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

Having a union tends to prevent that. In the United States there was no union in the beginning, but there was a civil war that was fought on the basis of a union or otherwise - there were other issues as well. However, it produced a union that has grown and stuck together. Unlike the European Union, the United States has a single currency, from which Europe shied away, much to its detriment. I believe that unless and until a single currency prevails across Europe, there cannot be economic or political cohesion to the extent that would be naturally beneficial to the Union. The people of Europe will not be able to access the benefits of that huge 450 million people Single Market.

Sir Bill Cash mentioned the need to protect the democratic system of his national parliament. We would all like to think the same thing. We would like to think that we have protected it to a fairly considerable extent. I imagine the French believe they have managed to protect the democratic system. How does Sir Bill Cash suppose that 28 member states can each protect the system, as they know it, and the tradition of their particular parliamentary system, some of which have had varying degrees of democracy over the years? Is it possible in a union?

Does Britain contribute to the concept of that union? Has Britain immersed itself in the concept of the European Union since the beginning? Or, as would appear from what Sir William has told us, has Britain looked at it from the outside? We have a number of people in this country who look at it from the outside as well and as yet do not recognise that the European currency is our currency on which we depend. There is a possibility that Britain has looked at the EU from the outside and a "them and us" situation has developed.

I put it to Sir William that it is not in the interests of the EU or of Britain to separate. I predict that in the event of that happening, Europe will find itself at loggerheads with itself in the very near future. This has happened before, with the full knowledge of all concerned, when all were watching what took place without saying anything and each in turn decided to seize the opportunity for their own particular gain. My view is that it does not work that way and we have moved ahead from that. If we retrench and go back on our word to our fellow Europeans we will be setting an unwelcome and hugely destructive standard.

Mr. Barroso was quoted as saying that the only EU Parliament was the Parliament of the European Union. He was right, of course. We cannot have 28 member state parliaments all claiming to be parliaments of the European Union. They are parliaments within the EU and constituent bodies of the EU and the parliamentary system. National parliaments influence the European Parliament and European thinking.

Over recent years, we have heard about the Swiss, Swedish and Finnish models. All kinds of models have been brought before us in their economic and historical contexts. In the case of Britain it is somewhat different. Although Britain is a much bigger country than Ireland with a much bigger population and much more economic clout, it is now a little like Ireland. Things have moved on from the time of the Commonwealth, which was much more powerful and influential 60 years ago. Now, Britain is much more dependent on the European Union and trade with the EU. Does Sir William believe that an exit from the Union, which he believes the British people will choose as is their right, will benefit the UK economy in any way? Britain will have to make the same contributions to the EU as it does now if it intends to trade with it.