I thank the Chairman and members for giving me the opportunity to appear before the committee on this historic day for Ireland and the European Union to discuss these important matters. I would like to add my congratulations and those of all in the Department of Foreign Affairs to Máire Geoghegan-Quinn on her appointment. Many of us have had the privilege of working with her during her time as a Minister. I am confident she will do a very good job.
The entry into force today of the Lisbon treaty marks the beginning of a new and long awaited phase in the Union's development. As of today, the EU has the potential to become a more efficient, effective and democratic organisation. One of the most important ways in which the Lisbon treaty has made the European Union more democratic is through the enhanced role it provides for national parliaments. This was a point the Minister for Foreign Affairs underlined when he met last year with this committee, sitting in joint session with the Joint Committee on European Affairs.
With the treaty in force we are opening a new chapter in the role of the Oireachtas regarding the European Union. I will return to this point later, along with other issues concerning the implementation of the treaty. With the permission of the Chairman, however, I would first like to deal with the report of the Department of the Foreign Affairs to the Houses of the Oireachtas on developments in the European Union between January and June 2009. This report deals with developments during the Presidency of the Czech Republic. It offers a concise summary of the main developments during that period and, if desired, I will do my best to answer any questions on it.
As the report reveals, the first six months of this year presented significant challenges for the Union, not least the ongoing economic crisis, the uncertainty over the future of the Lisbon treaty and the troubled international horizon. Credit must go to the Czech Republic that so much was achieved, notwithstanding the fall of the Czech Government and its replacement by an interim executive during the final weeks of the Presidency. The period also saw the election of a new European Parliament, with well contested elections for the 12 seats in this jurisdiction.
For Ireland, however, the most important development during those six months was undoubtedly the European Council in June, at which the Government secured legal guarantees in regard to the Lisbon treaty, designed to respond to the public concerns raised in the first referendum. These guarantees provided the foundation for the campaign which culminated in the Irish people's decision to give the treaty a resounding endorsement in the October referendum.
The securing of these guarantees was the culmination of months of lobbying and persuasion by members of the Government and officials, as well as consultation with Opposition parties. This achievement would have been impossible without the solidarity and understanding of our EU partners and the advice and support of the Council secretariat. Nevertheless, such was the concern of partners to ensure that nothing be conceded which might constitute a reopening of the text of the treaty that negotiations went to the wire, with the Taoiseach personally reaching agreement with his colleagues after protracted discussions. I will not rehearse the content of the report but I would draw your attention to the significant developments in the enlargement agenda which have taken place since the publication of the report.
Following a compromise in the bilateral negotiations between Croatia and Slovenia, facilitated by the Union, it is now possible that if Croatia can meet all outstanding benchmarks in time, accession negotiations could be concluded next year. In addition, the Commission has recommended formally opening accession negotiations with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and is currently preparing its formal opinion on the applications of Iceland, Montenegro and Albania.
I turn now to the second item identified in the letter of invitation, namely, the implementation of the Lisbon treaty and its consequences for the national parliaments of the EU in the context of the Department of Foreign Affairs co-ordinating role. I propose to concentrate my remarks on the following three areas: the current state of play on implementation of the treaty; the new and enhanced role of national parliaments; and I will conclude by addressing some issues around Communicating Europe.
Preparatory work on the implementation of the Lisbon treaty has been moving ahead under the Swedish Presidency, which reported on progress to the October European Council. A good deal of this work is technical, dealing with rules of procedure, working structures and so on.
One of the important new steps is that under Lisbon, the European Council becomes formally an institution of the Union, with its own elected President. An important political decision was made by the European Council on 19 November when it elected the Belgian Prime Minister, Herman Van Rompuy, to be the first to occupy this office.
The European Council also agreed that Catherine Ashton, the EU Trade Commissioner, will be the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. As envisaged, she will also be Vice President of the Commission, dealing with external relations. Both of these new roles are designed to bring further coherence to the work of the EU, particularly in dealing with global problems.
Catherine Ashton will be supported in her high representative role by the important innovation of the European External Action Service. The October European Council endorsed a set of guidelines on the scope and structure of the European External Action Service. It will be for the new high representative to put the service on a formal footing, by proposing a Council decision on the EEAS parameters. This should be adopted at the latest by the end of April 2010.
Naturally we have been keen to ensure in the discussions that recruitment to the EEAS is transparent and merit-based and results in an EEAS that reflects the Union's diversity. Discussion on these and other treaty implementation issues is continuing in preparation for the December European Council.
An important democratic innovation in the Lisbon treaty which we look forward to seeing implemented is the Citizens' Initiative. This will give an opportunity to people around Europe to call for action on issues within EU competence. The Commission has now published a discussion document which highlights some practical issues, such as how the million signatures required can be properly collected and verified. The committee may be aware that the Citizens' Initiative is prioritised in the revised programme for Government. The Government is looking forward to early agreement on the mechanisms for the Citizens' Initiative so that this practical facilitation of the people's voice can be given effect.
I now turn to the role of national parliaments in EU business, an issue which is of particular concern to this committee. Article 12 of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Lisbon treaty, states that "National Parliaments contribute to the good functioning of the Union". The newly-revised treaties provide for national parliaments to assume a number of different rights and responsibilities in various aspects of the Union's operation. These have been usefully summarised in the European Parliament's report on the development of the relations between the European Parliament and national parliaments under the Treaty of Lisbon. This report categorised the rights of national parliaments under three headings: the right to information — for instance on Commission Green and White Papers, on the Commission's annual legislative programme, on draft legislation and on the annual report of the Court of Auditors, all of which are to be sent directly to national parliaments at the same time as they are sent to the Council and European Parliament, but also on the evaluation of policies conducted in the area of freedom, security and justice, on proceedings of the Standing Committee on Internal Security, on proposals to amend the treaties, on applications for membership of the Union, on simplified treaty revisions, and on proposals for treaty supplementing measures; the right to active participation in the proper functioning of the Union, the so called "umbrella" provision, as well as in the control of Europol and Eurojust together with the European Parliament, and in conventions dealing with treaty changes; and the right to object to legislation not complying with the principle of subsidiarity, the so called "yellow card" or "orange card" procedure, to treaty changes in the simplified procedure, to measures of judicial cooperation in civil-law matters in the family law area, and to an infringement of the principle of subsidiarity by bringing an action before the Court of Justice.
However, the most powerful of the new rights accorded to national parliaments by the Lisbon treaty is the power of veto — the so called "red card" — now held by each national parliament or, in the case of Ireland, each House of the Oireachtas, over decisions by the European Council to move from special to ordinary legislative procedure for decision making in specific areas, the so-called general "passerelle” or bridging clause, decisions by the European Council to move from unanimity to qualified majority decision making in the common foreign and security policy area, and Council decisions concerning family law with cross-border implications.
Additionally, in the case of Ireland, the recent referendum approved an amendment to the Constitution which includes requirements for the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas before certain important EU-related decisions could be made.
The European Union Act 2009 gives effect to the relevant provisions of the Lisbon treaty and the amendment of the Constitution in the domestic law of the State, including the new powers of the Houses of the Oireachtas. Perhaps the most significant enhancement in the role of national parliaments is in regard to the principle of subsidiarity. The European Union Act sets out the legal basis on which each House of the Oireachtas can issue a reasoned opinion to the Presidents of the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission stating why it considers that an EU draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity.
Work has advanced at official level to ensure that the necessary administrative procedures are in place in good time to give effect to this system, in particular to ensure that the Oireachtas can meet the eight-week deadline set out for the provision of a reasoned opinion.
The Department of Foreign Affairs has recently written to all Departments asking that, in future, the information notes supplied to this committee should include material on subsidiarity issues where relevant. We have also asked Departments to alert this committee as soon as possible if there are grounds for believing that a proposal may contravene the principle of subsidiarity.
In view of the eight-week deadline under the Lisbon treaty, it will be essential that Departments respect the existing 20-day deadline for submission of information notes on proposed ED measures. This point has been underlined in our communications with the Departments concerned.
Given that the subsidiarity review can, in the majority of cases, only be triggered by the objection of a least one third of national parliaments, based on two votes per national parliament or, in Ireland's case, one vote for the Dáil and one for the Seanad, co-operation with other national parliaments will be of relevance to the operation of this procedure.
I am aware that the Ceann Comhairle has been invited by the Speaker of the Swedish Parliament to a meeting later this month of all national Speakers to discuss how national parliaments can best implement this and other Lisbon treaty provisions which involve national parliaments. These and other contacts in the COSAC framework will no doubt be useful in elaborating procedures.
In considering the enhanced role of national parliaments under the Lisbon treaty, I am conscious that there are broader issues in regard to democratic engagement with the European Union. The report of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union was a significant and timely contribution to public discussion on issues surrounding Ireland's engagement with Europe.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs, when appearing before the Joint Committee on European Affairs recently, made the point that this report was "particularly effective in reassessing and facilitating a more macro perspective on Ireland and the European Union and that relationship in the years to come". At that meeting, the Minister also mentioned his desire to develop a more strategic approach to EU affairs, which might include some of the areas covered by the sub-committee's report.
The Minister noted that many of the report's recommendations are for the Oireachtas to bring forward and indicated that he did not wish to prescribe how this should be done. His general concern, however, is that EU matters receive the prominence in national political life and discourse which they merit in light of their influence and far-reaching impact on this country.
Among the recommendations contained in the report is a proposal for a more formal system of consultation between Ministers and Oireachtas committees, both before and after Council meetings. As the committee is aware, the Minister for Foreign Affairs appears before the Joint Committee on European Affairs prior to each Council he attends. In the Dáil recently the Minister reaffirmed his view that this practice could usefully be followed by other Ministers with their respective sectoral committees. I believe that the necessary powers are in place already to allow this. Greater engagement by sectoral committees with the EU agenda would greatly assist in that mainstreaming and fulfil another recommendation made in the sub-committee's report. Ultimately, however, this is a matter for the committees and individual Ministers to determine.
The report also called for more discussion of EU matters by the Houses of the Oireachtas in plenary sessions. I know that a so-called state of the European Union debate has been mentioned as a possibility. I am confident that public opinion would consider this a positive development, although this is clearly a matter for the Oireachtas to decide upon. I have also noted the sub-committee's proposals on greater Oireachtas oversight of transposition of EU law, including the proposal that regulatory impact assessments be submitted to the House.
I wish to brief the committee on the Department's Communicating Europe initiative. The report of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union was imbued with a strong sense of commitment to the task of informing the Irish people about the European Union. That is a task in which the Department of Foreign Affairs has long been engaged. The Department has operated a Communicating Europe programme for 15 years and the 2007 programme for Government included a specific commitment to support these efforts. This year, we developed a new communication action plan for this area of our work. As part of that plan we developed a new website highlighting the relevance of the EU for Irish people. We publicised this website extensively with strong, clear messages and provided funding to civil society groups for EU awareness activities, including Europe Day events. We advertised our funding scheme in the national newspapers in February. A total of 61 applications were received, a 50% increase on the number in 2008, and 40 applications were approved for partial or full funding.
The Department's Communicating Europe programme for 2009 was designed with a view to improving awareness and knowledge about Ireland's EU membership. Research commissioned by the Department pointed to a need for Government to address this issue on an ongoing and long-term basis. The eumatters.ie website provides easily accessible, reliable information about the EU that is relevant to people’s lives. The content is free of jargon and is interactive. In July, a publicity campaign around this website targeted groups identified in earlier research: 25 to 39 year olds, unskilled and skilled workers, and women. I believe we have learned much in the past year about communicating Europe and I believe we can learn more from the recent referendum campaign which will be very helpful in guiding and focusing our efforts in the future.
As the committee may recall, the Government commissioned comprehensive research following the referendum of June 2008. Using this research as a benchmark, the Department has now commissioned a smaller, cost-effective research project following the recent referendum. We hope this research will identify the factors that shaped voting decisions and the outcome of the recent referendum, measure the level of understanding of EU issues in general and the Lisbon treaty, and determine what forms and channels of communication were most effective during the campaign. The objective will be to draw lessons that can be applied to future efforts to communicate about Europe. These lessons are not exclusive to Ireland and the findings of this research will be shared with European partners.
Communicating Europe will continue to be accorded high priority by my Department. Our activities in the coming year will be informed by the research and by our experience over the past year. We believe we can achieve long-term results with a cost-effective programme.
I have confined my opening remarks to a brief outline of some major topics but I trust these remarks have been helpful as an initial contribution to our discussions. I look forward to our discussion.