I remind our guests that absolute privilege does not extend to witnesses appearing before the sub-committee, in the way it does to members. I thank Mr. Territt for attending again to discuss the reasons behind the lack of public, media and political engagement with the European Union and suggest measures which might be taken to improve this state of affairs. I ask him to make a presentation for between five and ten minutes.
Public Understanding of the EU and Ireland’s Membership: Discussion with European Commission Representation.
Mr. Martin Territt
I thank the Acting Chairman for the invitation to speak on the issue of public understanding of the European Union and Ireland's membership. I have followed the discussions at the sub-committee very closely and note the wide-ranging terms of reference which ask the sub-committee to consider Ireland's future in the European Union in respect of economic and financial matters, social matters and defence and foreign policy, in the light of the result of the referendum on the Lisbon treaty last June.
Mr. John Bruton and Ms Catherine Day talked about how the Irish were perceived as committed Europeans and how Ireland had been a role model for small European countries in the European Union. I wish to underline that point. I also refer to the contribution to the ongoing debate last Sunday by the Archbishop of Dublin, Most Reverend Diarmuid Martin, who said Ireland's destiny and identity were clearly and irrevocably bound up with that of the European Union. Far from looking at it as a threat to our distinctive Irishness, we should realise Ireland has the capacity to contribute to and change the European Union. From the highest political level to the operational and administrative levels, our contribution continues to be made in the public and private spheres.
The referendum campaign raised a lot of fears, many unfounded but some understandable. These related to loss of sovereignty, the loss of a Commissioner, increasing militarisation, ethical issues, corporation tax and workers' rights. At the same time, recent polls have shown that many Irish citizens and those from other European countries would like more European action in certain areas. This gives rise to a contradiction in people's understanding of the European Union which needs to be addressed. The areas in which people seek further action relate to climate change, energy supply and use, crime, terrorism and security issues, globalisation and the impact on employment and social issues, including migration.
We in the European Commission believe the Lisbon treaty would help to address many of these issues but now the baby has been thrown out with the bathwater. Without the provisions of the Lisbon treaty, European Union action in these and other areas on the global stage will be hamstrung by heavier procedures and less clarity about what we can and cannot do. That will lead to less effective responses to issues about which Irish people and other European citizens care.
There have been extensive discussions on many of the issues, at the sub-committee and elsewhere, and I believe they can be addressed in terms of public understanding. However, the fundamental question is how this can be achieved in a practical and effective manner. As my own direct political boss, Vice President of the European Commission, Ms Margot Wallström, said to the sub-committee last week, a solution to this dilemma cannot be found only by diplomats and politicians. It needs the engagement of the Irish people — those familiies and individuals who considered there was a lack of information leading to a lack of understanding of the treaty. It needs the engagement of women and young people, whom the polls showed to be alienated and unsure, as well as the socially excluded who believed they did not have a sufficient stake in this change process. In the absence of clear information and communication such fears can only grow.
Reaching a solution must involve better communication in the European Union on the benefits Ireland's membership brings and establishing what it means to its citizens. A solution will also involve explaining how the European Union works, the roles of various institutions, voting arrangements, the use and benefit of vetos, qualified majority voting and Ireland's position on various policy issues. This means reaching a wider audience, using media such as the Internet, local media, broadsheets and magazines and greater interaction with the tabloid media. People's concerns must be heard and responded to. A more imaginative approach than heretofore must be taken; this means listening and dialogue, not one way traffic of information.
The European Commission and the Government are planning to work together, with the European Parliament, to communicate on the European Union with citizens in a better way. I have the privilege of leading discussions, on behalf of the Commission, on negotiating a memorandum on communication in partnership with the Government and the European Parliament. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, alluded to this at the sub-committee ten days ago. I clearly underline that this move is not designed to create a propaganda machine, but to support the fundamental democratic principle of the right to know and the right to be heard. The idea is to ensure the people are in a position to understand and cannot say they do not know about European issues. We want to achieve the dissemination of general information to boost public awareness of the European Union's objectives, policies and institutions.
We will place particular emphasis on developing partnerships at all levels in the education sector. This is not a quick-fix solution to an immediate problem but a long-term endeavour to promote civic education in the European sphere, improve participatory democracy alongside representative democracy, reach out to students, teachers and young people, boost two-way dialogue with European institutions, increase the involvement of key players and other opinion formers, interact with the media, including local and regional media, and embrace fully the communications potential of the Internet and other new media.
This concludes my official presentation but I would like to allude to another issue in my personal rather than official capacity. It relates to the experience I had interacting with the political parties prior to the referendum and in many years of public service. In other EU countries and countries further afield political parties are supported by foundations and other bodies which assist in the education of party members on various issues, including European issues. They help in the dissemination of information to a broader public and in programmes across the European Union and further afield that act like Erasmus for politicians. This dimension is missing from political life in Ireland. I do not mean this in a critical way but in what I hope is the most helpful way possible. Parties here, including Fianna Fáil, the Labour Party, Fine Gael, the Green Party and so on, should consider the development of political foundations.
Alternatively, as money is always scarce in the political realm, consideration might be given to the development of a cross-party foundation for the development of thought in relation to European issues, in particular, about which I am most concerned, but also across much broader policy fronts. It would also provide an opportunity for scholars and intellectuals from other member states of the European Union to contribute to Irish public life, share their thoughts and contribute to policy formation.
Having said these few words of introduction, I will be delighted to answer any questions members may have.
I thank Mr. Territt for attending. I will start with the last point. The suggestion regarding the development of a cross-party political foundation to develop thoughts and ideas and a more academic approach was very interesting. Mr. Territt might be able to provide some information on such foundations in other countries for the benefit of the sub-committee.
Regarding the director's own activities, perhaps he could describe a day in the life of the director of the European Commission Representation, what he does, the size of his operation, how many staff he has, whether the Commission has an outreach facility and how it operates within its remit. As the Commission representative, what does Mr. Territt believe is the public perception of the Commission? It seems it is seen from two polarities, both left and right. Eurosceptics see it as elitist and bureaucratic, as an anti-democratic organisation running the European Union and member states. We have had a presentation from the trade union movement which states the Commission is neoliberal, anti-trade union and anti-worker. From both sides, the Commission is seen pretty much as a bogeyman. In between are Irish people who want an extra Commissioner, to have somebody at the table. Perhaps Mr. Territt would comment on this also and on how he views the role of the Commissioner and whether he believes it would be valuable to have a Commissioner for all member states rather than two thirds.
What is Mr. Territt's perception of how this Parliament and the Government fulfil their role in dealing with European Union issues, the transposition of European legislation, linking up with the European Union institutions, and Parliament holding the Government to account? Does Mr. Territt think we are doing a good or a poor job? Does he have any other proposals on how we might engage more with the public? We have the National Forum on Europe, the chairman of which, Dr. Maurice Hayes, will be here shortly. The forum was established to establish a link with the public and does Trojan work in the area in which it operates. However, there still seems to be a position very much of disengagement and poor links everywhere along the line with the public in terms of the European Union. Does Mr. Territt think there is a reasonable prospect of that gap being bridged or are we swimming against the tide?
Mr. Martin Territt
I thank Deputy Costello for his contribution. I will be glad to assist the sub-committee by providing information on other political foundations in other member states. There are many examples and I know that members of this committee and Members of the Houses are closely associated with foundations in other member states. We are happy to share the information with the committee and will bring it to the committee secretariat very quickly.
The life of the European Commission representation on a day-to-day basis is varied. That there is such variety is one of the great aspects of this job. Since I took over the European Commission representation, it has doubled its staff to 25, doubled the budget to €1million in operational terms and it now has a greater outreach across the country. This year we ran 20 debates and seminars right around the country. This lunchtime we will host a session on the Western Road, near UCC, Cork, in co-operation with the European Movement Ireland. The session explains, in simple terms, what the EU is about. European Movement Ireland is involved, as are law experts from UCC.
The European Commission representation has a media department that reaches out to the media. We have a public information role and a public information centre on the corner of Dawson Street and Molesworth Street. We receive many school groups there. Many groups received by Deputies and Senators also visit the European Commission representation. We are glad the work we do in the school sector is not just about receiving school groups but about developing educational resource material for schools and teachers. A significant range of products has been developed over the past three years, including a significant pack for transition year students and their teachers. That is available on the Internet. Other material is available for primary, secondary and third level.
School groups visit the Houses on a regular basis. Is it possible to circulate a message to Members to inform them of the facility the European Commission representation has and that the European Commission Representation is more than happy to link up with Members and provide a forum where school groups could be received in its office? The groups could receive a pack and there is an opportunity to speak to them.
Mr. Martin Territt
I will certainly take up that suggestion. Some 18 months ago I wrote to all Members about the facilities on offer. I will take up Deputy Costello's offer.
We get a great deal of mail.
Targeted specifically on the school groups.
Mr. Martin Territt
I am conscious of the heavy mailbox we all have. I will be glad to see what further co-operation the European Commission representation could engage in with the Houses of the Oireachtas, which is anxious to engage more openly and in a more dynamic way with the public. If there is something we can do to assist, we will be happy to do so.
I am not so sure whether the Commission is lurching to the left or the right. We hold a steady centrist course and, under the treaties, we are obliged to take account of the Community interest. This is what the Commission tries to do.
Harking back to what I said earlier, we are trying to engage with people and listen to their concerns. Over the past 18 months, we engaged in a listening exercise on the social agenda. That very much informed the package of measures brought forward by the Commission in that regard in July of this year. This engagement on those social issues will continue just as it does in respect of the various pure economic issues. In many ways the current financial and economic crisis is placing a greater emphasis on the synthesis of economic and social issues, to ensure that the very real concerns of citizens are addressed.
I have to stay neutral as to whether there will ultimately be a Commissioner per member state. Members will have heard last week the views of my Commissioner who clearly believes very strongly that there should be one Commissioner per member state for reasons of democratic legitimacy, as she outlined. Having regard to what the Minister for Foreign Affairs said earlier in the week, this issue will be discussed at the December European Council meeting. As for the role of the Oireachtas, there is a developing role with regard to European matters. I will make one suggestion based on my experience of interacting with the European Parliament and its committee structure. The committee structures of the European Parliament function extremely well, significantly because of the strong support base of the committees in terms of a supporting administrative structure. This is very important in the European Parliament context and very valuable lessons can be learned there. Clearly there are issues of resources and this is a matter for members and for the Houses of the Oireachtas and its own budgetary authorities but it is an important issue and something that should be closely examined.
I thank Mr. Territt for coming to the meeting this morning. On the point about communicating the European message, I am interested in this memo of understanding which is being worked on by the European Parliament, the Government and Mr. Territt's office. I ask him to explain this work in more detail and to say how it will be rolled out. This committee is expected to deliver a message in the short term, if there is a decision taken to run a second referendum and this gives us a very limited period of time if that course of action is decided upon. There are also the medium and long term plans to be considered such as how to inform by means of the schools. I would like to hear more about those plans.
On the question of interaction with the media, how does the European Commission office in Dublin interact with the media? Given the results of the poll after the Lisbon referendum which showed the impact of the media on how people voted, how can we improve our message by means of all aspects of the media? I am not just referring to certain types of newspapers such as The Irish Times and the Irish Independent but also the tabloid newspapers and how advertising was focused in certain areas and not in others. We may not have hit the widest possible audience and we must find out how to address that situation.
Mr. Territt said that his organisation has organised 20 debates this year. Are these debates well attended by members of the public? We held public meetings during the Lisbon campaign and despite the fact that they were extensively advertised on radio and in the local newspapers, virtually nobody turned up. Trying to get the public switched on to the debate and interested when there is a lack of knowledge on how the EU institutions work is very difficult. Mr. Territt spoke about setting up a foundation and like Deputy Costello I would be interested to hear more about it. In the Houses of the Oireachtas the level of knowledge about Europe is good among members of the Joint Committee on European Affairs. Mr. Territt referred to the resourcing of committees. Visiting committees from the UK told us about the number of researchers and administrators they had at their disposal and we were gobsmacked because there is not the same level of resources available here. It is a point we will need to pursue. It is a case of upskilling TDs and creating an interest in Europe. Unless Members are interested, the message will not get out to the wider public. In Ireland all politics tends to be local. If people do not see an immediate impact and relevance to themselves on a political issue, they tend to switch off. Can Mr. Territt give the sub-committee some suggestions on how to address those issues?
Mr. Martin Territt
The memorandum of understanding we are discussing with the Government and the European Parliament is a modality to agree that we would co-ordinate in a clearer and better way on joint and several communications activities. It is an important development which the Commission has been encouraging member states to do.
Quite a number of examples exist where significant co-ordination has taken place. For example, we have a much more legalistic framework with the German Government. Under that particular endeavour there has been a tour of 50 cities with information being disseminated and interaction with the public at town squares and other gathering points. There have also been many educational initiatives in German schools as a result of this co-operation.
The memorandum is a light form of saying we agree to co-operate together. Flowing from that an annual communication plan will be jointly agreed between the Government, the European Parliament and the European Commission. The detail of that will be important. Based on our discussions so far, there is a need to target the general population. As my Commissioner said last week, everyone has the right to know, a fundamental principle of democracy.
We also propose to have particular initiatives geared towards younger audiences, the 18 to 30 year old age group. Based on the polling evidence, this group has, to put it at its most positive, information gaps on Europe. There is also a large interest among women's groups for further information, as well as targeted information for the lower socioeconomic cohorts.
We plan to do this in an interactive way by engaging with organisations representing these groups, debates and seminars and through the use of new media, which is underexploited in this country when it comes to the European public sphere. As regards the debates we have had so far this year, many of them have been well attended. Last Friday in Dublin, Commissioner Margot Wallström was involved in a debate with the European Women's Lobby which was attended by 100 people. At it the Commissioner placed particular emphasis on the 50:50 campaign to get more women to vote in, go forward for and get elected in European elections. At the Royal College of Physicians, we held a debate about the current financial and economic crisis which 70 people attended.
One ingredient in having successful debates and seminars of this nature is to have them on topics of immediate interest. Not too many people would turn up for a debate on, say, degressive proportionality in the European Parliament or the intricacies of the comitology procedure. I believe many people, particularly young people attending university, will turn up for today's seminar in Cork on how the European Union works.
The question of educating Deputies and Senators on European issues brings me back to the point I made about developing a foundation on European matters in Ireland. In the last week I have been approached by a Member of the Oireachtas with a request for a meeting with my people in order that they can find out more not just about what we do but also on broader questions related to the European Union. We are very happy to do so. It is an open offer to Members of the Houses to come in on an entirely private, anonymous basis. We are happy to work with Members and facilitate them in any way we can. I was glad to facilitate the Joint Committee on European Affairs earlier this year with a visit to Brussels, where members met many Commissioners and other senior officials of the Commission and the European Parliament. I would be happy to facilitate further visits of that nature.
Mr. Territt ran a tour bus in Germany. Is he planning to do something similar here? I am interested in women's groups which tend to be well organised, particularly in rural Ireland. The possibility of sending speakers might be worth considering.
Mr. Martin Territt
I will certainly take up the suggestion about women's groups. The possibility of a travelling roadshow is something we are considering. Clearly, there are resource implications. It may prove to be better value for money to visit groups in particular areas of the country rather than touring around with a scattergun in a "Wanderly Wagon" type approach. It is certainly something we are considering and discussing with the European Parliament in the context of the elections.
How do the staffing and budget of the European Commission Representation compare with those of other European countries? Is it adequately resourced to do its job?
Mr. Martin Territt
I do not think the Deputy has ever met a public servant who would admit to being adequately resourced. I must say my Commissioner and director general have been extremely generous in terms of resourcing and staffing in the past few years.
He is not listening now. Mr. Territt can speak frankly.
Mr. Martin Territt
This is something of we are cognisant for the coming period.
We might obtain comparative figures from Mr. Territt for other countries, on which will make our own decision.
I apologise for arriving late; I was unavoidably detained.
I thank Mr. Territt and his team in the Commission office for the work they do. As a newer Deputy, I have found this resource very helpful. There is an onus on Members of the Oireachtas to use it because it is available to all of us. I am grateful for this.
I apologise if my questions duplicate any already covered. I would like to ask about the concept of competence creep in the European Commission. The Commission is increasingly getting a lot of stick. It certainly got a lot of stick during the Lisbon treaty campaign. People have attacked it from all angles, often contradictory. Certain concerns about social and moral issues were raised during the campaign, for example, with regard to family values, family law and so on. There is a perception that the Commission has been engaged in bringing forward proposals, particularly via equality legislation, which, when transposed into domestic law, are challenged by the European Court of Justice for not being compliant with the letter of the law. This has impinged on decisions, for example, with regard to the religious ethos of schools, school choices available to parents and a variety of other issues that have been interpreted by the court. Will there be proposals to strengthen the subsidiarity principle or the division of powers between the EU and member states? I subscribe to the view, in certain instances, that the Commission has overstepped the mark and has been delving into areas of social policy that are matters for member states. This is particularly true in the Lisbon treaty, ironically. I would like to hear the views of the European Commission representation on that and on what can be done. There is a major onus on national parliaments and member states to monitor these matters but a certain amount of blame falls on the shoulders of the Commission.
I refer to the reforms we wish to see in the Oireachtas, such as raising the profile of European affairs and European policy, laying more emphasis on debates, engaging Members and consequently the public on issues coming down the track. These could be policy moves of the EU or directives. What models or ideas have worked in other member states that could be applied in Ireland? What role do we see for our MEPs? The working of the Oireachtas is not user-friendly to MEPs. I am a member of the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and the Joint Committee on European Affairs, which meet on Tuesdays and Thursdays when MEPs are in the European Parliament. I do not know if we can make proposals to change our system to have a committee week to coincide with the European Parliament constituency week so that MEPs can play a role. Giving them speaking rights in plenary session is an idea that may happen in other countries.
The meetings organised by European Commission representation were extremely useful. The feedback I received suggested people were impressed by the quality of speakers and the level of debate. I hope that continues.
We all pay lip service to targeting younger voters but we are not effective at doing it. Has the European Commission representation considered teaming up with Rock the Vote? This is an organisation for young people aimed at getting them to vote and getting them involved in participatory politics run by young people who have an idea of what young people want and how they think. That does not suggest that Mr. Territt does not but I wonder if the European Commission Representation considered the idea.
Mr. Martin Territt
I thank Deputy Creighton for her contribution. The question of competence creep was addressed by Catherine Day, Secretary-General of the Commission and Margot Wallström. There are concerns about this but they are addressed by the clear delineation of competencies set out in the Lisbon treaty. That is a good reason for ratification of the treaty in all member states. The formal role the treaty gives to national parliaments is a good bulwark against the notion of competence creep.
At an operational level, we have been examining this as part of the deregulation agenda the Commission has been pursuing for the past three years in particular to cut out unnecessary regulations, to make the acquis more business friendly and to ensure fewer barriers. We have seen progress in that regard and will see further progress. I know this is something that Vice President Verheugen is keen on to ensure that agenda is pursued and has effect.
Regarding social, moral and ethical issues and the EU, I believe that the treaties are clear. Some of the criticisms aimed at the European Court of Justice are unfounded. Despite what might be suggested, the court cannot extend what is in the treaties, nor can it invent new competences. Equally, the Charter of Fundamental Rights does not create a new legal basis for any action as all of the legal bases are in the treaty. Therefore, I believe a priori there are no grounds for concern in this area. Nevertheless, I recognise there are concerns relating to perception and that they must be addressed.
Deputy Creighton raised a point on the religious ethos of schools and concerns the Commission may have had. We examined the Irish legislation in this regard and had ex ante concerns but they were all addressed by the submission made by the Irish Government. Therefore, the Commission has no issue on the application of European law regarding the recruitment of teachers of particular religious persuasions.
Can I ask for clarification because one hears many different versions of this? Were proceedings of some form issued, was there a reasoned opinion or what, precisely, occurred?
Mr. Martin Territt
We raised concerns about that particular issue, among others, but it had not reached the reasoned opinion stage. We always engage with the member state in question when we have concerns and I was heavily involved in the relevant discussions, along with colleagues in the Commission and the Irish Civil Service. We facilitated meetings between the relevant experts and clarified the issues involved. I can state categorically that the Commission has formally decided there is no issue regarding the application of Irish law in respect of the religious ethos of schools and the recruitment of teachers to fulfil the mandate of denominational schools.
There are issues around the matter of perception and I expect they will be addressed in the European Council in December.
I spoke at an Iona Institute debate on the Christian values of the EU and feel this could be an issue for the Commission to address head-on in Ireland. It could be done through a process of debates or seminars. It would be well worth it because there are suspicions, and if the Commission makes it its business to engage with people who have these suspicions it could be very positive. There is also the question of Rock the Vote.
Mr. Martin Territt
I will come back to the Rock the Vote question. We will address moral, ethical and social issues through further debates. We already had a debate this year as part of the series and I was glad Senator Mullen made a valuable contribution, along with Ronan McCrea, David Quinn and Gina Menzies. There was a great turnout of around 100 people that night at the Royal Irish Academy and the debate was of high quality.
Learning how to engage young people is one of the great challenges we face and I suggested a method in my reply to Deputy Flynn. We are moving towards listening to and engaging with young people on issues that concern them as opposed to telling them the content of one or another directive. Over the course of the coming year I expect we will go to various festivals and young people's events around the country to engage with young people in a very direct interactive way. I will certainly explore the idea behind the questions around the Rock the Vote campaign. We must be much broader than that but it is certainly a valuable suggestion and I will have a look at it.
There was also a question on how the role of the Oireachtas and MEPs and so on could be enhanced. I would support the ideas the Ceann Comhairle has with regard to the development of an annual Europe week in the Houses of the Oireachtas, perhaps around 9 May.
Mr. Territt, thank you for your ongoing work in Ireland on behalf of the Commission. You have been here on several occasions and we appreciate the time you have given to this committee. I agree with Deputy Creighton that the ongoing work you do with Members of the Houses is very helpful. I also understand that one committee of this House intends to establish an office for European affairs within the House. I am sure there will be ongoing dialogue with you on that. We appreciate your efforts in that regard and thank you sincerely for being here.
Sitting suspended at 10.37 a.m. and resumed at 10.38 a.m.