Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will take the last question first and come back to the right to be forgotten. One of the central kernels of the European Union is freedom of movement across the European Union, which is hugely important. In the original Treaty of Rome in 1958 the focus was to provide for a Common Market across the original six member states with freedom of movement between those states, and matters have developed from that point. Providing for freedom of movement is a central article of the Rome treaty and much of what has happened since - the new states joining, the arrangements I mentioned earlier in regard to Schengen and all the other matters - are the outward product of ensuring freedom of movement in the manner that accords with the philosophy of establishing the European Union.

An issue has arisen in some member states, and whether it is a real issue of substance or more driven by domestic electoral demands in individual countries and presentations that were seen to be politically opportune by the Governments raising them is an open question. I will not comment on that, but a case was made without any substantive supporting evidence, and I emphasise that. It was suggested that within the European Union some individuals were welfare shopping, if I can put it that way, and abusing the concept of freedom of movement so that they could make claims for social welfare in states that had superior social welfare systems. The states that made those cases did not produce substantive evidence.

There is a danger in this. The reality across the European Union is based on a premise and a philosophy that within the Union all nationals of each member state are free to travel to and locate in other member states and seek work there in the current economic climate. In this State and elsewhere we have a range of individuals from other European Union states who came to this country, for example, during the so-called boom years whom we needed here to meet our employment needs. They held down jobs for many years and contributed to our social welfare system but as we headed through the period from 2008 to 2010 they lost their jobs and found themselves in difficulties. Many of them settled here, have families here and, based on the contributions they made to our social welfare funds, in circumstances in which the economic difficulties we experienced have affected their employment, are entitled to claim social welfare in the same way as many Irish nationals who find themselves unemployed in England or in other European countries having held down jobs in those countries.

Our European colleagues need to take care in what they say in travelling this particular route to ensure they do not unnecessarily stimulate prejudice or a reaction from sections of the community who may not fully understand the complexities of the issue. This issue was discussed among European Union Ministers. Some Ministers expressed concerns about the issue being raised in the manner in which it had been raised, and I share those views, but if four member states raise an issue and express a concern they have an entitlement to have that concern considered. As a consequence, the request was that a report be done to examine any evidence in that context, and it is no more than that. It is very important that the benefits of movement, which are enormous in human, commercial and business and tourism terms - and this country benefits substantially from that - are not turned on their heads by a suggestion that there is a greater problem in this area than exists. It is unfortunate that it was raised in the manner in which it was raised in the absence of the presentation of substantial, substantive evidence to back up what was said. However, it will be a further discussion at the meeting to be held next week and I suspect it is an issue to which we will return.