, however, and nobody knows who put them up or at what cost. That is what is happening and it is serious.

Chairman

I am not sure whether I informed the committee previously, but we went through all this at the first meeting of COSAC under the French Presidency. Serious questions were asked of the committee as to what happened and why it had gone wrong. The arguments that were put up here were not really accepted by them. For instance, it was always said here that nobody in Europe would approve of it and that the French and Dutch people had previously rejected it. The response to that was quite simple: that it was not necessary for the people in those two countries to have a referendum of that nature, but they did it for whatever reason and they got a negative result. Because 60 million people had made a decision some minor changes were made. It will also be recalled that in the course of the campaign here we were told there was a better deal on. There is no better deal on. There is an exit clause in the Lisbon treaty that was there for everybody to see. Sadly, for one reason or another, the fact that we had two referenda on Nice was not helpful. Everybody was looking over their shoulder and saying "Look, sure we are going to have a second chance at it anyway." I do not want to keep repeating this but the people of Clare, Kildare North and a number of other constituencies voted "Yes". During the course of the campaign, many people said "We don't want to have to vote again". I am sure those who voted "Yes" do not want to vote again but they will have to also. Sad as it may be, we will have to do it all again.

The crucial point to remember is that after the result, serious commentators were in awe of this astounding decision and said they could not understand how it was arrived at. It was astounding that Ireland should have rejected the treaty in this fashion given Ireland's involvement in the EU and the leadership role it has taken within the EU. Members of this committee are quite right in that those issues must be addressed. There is no sense in allowing whoever has the responsibility to run away from the issues. The issues must be tackled and people's views must be assessed before conclusions are reached and decisions are made. The public were confused. A 50:50 situation was presented to them and at the end of the day they asked who was right.

Is it agreed that we should wait until we get indications from the Minister or the Taoiseach concerning what will happen next? The committee can be held in readiness at fairly short notice and we will do whatever has to be done. With the permission of members, I do not propose to set a date for the next meeting because we may be given short notice of this matter in which case the meeting can be arranged quickly. Is that agreed?

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I suggest that to be proactive and communicate the importance and urgency from the committee's viewpoint, the Chairman might initiate contact with the Minister. I am unclear as to what is happening. Deputy Costello raised the matter on the Order of Business this morning and it now seems the Government will put forward a motion tomorrow morning on this matter. It would be helpful for the Chairman to seek clarification at an early stage.

Chairman

Is the Deputy agreeing?

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

Yes. An e-mail could be sent to committee members today, if that is possible, to let us know. I would like to know beforehand.

Chairman

If there is any change it will be conveyed by e-mail.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

Yes. Thank you.

Deputy Joe Costello

There is a plenary session of the Council of Europe this coming week, on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. Quite a few members of the committee will attend that.

Chairman

It had been intended to meet informally with the Belgian Foreign Minister next week, on 30 September. The Minister cannot meet us on that date but is anxious for the meeting to be held at a later date. The Minister will contact the committee in this regard. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Various senior political figures in Europe are anxious to meet the committee now for the reasons we have been discussing. Members are aware of the story.

Is it agreed that the meeting should now be adjourned sine die and that members will be informed as they have requested? Agreed.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.15 p.m. sine die.