Terry Leyden (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is only a small detail and these things happen. In any event, I agree with the Chairman regarding the questionable nature of the documentation on attendance. While I have no problem with including members' attendance, one should go into it further and state precisely who is attending. I was interested to see the contribution regarding the Council of Europe, of which I am a member. I am deputy leader of that group and I compliment EM Ireland on including the details. This document is very useful for many people, including students of Europe. For example, it includes an organisation with which I am not that familiar, namely, the European Economic and Social Committee, which has no Oireachtas Member on it, as it happens. Similarly, it refers to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, which of course includes representation by a delegation from the Oireachtas, and that is very good. As far as attendance is concerned, again the report is slightly misleading in respect of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. We actually have a full turnout for the main sitting days, which take place between Monday and Thursday. Friday typically is a day on which there is very little activity and, from an economic point of view, we tend not to attend on that day unless there is a matter of specific interest to Ireland.

As for these details, as the Chairman stated, one may as well name those who attend the meetings and publish the attendance records. I have no problem with that and think it is only fair. However, when one generalises and cites an attendance rate of 60%, it is not actually that accurate. It is 100% from Monday to Thursday, but if one divides by five, one will end up with X percentage gone. However, it is important this activity is included.

On the question of prominent Deputies during the election campaign, if "vigorous" means doing nothing, it was a very vigorous campaign because I saw no action on the ground as far as the constituency of Roscommon-South Leitrim was concerned. However, if that constitutes vigorous campaigning, it is wonderful to describe it as such. Perhaps I did not notice it but I certainly did not see it in the constituency of Roscommon-South Leitrim. While I did not see much vigorous campaigning by anyone during that particular campaign, that is neither here nor there. Nevertheless, the decision was correct. It is very difficult when one makes generalisations like that.

I will conclude by noting that one thing that will affect support for Europe is the reduction in the number of MEPs. Ireland supported the admission of Croatia and, in consequence, more than likely will end up with one fewer MEP, down from 12 to 11. Were Turkey to join the European Union, Ireland would end up thereafter with possibly as few as six MEPs. I understand the maximum number of MEPs is set at 765 and, consequently, the greater the number of member states that join, the smaller Ireland's membership of the European Parliament will be. There is a possibility that Ireland, with a population of 4.5 million, will be reduced to the same level of representation as member states such as Malta or Luxembourg, that is, with six seats. This is an important issue and I believe having fewer representatives in Europe will affect the actual voting record in the future. In this context, I note the Connacht-Ulster constituency has 79% recognition of Europe.

Other than that, I believe the production of this report is a very good exercise as far as Ireland is concerned. It is good that a non-political organisation should put together a document like this. It is a document I presume will be made available in libraries throughout the country because people can use it to conduct research about Europe. I say well done and I have no criticism of the entire report but have mentioned something the witnesses may wish to bear in mind in future reports.