Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank both witnesses. I must confess that I read the report and found it most interesting, hence my question about Joe O'Reilly of Fianna Fáil and the Joseph O'Reilly of Fine Gael. They might be two politicians or they might not, but before the report goes to the Library, I request that the matter would be checked.

I do not wish the witnesses to answer the question if it embarrasses them but it is fascinating that two citizens are present in a voluntary capacity and that they have a programme of visiting schools and educating children, that they have the facility to produce such a report and that they are a non-political, not-for-profit organisation. I did not realise they have a spy in the camp every day the Joint Committee on European Affairs sits. They are more than welcome. I am pleased to learn that at least one person in the audience represents European Movement Ireland.

The witnesses will have noticed how sensitive the Chairman was about the slap on the wrist they gave on the relative drop – 11% - in committee attendance to 67%. It is worth pointing out – the point might have been made already – that I can guarantee that as I clocked in today, my attendance record in the Houses of the Oireachtas is 94%. That does not mean the national media, RTE and the leaders of all political parties recognise me as a great parliamentarian who is better than everyone else. In a sense, what I say is that attendance is one thing and what goes on after the clocking in is more important. It is not necessary for the witnesses to list each individual’s attendance.

I wish to focus on three key areas in the report. The witnesses brought to our attention the fact that when directorates general, DGs, issue consultative documents, they seems to be at sixes and sevens about how they release the discussion documents, analyse the feedback and how matters are ultimately presented. That is noteworthy. The process definitely appears to require improvement.

Perhaps it is not a fair question to ask but the witnesses can answer it if they wish. I would welcome their views on the committee’s oversight role on the scrutiny of European affairs. I am also a member of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade which has a similar role. We had a discussion with the Minister of State, Deputy Creighton, about the ability of elected public representatives to devote the necessary time to analysis and scrutiny in terms of our oversight responsibilities.

I occasionally visit schools to explain what a Deputy is and I find it difficult to get the children to realise that a Deputy is not the same as a councillor. I hesitate to say it in public but I am surprised that many of the teaching profession who are charged with educating children on the political context and structures of Irish politics are themselves confused about the roles of parliamentarians and councillors.

In explaining European issues to children, the witnesses include reference to the "PAC". I did not realise that in this context it is the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Reference was also made to the OSCE but, more specifically, it is to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. I did not realise there were so many parliamentary assemblies and I do not think the public does either. I wish to ask a political question and I understand that the witnesses might not be at liberty to comment. The public surely does not know about the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Are there too many such fora? Is there duplication? For example, the OSCE is based in two, if not three, countries. One part is in Vienna, another part is in Copenhagen, while the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, ODIHR, wing is in Warsaw. It strikes me that children might find it difficult to get their heads around all of those assemblies, the European assemblies and committees. I would appreciate it if an opinion were forthcoming.