Ms Viviane Reding:

Do this and other national parliaments control what, for example, their Justice Ministers are doing at the Justice and Home Affairs Council? Perhaps members will not bring what I am saying in this regard to the attention of the Minister for Justice and Equality, with whom I work very well. Do Members of the Oireachtas really control what the Ministers with responsibility for social affairs, economic affairs and finance do when they attend Council meetings? Doing so would be an extremely important task. There would also be a need to organise, in the context of plenary sessions, discussions on proposals which the Commission puts forward. For example, would the members present suggest that the Minister for Justice and Equality support the proposals I have put forward in the context of justice for growth, which contemplate many elements of reform? Would they instead inform him that they do not agree with him in respect of the matter?

I am of the view that national parliaments must take an increasing interest in European politics. This will show the citizens in Ireland and other countries that European politics are not foreign politics but rather they are national politics. If this Parliament engages in regular debates on matters relating to Europe, the public will understand that European politics are also national politics. They will also come to see that their national parliamentarians care about those matters to which I refer.

A not so positive way to proceed within the European Union would be to take the intergovernmental approach. The fiscal compact is an intergovernmental mechanism and it states that the intergovernmental system must be included in a treaty by 2018. That is why I stated that 2018 is an important year in the context of treaty change because there is already something which we must include in a treaty. The Deputy inquired about a Europe led by France and Germany, with all the other member states following behind them like poodles. It appears that this is the case because when one switches on one's TV, one sees Francois Hollande and Angela Merkel clapping each other on the shoulder and agreeing with each other. Citizens looking at such pictures often think that France and Germany have made a decision and that their countries can do nothing but follow. Things are not like that. Since the creation of the European adventure, we needed the engine of the German and French understanding. If that engine does not work, then Europe has a problem. However, an engine is not enough. We need an entire aeroplane and a pilot to fly it. Decisions relating to the European Union are taken by 27 member states, not by two.

I am a Luxembourger and the people in my country know that there are other states which are bigger than ours. Ireland is one such example. However, that does not prevent Luxembourgers from trying to exercise influence in the European Union to try to bring it to that place where we want it to be, to persuade, and not agree with, our larger neighbours of the fact that they are, as we see it, on the wrong track. The essential aspect is that democracy in the Union relates to the fact that we are 27, we are not two. I accept, however, that all the shoulder-clapping might give the wrong impression.

This brings me to the political union. Such a union is not one where two decide and 25 follow. It is, rather, a union where we have parliamentary systems which can have an impact in respect of the fiscal compact and the intergovernmental approach. The Parliament must also have an input in respect of banking union when we go down that road. There is a need for checks and balances. I say this as a Commissioner and I am well aware that it is not always very comfortable to go before the Parliament, offer an explanation and then be grilled by the Members. However, those are the checks and balances we need in order to reinforce the European Parliament.

We do not need intergovernmental decisions but European Union decisions and not only economic decisions. The European Union decisions are also citizens' decisions. I will give a good example in this respect. During Ireland's Presidency, the protection of personal data, a project I have put on the table, will be a very important element. I hope Ireland will make a gift to Europe and reach the completion of this or at least arrive at a political decision between the Council and the European Parliament on data protection rules. This is a system where both can be done together.

With regard to what are the new rules on data protection, I am talking of a market opener because there are 27 different conflicting national laws on data protection. If a company wants to work in 27 different member states, it has to apply 27 different conflicting rules. This costs the business world €2.3 billion per year, which represents a loss of money. As to what to do, we need to open the market, eliminate the 27 conflicting rules and replace them with a system of one continent, one rule and one regulator and in that way such companies can work. The data protection rules protect the individual. That means we must also reinforce the protection of the individual's rights in this system, and we can do both. We can open the market in an internal market without barriers and better protect the individual. It is not a case of one or the other; it is one and the other. Europe is about the economy but it is also about the rights of the citizens. It is about the free movement of citizens and citizens being protected when they move across borders. That is exactly what we need to do and to do it well.

Why can we not have, in terms of governance, a common policy, a foreign policy and a justice policy? What I am doing in justice is building bridges - bridges between different systems - not to change the system per se but to ensure the systems can function together and that a citizen is not completely lost when he or she crosses a border.

On the question of moving at great speed on the fiscal treaty and the banking union, one might ask are we not at times moving too quickly and at times too slowly. The member is right in respect of both. When we are in a crisis situation, we cannot lead a long discussion on the system of the firefighters to be established. We need a firefighter in place if the fire has erupted. That is exactly what we are doing and we have to do it quickly.

It was decided in June that a banking union would be put in place and that the ESM would lend to banks when we have a common central supervisory system in place. The Commission put the system on the table on 12 September. I hope the wish, which was also expressed by the Taoiseach, will come to completion, namely, that the Irish Presidency will start with the banking supervision system in place. I hope that those who agreed on the necessity to do that very quickly in June will not now disagree behind the scenes and think that we can do it more slowly. We need all this to be done quickly. The Commission has put the project on the table. It is with the European Parliament which has often shown it can act very quickly, mainly on my projects, which sometimes were dealt with from the beginning to the end in nine months, like all good things. The Parliament can act on this very quickly. I hope the Council will not hide behind closed doors in order to have more time.