Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am afraid we will have to continue this debate at another time. I congratulate our guests for the manner in which they have laid out and grasped the issues before us. This serves to focus once again on the challenging issues emerging for us, as Members of Parliament, and our colleagues throughout Europe.

The question of the financial markets, as well as budgetary and financial frameworks, has been well and accurately laid out by Dr. Gavin Barrett. As has been said before, we must all move in the one direction. When the crisis hit, each country seemed to run for cover, while ignoring its neighbours to a large extent, with one or two exceptions. That was how the problem arose in the first instance. It is true Europe had never been asked to address an issue of this nature before.

There are lessons to be learned from history, of which I know the Chairman and our guests are keen students. When crises struck Europe in the past, it turned on itself. It was cannibalism for want of a better description, to which Professor Laffan also referred. In the United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt's guidance cajoled the people and led them in a different direction. They were encouraged not to take the destructive route. I ask our guests to address this point. The destructive route is very dangerous. It is as old as history itself and has been followed countless times on the continent of Europe. Sadly and unfortunately, it seems to be moving in that direction again.

Professor Laffan referred to party systems being under pressure. They are because they have nothing good to offer. In addition, they have no easy options. The Italian election in recent weeks was a classic example of where people wanted to go for easy options. Unfortunately, however, there are no easy options. It is a question of dealing with issues as they arise in the earlier stages, or dealing with a more serious issue in the not too distant future. I do not accept the notion that we cannot arrive at that juncture again.

Various commentators have suggested the Second World War solved the problem that arose in the 1930s after the roaring twenties. We find ourselves in a similar situation. I do not believe the Second World War solved the problem, but humanity recognised that it was about to obliterate itself from the face of the map. People across the globe, not in one particular area, recognised this. They suddenly realised the seriousness of the problem and that untold damage could be done and it was. I do not think modern Europe is conversant with what happened in that era, including the options that were taken and those that were not.

A good point was made on democratic legitimacy, but where do we go from here? Do we lead the people or vice versa? That is what it comes down to. It is a difficult issue that nobody else can really assess, except those on the front line. Those of us in the public arena must seek public support to do what is right for the people. It is a difficult position to be in. It is easy to seek public support to do what people want, if that is the easy option. Therefore, we all have to choose.

There are those who believe the abolition of the party system is the answer to their problems, but it is not. The opposite is the case. I do not think the European Union can succeed socially, economically or politically without a single currency for the entire Union. Professor Laffan also referred to this issue but did not come to the same conclusion. All kinds of excuses have been made, but effectively we now have a two-speed European Union.

It is going the opposite route to the way the founding fathers of the European Union who had experiences from a different time from which they learned wanted it. Several weeks ago this committee heard from a delegation from the European affairs committee of the Swedish Parliament. We learned that this committee has a veto over their Ministers at Council meetings. The committee was asked on whose behalf the committee speaks when it has to use the veto. Is it on the behalf of the people of Europe or the people of Sweden? We know what the answer is in that case.

I believe when each member state takes ownership of the European project as if it were theirs and recognises the need to accommodate others, then we will succeed. Until that it is done, we are wasting our time. All we are doing is talking around the subject. A classic example of this is when the euro was introduced. We all thought, in our naivety, that the European Central Bank was going to control European fiscal policy. It did not, despite the fact each member state had representatives on the bank's board. Why did this happen? It happened because each member state wanted to go its own particular route, looking after its own interests.

Enough said, although I could go on for ever and I know our two guests could go on for an awful lot longer than they have. I would love an opportunity at some later stage to have a longer debate on this subject. We need it in this country and Europe needs it as well.