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

I must keep an eye on the monitor as I will have to leave to go to the Dáil shortly. I thank our guests for coming before us and giving us their usual report on the respective activities. There are a number of points we need to keep in mind in the context of this country's situation vis-à-vismany of our European colleagues. We probably have the most tested democratic system of voting of an any European country. Only Australia has a more intricate voting system of proportional representation, which is the ultimate in terms of democracy because everybody has an opportunity to voice their opinion and their second, third, fourth, fifth and tenth opinion, if necessary. That does not apply in other countries where they have varying lists of systems to which they refer as time goes by.
In terms of how we manage the time available, I have no experience of the European Parliament but I am sure it probably organises its schedule of meetings in such as way as to ensure that three or four of them are not scheduled at the same time, which, unfortunately can occur in the scheduling of committees of these Houses, which results in our being expected to be in three or four places at the same time. Two consequences emanate from that. One is that it is impossible to give adequate consideration to the subject matter under discussion and the second is that Members find it intensely frustrating to have to move in two or three directions at the same time. As in the case of the European Parliament, it is not unusual for these Houses to have 15 or 20 meetings scheduled in the course of a day, which Members are supposed to attend but they find themselves being dragged in varying directions and it distorts their interests at a particular time.
We can talk ourselves to death in the context of debate but we need to ask ourselves are we making progress and achieving a result in line with our objectives. There are more opportunities now for discussion in national parliaments throughout Europe through the various committees that there has ever been in the history of Europe and yet there is a growing degree of Euroscepticism. During the course of Ms O'Connell's examination has she identified what might be a contributory factor to the growing degree of Eurospecticism? My colleague prompted an interesting question when he referred to the European fiscal stability treaty referendum, which our people supported, thereby giving a mandate to the country to adopt a particular stance which subsequently has often been questioned. That prompts the question: of what are we in favour? Do we create confusion, are we an enigma in the sense that we decide one thing today and maybe something different tomorrow or, to what extent, has Ms O'Connell been able to identify a lack of connectivity and continuity in our thinking and theory as a nation with respect to the European institutions?
Different countries have different systems but I believe our system is the best. I firmly believe ours is the most democratic system; it cannot be beaten. It is counterbalanced all the way along the line by proportional representation. The question that arises is: how do we view other national committees and their influence on the European Parliament? We had a visit of the Swedish parliamentary delegation and Swedes direct their delegations and Ministers. The is the way their system works. They are entitled to have that system but I do not agree with it and I believe ours is a better one.

We charge our Ministers and elected representatives to the House of Parliament with the responsibility of pursuing a particular programme. They are accountable afterwards if they do not do what they said they would do in that context. To what extent have comparisons been made of the extent to which EU member states relate to the European institutions and vice versaand how does Ireland compare in terms of public perception of those institutions?