JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 22 Sep 2009

Lisbon Treaty: Discussion with Leader of Labour Party.

Chairman

In accordance with a previous decision of the joint committee, party leaders have been invited to address us on the Lisbon treaty, the importance of it and to outline why people should be led by their views. We have already heard submissions from the Taoiseach and Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin. Today, we will hear a submission from Deputy Eamon Gilmore, leader of the Labour Party, who is accompanied by Mr. Tony Brown, Labour Party international affairs committee and Ms Jean O'Mahony, Labour Party policy analyst.

The proceedings of this meeting are webcast and for this reason I ask all persons to ensure their mobile phones are switched off and not left on silent mode. I draw witnesses' attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege that same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before it. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The joint committee will first hear an opening statement from the leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Gilmore, following which there will be a questions and answers session. I now invite Deputy Gilmore to make his opening statement.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore

I thank the Chairman for his invitation to speak to the Joint Committee on European Affairs on an issue critical to the future of Ireland and Europe.

The Labour Party is asking the Irish people to vote "Yes" to the Lisbon treaty on 2 October 2009 for three principal reasons, namely, to help restore international confidence in Ireland so that jobs and businesses here can be secured, to enable Europe to function more efficiently and democratically to help get Europe and Ireland out of the economic crisis, and to improve the rights of the individual as a citizen, worker and consumer in Europe.

The Labour Party believes the Lisbon treaty is a positive step for Ireland and the European Union. In this referendum campaign, as in the previous one, so much time has been taken up by manufactured controversy, conspiracy and misinformation that the real and concrete benefits of the Lisbon treaty have often been obscured. The Lisbon treaty reflects the challenges facing the European Union, its member states and its citizens and provides a roadmap for a stronger more social and democratic European Union into the future.

The Lisbon treaty is a reform treaty which helps make the European Union fit for purpose in a globalised world economy, not as an end in itself but for the better flourishing and protection of its citizens who work and live in an age defined by insecurity. More than any other, the Lisbon treaty is the European treaty which does most to progress the social agenda in Europe. The Labour Party has consistently argued that these two objectives, to prosper in a globalised world economy and to create a stronger more secure society, must go hand in hand. We believe the Lisbon treaty is an important step towards that goal. It is in this context that we should examine the question of whether the Lisbon treaty is good for workers' rights.

I can understand why people are concerned about employment rights, in particular at the moment. There will always be those at home and across Europe who will try to use a downturn in the economy to row back on workers' rights. However, the response to this threat to workers' rights and employment conditions is not to destroy the Lisbon treaty but to support it. The Lisbon treaty is good for workers. There is not a single provision in it which weakens or lessens the rights of workers. On the contrary, it copperfastens a range of workplace rights such as the right to collective bargaining and collective action, the right to information and consultation, the right to protection from unfair dismissal, the right of non-EU citizens working legally in the European Union to the same working conditions as the host population and a range of rights relating to women's and parents' rights in the workplace. Furthermore, the inclusion of the Charter of Fundamental Rights gives workplace rights the same weight as market rules when the European Court of Justice is making a decision on EU law. This could have been significant in recent controversial judgments such as Laval, Viking, Rüffert and Luxembourg which are now being used by the "No" campaigners to muddy the waters when it comes to discussion of the Lisbon treaty.

The truth is these European Court of Justice cases have nothing to do with the Lisbon treaty. They relate to EU law prior to the ratification of Lisbon and those who use them as the spectre of a race to the bottom in wages and working conditions spearheaded by the European Court of Justice are highly selective in their choice of ECJ judgments. Conveniently for them, they ignore other positive ECJ rulings, concerning gender equality, fixed-term workers' rights, equal pay and carers' rights. Contrary to what some have claimed, the rights in the Charter of Fundamental Rights cannot be undermined if they are perceived to be contrary to the "common organisation of the market".

Most significantly for those who want to advance workers' rights in Ireland, there are domestic solutions to legitimate concerns about wage agreements and the right to collective bargaining — both of which can be legislated for by the Dáil, if the political will exists. In that context, I want to reiterate the commitment that, if elected to the next Government, the Labour Party will legislate to give domestic effect to the principles enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including collective bargaining. It is incontrovertible that it is in Ireland's interests, and the interest of working people, to be part of a Union of 27 member countries, and 490 million people, with the power to uphold employment standards and withstand pressure from low-wage economies in other parts of the world. It is disingenuous in the extreme to imply that Irish workers would do better outside the European Union and those who suggest this are leading working people up a blind alley.

A second area where the Lisbon treaty seeks to strike a better balance between the social and economic needs of European citizens and the demands of a globalised market economy is in public services. Some opponents of the Lisbon treaty claim that, if ratified, it will enable the privatisation of essential public services. If that were truly the case, the Labour Party, our sister parties in the socialist group in the European Parliament and indeed the European Trade Union Confederation would not be supporting it. The European Union has developed as a social market economy — an economy which seeks to harness the prosperity brought about through trade for social ends. That is an ongoing process that is helped or hindered by the complexion of the governments of its member states. On many social issues, and issues of workers' rights, the EU has often been more socially progressive than Irish Governments.

The Lisbon treaty consolidates the gains made to date in the social market economy — gains relating to workers' rights, citizens' rights, consumer protection and environmental protection. Through the Charter of Fundamental Rights it rebalances the objectives of the European Union in favour of the social, civic and economic rights of its citizens. The Lisbon treaty enables a distinction to be made in EU law between services which are suitable for commercial competition from private operators, such as telecommunications or energy generation, and essential, non-economic public services such as health care, education, policing or social welfare. This is the foundation stone on which legislation that clarifies and protects the role of public services can be built. The principles that will inform future EU legislation on public services are set out in a protocol to the treaty, recognising the following: the role of member states in delivering public services; that they should be located as close as possible to the user; that public services are diverse and vary from one member state to the next; and that they would demonstrate a "high level of quality, safety and affordability, equal treatment and the promotion of universal access and of user rights".

During the previous Lisbon treaty referendum campaign, the Party of European Socialists, of which the Labour Party is a member, published its draft regulations governing public services. The task ahead is to have strong regulations protecting the unique place of public services in EU member states, adopted as EU law. However, it is already clear that the objectives of the European Union, as set out by the Lisbon treaty — such as combating social exclusion and discrimination, promoting social justice and protection, equality between men and women, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of children — could not be achieved without a commitment to strong, universal public services. This is consolidated by the passing of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into primary EU law, which includes the right to social security and assistance, the right to social housing, the right to education, preventive health care, medical treatment and other public services. If the Lisbon treaty is ratified, future EU law — and existing EU law — must be compatible with these rights.

The Lisbon treaty is a practical response to the major global challenges that face every member state of the European Union, and indeed those outside it. Priorities for the European Union set out in the Lisbon treaty include the following: energy security and climate change; the need to eradicate poverty in the developing world; global migration; and international peacekeeping and humanitarian aid. These are reflected in new decision-making procedures and structures which will make the EU more efficient and more effective in responding to international problems.

The common thread running through all of the biggest problems facing us today — the global credit crunch, climate change, the complex relationship between global poverty and global peace — is the need for significant international co-operation and collaboration. For Ireland, the European Union is a bulwark against global insecurity and a vehicle for tackling it. Playing an active part in a reformed, more responsive and more responsible European Union is not only in our own interest, but also our duty as members of the international community.

The Lisbon treaty is a progressive response to the realities of a globalised world. It sums up the collective political will of the leadership of 27 European democracies, which share an understanding of the demands of 21st century political, economic, social and cultural life, rather than the will of the so-called "faceless bureaucrats" of Brussels. There is much to be gained for Ireland and the Irish people from the ratification of this treaty. More than any other European treaty we have voted on to date, it addresses in a practical way things that matter to people who live and work in the European Union. I refer to issues like opportunity, prosperity, basic rights, social cohesion, stability, international security, addressing the great environmental and energy challenges, combating serious international crime and working to end global poverty. It is on the basis of the concrete advances for Irish people and citizens across Europe that are contained in the Lisbon treaty that the Labour Party is strongly campaigning for a "Yes" vote on 2 October.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I will be brief because Deputy Gilmore has covered many of the issues I wanted to raise. In his statement, he clearly and lucidly dealt with the allegation that services will be privatised. Ireland is currently facing the challenge of rising unemployment. It affects supporters of the Labour Party and almost everyone else in Irish society. Can Deputy Gilmore outline the steps he believes the EU can, should and will take to try to tackle unemployment in Ireland and elsewhere in the EU? We have all indicated that this issue is relevant to the debate on the Lisbon treaty. Perhaps the Deputy can expand on that by explaining the crucial role he thinks the EU can play in this regard. He might also give us some detail on the Labour Party's campaign for a "Yes" vote. What is the organisation doing throughout the country? What is Deputy Gilmore's perspective on the current status of the "Yes" campaign? Is he confident and optimistic? Does he think the referendum can be carried on Friday week?

Deputy Timmy Dooley

I join Deputy Creighton in complimenting Deputy Gilmore on his concise and important input into this debate. The Deputy's career background — he has represented workers at every level within the trade union movement — puts him in a strong position to state categorically that the Lisbon treaty will not have a negative impact on the rights, pay and conditions of workers. What is his view on certain groups and entities — some of them are non-entities — that have sought to usurp the authority of representative groups such as trade unions, political parties, farmers' associations and business associations? The claims made by such organisations, which have given the impression that the groups have some mandate or reason to represent the sectors I have mentioned when that is clearly not the case, have had an inordinately damaging effect on such sectors. I have been canvassing extensively over the last two or three weeks. When I canvassed again at the weekend, I was bowled over by the number of people who continue to believe the minimum wage will be reduced if the Lisbon treaty comes into effect. The Government, in common with all political parties and various interest groups, has issued a frank and forthright press statement to contradict that belief. Unfortunately, that message is not getting through to a certain section of vulnerable people who are clearly concerned for their futures.

Deputy Gilmore also spoke about the issues of health and education. When I was canvassing in Ennis on Saturday, I met two women from County Kildare who are convinced, on the basis of posters in their local area, that education will be privatised. While we all agree with freedom of speech, it is particularly disappointing that some people in our society treat other people's futures in a cavalier manner by issuing statements and generating posters that seek to undermine confidence in the treaty. This matter has to be addressed and this is the forum in which to address it. I would welcome comments from Deputy Gilmore in that regard.

Deputy Mary O’Rourke

I thank Deputy Gilmore and his team for appearing before the joint committee. Canvassing in Athlone last night, I found that most workers and former workers in the ESB and Bord na Móna, two prominent companies in the area, will vote "No" in the Lisbon treaty referendum. Some of those to whom I spoke pointed out that their trade union, the Technical Engineering and Electrical Union, opposes the Lisbon treaty.

I heard Deputy Gilmore discuss the Lisbon treaty on a recent radio broadcast — perhaps it was "Morning Ireland" — with a trade union representative. I believe the individual in question was from the North but represented workers throughout the country. I fail to understand how trade union opponents of the Lisbon treaty arrive at their point of view. Does Deputy Gilmore, who deals with this issue at a more focused level, understands the reasons they oppose the treaty? Their opposition cannot arise from the Laval judgment or other rulings of the European Court of Justice as we have all addressed this issue.

I cannot figure out how trade union members could oppose the Lisbon treaty or the reason the esteemed Member of the European Parliament, Mr. Joe Higgins, is able to argue that voting "Yes" for Europe and the Lisbon treaty would be bad for workers. In his forays around the country and his various meetings with trade union members, many of whom have expressed support for the Lisbon treaty, has Deputy Gilmore been able to establish what documents or reasons these individuals are using to support their position and the rubbish they have been talking?

Deputy Joe Costello

I, too, thank Deputy Gilmore and compliment him on a fine speech. I will continue with the line taken by Deputies Dooley and O'Rourke. Deputy Gilmore placed considerable emphasis on the support the Lisbon treaty provides for workers' rights, the Charter of Fundamental rights and public services. Mr. Joe Higgins, MEP, has taken the opposite view, strongly criticising the treaty and arguing it does nothing for workers' rights. We have even had Cóir tell us the treaty does nothing for workers' rights. I ask Deputy Gilmore to outline how extensive is support for the treaty within the broader trade union movement.

I refer to the priorities set out by Deputy Gilmore, which include the need to restore international confidence in Ireland in terms of jobs and business and the role of Europe in helping to get Ireland out of the economic crisis. I ask him to elaborate on his perception of the importance of the Lisbon treaty in this respect. What will be the role of the treaty in restoring confidence, creating employment in the business sector and moving out of the current economic crisis?

Senator Terry Leyden

I welcome Deputy Gilmore and his team and compliment him on the strong stance he has taken on the Lisbon treaty. He is wholeheartedly involved in the campaign, as are the Labour Party members present, Deputy Costello, Senator Prendergast and Nessa Childers, MEP, who are attending in support of the referendum on 2 October. From Deputy Gilmore's work it is apparent that he is not in any sense making this a political issue. I saw Deputy Kenny was canvassing in Roscommon yesterday. Deputy Gilmore is supporting Ireland Incorporated from the point of view of the country as a whole, which is very worthwhile.

I also compliment Deputy Costello and Deputy Dooley on the detailed and comprehensive document they produced on workers' rights, which explains the situation very well. It has not been circulated to the extent that it deserves. Much work went into producing that document which is probably available on our website.

If anything would convince people to vote "Yes" it is the work of the UK Independence Party. Nigel Farage of the UK Independence Party was canvassing in this country. That party's sole objective is to destroy the European Union. It is fine if one wants to collaborate with that party. People who vote "No" are working with the UK Independence Party. If the Conservative Party in the UK gets into power, which will possibly happen in the next year, reform of the European Union will not take place. There is no doubt about that. It will put the Conservative Party into a serious dilemma. Twenty-six countries have already ratified the treaty and if this country ratifies the treaty, the United Kingdom will be tied into that ratification and there will not be any question of it trying to disengage from the European Union or trying to renegotiate the Lisbon reform treaty.

The Government deserves great credit for the negotiations that have taken place to clarify issues and get agreement on protocols among the other member states of the European Union. The situation has been clearly outlined by the Government. In general, the propaganda that was spread during the campaign on the previous referendum on the Lisbon treaty has been countered. The advertisements for the UK Independence Party that suggest euthanasia would be introduced following ratification of the treaty are an abuse.

It is all to play for. We cannot be complacent about the referendum on 2 October. It is a serious issue. Declan Ganley's propaganda is coming to the fore. He is getting a lot of air time and in most cases he is not being challenged. In some cases he will not allow any challenge to himself. Everyone who is in favour of the treaty should work together for the next few weeks until 2 October to get people to support it on the basis that a "Yes" vote is good for this country and a "No" would be against the national interest.

Senator Paschal Donohoe

I apologise to Deputy Gilmore for missing his contribution. I have had an opportunity to read it while my colleagues have been speaking. The one point on which I would like him to comment is the role of immigration in the debate so far. It has been my experience during this campaign and the previous one that insecurity has been created due to the perceived effect of immigration on people who were hanging on to jobs in this country and who recently lost them. Some of the literature to which Senator Leyden in particular referred is beginning to focus strongly on immigration. It argues that ratification of the Lisbon treaty would encourage more immigration and make it more difficult for member states to have control of their borders and to have policies in this area. I seek a comment from Deputy Gilmore on what effect the Lisbon treaty will have on immigration and the ability of national governments to control it. What would he say to those people who are considering voting "No" to the Lisbon treaty because of the perceived effect immigration has had on the labour market?

Deputy Noel Treacy

I warmly welcome the leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Gilmore, and Mr. Tony Browne and Ms Jean O'Mahony. I thank Deputy Gilmore for his detailed and focused contribution pertaining to the importance of this treaty and the European Union. Mr. Browne has played a leading role in the National Forum on Europe over many years. I thank him for his significant contribution at a European and domestic level.

Is Deputy Gilmore satisfied that irrespective of nationality, all workers in all member states will, under the Charter of Fundamental Rights, be afforded absolute protection, absolute rights, absolute safety and security and a guarantee of adequate payment? Is he absolutely certain the Union will have a greater capacity and collective ability to continue to transfer resources and to support its member states' requirements once the Lisbon treaty is enacted? That is of more importance than ever to this State in the current global economic crisis.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy

I thank Deputy Gilmore for his presentation to the committee in which he concentrated on the issue of workers' rights. Related to this is the need to create jobs and to ensure we have an educated workforce. The Labour Party published a document some years ago on access to third level education which outlined how the free third level education initiative had helped improve access to that sector. One of the findings was that European Union social funding to the institutes of technology in particular had greatly improved access to third level for those who were unlikely in the past to progress beyond second level. I recently tabled a parliamentary question to the Minister for Education and Science to ascertain the extent of support from the European Social Fund to Irish education in recent years. Between 1994 and 1999, I was informed, the Department received €963 million from the fund, and €352 million in the period 2000 to 2006. It is anticipated that we will receive €130 million between 2007 and 2012. This is in addition to the €52 million being provided under Structural Funds towards research and development. Will Deputy Gilmore comment on how we can work with the European Union in this area to get our economy moving again?

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Gabhaim leithscéal as gan a bheith anseo níos luaithe nuair a bhí an Teachta Gilmore ag labhairt, ach bhí mé ag freastal ar ócáid eile. In the aftermath of the first referendum in June 2008, Deputy Gilmore proclaimed that the Lisbon treaty was "dead" and that the result of the referendum must be fully respected. He went on to argue that it would be entirely wrong, inappropriate and counterproductive for the European Union to proceed on the basis of any settlement that does not fully respect the voice of the Irish people.

In December 2008, in the course of a debate on the future of the Lisbon treaty, Deputy Gilmore told the Dáil of the genuine concern among working people that the way had been opened for an undermining of levels of pay and working conditions and that these issues must be addressed satisfactorily before another referendum could be held. Now, however, he seems to advocate support for the second referendum on the grounds that the solemn declaration of workers' rights somehow addresses those concerns.

Does Deputy Gilmore agree that the solemn declaration will not have the status of the protocols on taxation and neutrality, will not in any way impact the text or implications of the treaty and will give the European Union no new powers to redress the current trend of Commission policy and European Court of Justice decisions undermining workers' wages, terms and rights throughout the European Union? I note Deputy Gilmore referred in his contribution to some of those court judgments, some of which took cognisance of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The solemn declaration will do nothing to address the genuine concerns of which the Deputy spoke in the Dáil last December. Despite this, he is calling for workers to support the treaty. Does this not represent a massive U-turn from June of last year?

Senator Phil Prendergast

I thank Deputy Gilmore for his contribution. We launched our campaign in south Tipperary on 1 September. The response is overwhelmingly different this time in that there is far greater awareness among the public of the contents of the treaty. I was concerned by the fact that elderly women were distributing anti-Lisbon propaganda outside churches in south Tipperary. A number of people in health care centres and elsewhere have told me that they were intimidated and frightened by this sort of negative campaigning. Yesterday I visited all the churches in my locality but did not find anything other than routine church pamphlets. There was no propaganda on Lisbon, and rightly so.

Tactics such as showing an old person a poster of a foetus or intimating that a "Yes" to Lisbon will bring all sorts of unhealthy consequences can cause distress among the public. Groups such as Cóir and this type of negative campaigning should be addressed head-on in the media and at the highest levels.

Senator John Hanafin

I welcome Deputy Gilmore and thank him for his contribution. In light of the saying, "If you are explaining, you are losing", should we not outline in more detail the positive contribution Europe has made to all aspects of our social policy? I have brought some examples of anti-Lisbon propaganda, much of which is bizarre and simply untrue. However, rather than responding with explanations, we should show what the EU has done in respect of workers' rights, maternity leave and equal pay. We need to continue making the point that the treaty is a force for good. As Senator Prendergast noted, we need to point out that the misinformation being spread is sometimes quite dangerous.

Chairman

The views expressed by members are consistent with what they have said previously and are based on what they have learned in their respective constituencies. In regard to scare-mongering propaganda, it appears that a significant proportion of posters have no basis in fact. This is an alarming trend and one which could be divisive for the country. We have not previously seen this type of poster. One poster suggested that the minimum wage could drop to €1.84. Since 1988, Irish incomes have increased dramatically when compared with the per capita incomes of other EU countries, the US and Japan. That is an extraordinarily positive development from an Irish perspective but it is completely ignored by some posters. These posters irritate and upset members because they could set a trend for the future whereby allegations would not require any basis in fact. Attempts have been made in some parts of Europe to stampede people in particular directions. The use of, for example, immigration issues comes close to racism. These issues are being raised by certain groups from outside this country in an attempt to foment division. That is a matter about which I am worried. I congratulate Deputy Gilmore for the very strong and positive leadership he has given to the people who support him.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore

I will take the questions thematically, rather than in the order in which they were asked. The first issue concerns jobs and the economy and is the biggest issue facing the country at the moment. Some 400,000 people are out of work and the figure is heading for 500,000. A huge number of people are out of work throughout Europe and several things need to happen. We must accept that getting out of our economic difficulty will involve collaboration with our neighbours in Europe. We will disagree on certain issues and we will have various arguments about what is happening with regard to our economy but to get out of the economic hole which Ireland, Europe and the world are in, will require that we work with our neighbours.

It is important that the European Union and its institutions can concentrate on addressing the economic crisis rather than be plunged into years of institutional navel-gazing, which will happen if the Lisbon treaty cannot be ratified. It took seven years to get to this point and the European Union needs to be enabled to focus collectively on jobs, services and the things that matter to people rather than the institutional preoccupations to which I referred.

The European Union needs to be able to operate more efficiently than it has operated heretofore and the institutional and decision-making reforms in the Lisbon treaty will free up the European institutions to make decisions more quickly and respond more rapidly to the changing global economic circumstances so that the European economy can compete more effectively on the global stage. The Lisbon treaty addresses the employment issue by its commitment to building a union that achieves full employment. Deputy Tuffy mentioned the roles of education and training, which are also important.

There is no provision in the treaty which opens the way to the privatisation of public services. On the contrary, a protocol to the treaty aims at the protection of public services, which the Labour Party and its sister parties in Europe welcome. If the Lisbon treaty is passed it will provide the basis for European institutions to legislate to underpin the delivery of public services and we and our sister parties have published the equivalent of a Private Members' Bill on the matter.

There is nothing — not a syllable — in the treaty which weakens workers' rights. The minimum wage will not be affected by the Lisbon treaty as the European Union has no function — good, bad or indifferent — in deciding anything in that regard. Posters claiming that the minimum wage will be cut to €1.84 are nonsense and are designed to frighten people. They are having a measure of success because I meet people, particularly young people, who are concerned about the issue but there is no basis for it.

A small number of trade union leaders have expressed opposition to the Lisbon treaty but the majority of trade unions in Ireland support the treaty. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions supports the treaty, as it did on the last occasion. I held a joint press conference this morning with the general secretary urging working people to vote in favour of the treaty. The European Trade Union Confederation is clear in its statement that it supports the treaty. John Monks of the ETUC has said: "There is no conditionality in the ETUC's support for Lisbon." SIPTU, the country's largest trade union, stated: "The balance of advantage for working people and their families rests with ratification of the Treaty."

Much play has been made of the Laval and other judgments in the European Court of Justice. The Swedish Trade Union Confederation, which was involved in the taking of that case, said the Swedish trade unions are 100% behind the Lisbon treaty and ask us to tell this to the Irish people. That is the message it has sent to us. When one thinks about it, why would it not support the treaty? Let us look at the things that are being written into it. There is the right of everyone to form and join trade unions; why would anybody ask working people to vote against that? The right to education and training will be written into the treaty; why would one ask working people to vote against that? There is the right to work; provisions on non-discrimination and equality between men and women; the right to consultation; the right to negotiate; the right to conduct collective bargaining; the right to strike; entitlement to social security; and the right to parental leave. I could go on. All of these rights are being given the same legal status as every other provision of the European treaties. It baffles me that anybody who purports to have the real interests of working people at heart would turn around and say that these things should not be in the European treaty or that we should not have them.

Senator Donohoe mentioned the issue of immigration. It is not something that is raised overtly, but one does sometimes suspect it is there under the surface. Again, however, let us look at the provisions of the treaty. Although Deputy Treacy remarked on it, not enough attention has been drawn to a provision in the Charter of Fundamental Rights which states: "Nationals of third countries who are authorized to work in the territories of the Member States are entitled to working conditions equivalent to those of citizens of the Union." There is a fear that people from third countries will be coming in, taking jobs and causing cuts in wages, but one of the things that has been written into the treaty is a provision that they are entitled to the same conditions as citizens.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh challenged me on a number of things. I did say after the referendum in June 2008 that the Lisbon treaty could not be ratified or adopted as a result of the Irish vote. That remains the case. The Lisbon treaty cannot be ratified or come into effect because Ireland voted "No" in June 2008, and that will remain the case if we vote "No" again on 2 October. The question is whether this is a good or a bad thing. In my view, it is a bad thing because it means the European Union will proceed on the basis of the existing Nice treaty and we will not have within the European treaties the rights for working people, for example, that I have just set out.

Yes, I did say that the result of the June 2008 referendum was respected, and I believe it was respected. The principle issues that arose as a result of that referendum were addressed. We will have a commissioner, which was a major issue. There were concerns with regard to abortion, tax harmonisation and neutrality, which have been addressed in legally-binding guarantees. There are concerns about workers' rights, which concerns, as I believed in June 2008, are addressed by writing these rights into the treaty, which is being done through the Charter of Fundamental Rights. It does not help anybody's case to engage in word games such as wondering if the solemn declaration is as important as the legally binding guarantees and about where it stands regarding the Charter of Fundamental Rights. What matters is the bottom line, that is, the result. If one takes an issue such as the minimum wage, there are concerns about the pressures being exerted on it, but if one looks at where these pressures are being exerted from, one will see that the pressure on the minimum wage here is not being exerted by the Lisbon treaty or from Brussels but from north of the Border where Deputy Ó Snodaigh’s party is in government. In this jurisdiction the minimum wage is €8.65, while in Northern Ireland it is €6.32. Everywhere I go persons such as those involved in the retail trade who are trying to employ people, particularly in Border areas, ask me about this. The concern is not that somebody from Brussels will come and tell them they have to apply a particular wage level, rather it is the wages being paid north of the Border. If Sinn Féin wants to do something constructive about the minimum wage in this jurisdiction — I wish it would — I ask it to please do something about the minimum wage north of the Border where it is in government because it is causing huge difficulties for people who are trying to trade within a 50 to 100 mile distance of the Border.

We have to make a distinction in addressing these issues between what is contained in the Lisbon treaty and what we have the potential to deal with. A lot of the things about which working people have concerns are matters we can and should be dealing with in our laws and practices. Is the Lisbon treaty a help or hindrance? It is a help because it sets down principles that will apply across the European Union in order that we can build legislation in the European institutions and domestically. That is why, for example, on the issue of collective bargaining I welcome the fact that the principle of and the right to collective bargaining will become part of European treaty arrangements. We should legislate for it here, which is why I have given my political commitment and that of the Labour Party that if we get the opportunity in government after the next general election, we will legislate for it.

Chairman

I thank members for their participation. I also thank Deputy Gilmore and his colleagues, Mr. Browne and Ms O'Mahony, for coming before us. I compliment Deputy Gilmore on his robust contribution. It may be of some interest to members that in drawing up the Charter of Fundamental Rights all trade unions throughout Europe were consulted at great length over a long period, as the responses given by Deputy Gilmore confirm. The strength and length of the discussions with the trade union movement prior to drawing up the charter, now embodied in the Lisbon treaty, are dramatically at odds with and draw questions as to the credibility of some of the advertisements people have seen in recent times. I am not referring to any political party when I say this, rather I am merely drawing attention to a fact, that in the case of some posters some seem to feel it is timely to make suggestions that are totally at variance with the facts and which can prove very damaging in terms of political dialogue in this country. I again thank Deputy Gilmore and his colleagues for being with us and hope the discussions of the committee which are being broadcast on the web will be of benefit to those who have made up their minds to vote in a particular direction but most particularly to those who have not yet made up theirs on they way they should vote.

The joint committee went into private session at 2.55 p.m. and adjourned at 3.15 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Thursday, 24 September 2009.