Is ábhar fíor-thábhachtach é seo. Tá go leor cainte á dhéanamh i láthair na huaire maidir le haontacht na hEorpa. Ní dóigh liom, áfach, in ainneoin an méid cainte seo, go bhfuil daoine ag scrúdú go mion céard a chiallóidh na gnéithe seo go praiticiúil do dhaoine.
European union of various types has become a very popular buzz word. It is very important, if we are going to make progress, that we are quite clear in what we are setting out to achieve and what structures we find acceptable. My understanding of European unity is the concept of a free association of nations working in their common interest but at the same time retaining their own independence, an association that we would like to see growing as the European Community has and embracing in time all the nation states of Europe.
I do not think that too many people are in favour to European unity on the model we have, for example, in the United States of America, particularly in this country, where under a Constitution we have basically a people led state. We have a lot to protect and to ensure that we protect in any new structures that are created in the new Europe. Unlike some of our neighbouring states, in this country the people are supreme and in matters of basic law all matters have to be referred back to the people. We have also of course, in common with all modern democracies, a Parliament.
When we look at the European situation the basic government of that Europe to date has been through the Council of Ministers and through the Commission working on their behalf. We have gradually seen the growth of the European Parliament with and ever increasing role. We would have to question in the long term which we wish to maintain supreme. I believe that when we sought independence in this country we did not seek it out of any hatred for the people in our neighbouring island, but we sought it because we believed quite genuinely that with independence we could achieve the better good of our people.
Those people who set up this State believed in associations of nations — we were already members of the League of Nations — and in co-operation; but they also believed in the importance of having an autonomous Parliament. Therefore I would favour European unity or integration along the lines of maintaining the Council of Europe, on which we have as our representatives Ministers from Governments elected by Dáil Éireann, and that that would be the main force for decision making in Europe. I can accept, however, that there would and should be consultation with the European Parliament and that that consultation and those methods of consultation could be improved.
The second reservation I have about all the talk about Europe is that I do not see that we would be well served by a central bureaucracy that would be making minor decisions that would affect people in this country. I personally am also one of the few people who have preached caution regarding the circumventing of the Government here as regards the application of funds from Europe on the ground in Ireland. I think that, while that might be attractive in the short term, there is a very serious inherent danger in such a policy when one is talking about developing a coherent and cohesive national policy within this country.
People on the ground tend to have a honeypot attitude towards Europe. They are all in favour of European unity because they see it as a kind of honeypot that money flows from. That is a dangerous and facile attitude in regard to what real European unity should be about. In an age where we talk nationally about decentralisation, not only in physical terms but in political terms, where we talk about devolution of powers to local authorities, where we are talking at the moment about a whole review of local authority structures to make them more meaningful, that at the same time it is coherent thinking to be sure that more and more decisions are being taken in Europe that could be better taken at a national or local level.
As somebody living on the periphery of this country I am very conscious that the bigger a scheme and the further a decision is made from where it is being applied, the more likely that it will have a distorting effect. Therefore I am very much in favour of what is termed, I understand, in the technical jargon the principle of subsidiarity. That is, that only those decisions that would need to be made at a European level would be made at a European level and that we would resist the temptation of the bureaucrats to draw more and more minor decision making, minor controls that are unnecessary, towards themselves.
There has been great talk about European monetary union. I have no problem with the idea of having a situation where we would have one single currency. The practical advantages of that are obvious, although I think it has to be pointed out in passing that it will not protect us from fluctuations. It will only mean that it will be our currency versus the rest of the currencies of the world; but we will be still subject to fluctuations against the dollar, the yen and all other currencies. However, the reservation I would have relates to the drawing of fiscal policy in towards the centre that might be and could be and, I understand, it is mooted as being the necessary corollary of European monetary union. The dangers of that are that the practices in monetary and in financial policy terms that are commonplace at the moment and that are perceived by the economists to serve the requirements of Europe at present might become embedded. Whatever about trying to get those changed at local level, it might prove very difficult and a very slow procedure to change such a large body as would be necessary to control the financial policy of a European unified state.
On the question of security and defence, I would have grave reservations on the ground of a common defence policy. The first thing we would have to recognise is that, if there was European unity in the terms of defence policy, we would be, in part, with neighbours who have overseas interests outside the European union. The second thing we have to recognise is that generally in larger states there tends to build up a paranoia that out there somewhere there must be some enemy about to attack us. We had this syndrome for the past 40 or 50 years when it was believed, up until four or five years ago, that we were in imminent danger from the eastern bloc. I do not honestly believe at this stage that we need in real terms to defend ourselves against any outside nation. I do not believe there is any nation that has designs on us. I am absolutely convinced that it is not our defence forces that are deterring people from attacking. I am equally convinced that it is not the defence forces of our neighbours either that are deterring such an attack.
However, on the role that we could play in defence, I think our role should be a positive one. Ireland is in a unique position to say that the road to peace is not by nuclear deterrent, is not by mounting an equal threat, but by preaching the gospel of disarmament, the gospel of resolution of international disputes by peaceful methods, and by trying to persuade our fellow nations that the way forward in the future is through peaceful negotiation and not through armed conflict or deterrent which, by a wrong pressing of a button, could extinguish mankind. I am convinced we have a positive role to play there. To play that role it is very important that we maintain our traditional independent stance in these matters, not as a negative value but as a positive value, because we as a small nation cannot be thought to be a threat to any other nation.
On the question of common security, I agree that, not only within Europe but throughout all civilised nations, there should be co-operation on security. In a world where people are very mobile and where crime tends to be international, it is very important that not only within Europe but on a broader scale we continue to build our links with the security forces in various lands. However, in doing that, we should also avail of the opportunity to look at arrangements that would ensure, in relation to nationals from various countries, that agreements are made for the humane treatment of prisoners.
One thing that could be developed on a European level would be the concept of reciprocal arrangements for prisoners, where people would have the choice to apply to serve their sentence in their country of origin on humanitarian grounds. I would also see that for certain types of offence we could look at a direct European court which would be seen to be independent. These are only ideas that could be passed around, honed and refined in the developing Europe.
If we are going to make progress on European unity, and not only on European unity but also on world unity, if we are going to bring down the barriers right across the world — and it was proved in the past year that European unity is not what we thought it meant two years ago; it is a much grander scale of things — it is important that we are willing to flesh out and be specific on exactly what powers we mean to pool, how to share our sovereignty and which powers we feel we should maintain also as a nation state. It is a new concept. It is a concept that Europe has pioneered.
Unlike the United States, my understanding of what we mean by European unity is a free association of nation states pooling their sovereignty in common interest and in common pursuit of common goals. I do not think that anybody within those terms means to do away with the independence of, for example, this Parliament. For example, I do not think anybody is suggesting we would give up our seat in the United Nations and that we would have one European representative there, and so on. If they do mean those things they should spell them out, because I cannot see that we can progress on this line until people become specific about what exactly we are talking about in this sphere.
Tá sé an-tábhachtach go ndéanfar plé mion, domhain ar an ábhar seo agus go mbeimid soiléir faoi na structúir faoina mbeimis sásta dul ar bhóthar na haontachta an Eoraip. Ní foláir dúinn bheith soiléir freisin faoin mbóthar nach mbeimis sásta a dhul. Caithfear a chinntiú go leanfar polasaithe eacnamaíochta a rachaidh chun leas na tíre seo sa bhfad-téarma, agus a bheith aireach nach dtéann an tarraingt go léir go dtí an lár, má tá contúirt i gcás mar sin. Dá bhrí sin, ní mór deis a bheith ag na ceantair imeallacha, ar nós oileáin na hÉireann, forbairt agus fás a dhéanamh agus a bhféiniúlacht a dhaingniú san Eoraip nua.
