Dr. Gavin Barrett:

In response to Deputy Bernard Durkan, I would expect any scrutiny reserve system - indeed, any system that deals with national Ministers - to represent the national position. That is what the Council of Ministers is for; it is a forum in which each country can represent its own national position at European Union level. I would be surprised if any mandate system did anything other than that. In terms of how such systems function, in the case of Denmark, for instance, the Government itself decides when it wants a mandate, in which case it drafts the mandate and presents it to Parliament. Far from Parliament telling the Government what to do, the Danish situation has been described as one in which the Parliament becomes an extra member of the Government.

The Deputy is absolutely correct in his point regarding euroscepticism. It is indeed the case that the states with the best-functioning systems in terms of parliamentary control of government tend to be the more eurosceptic. Perhaps Ireland can be the first to break that mould.

In terms of its relationship with other committees, an enhanced system of oversight and scrutiny would increase the workload of this particular committee enormously. Of course, that oversight role would not necessarily be taken by this committee but by a committee established for that particular purpose, for example, or perhaps by a sub-committee of this committee. In any case, it would require one committee to be in control to make the system work. If we simply let every committee do whatever it wants, it should come as no surprise if some do well and others badly. Indeed, given the pressures the committees are under, it might not be a great surprise if all of them were to perform rather poorly.