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

I apologise to Mr. Seamus Coffey for arriving late. I have some general questions. A quite fascinating debate is taking place, and a fascinating debate is taking place elsewhere, such as that on the rise of nationalism in Spain. Catalonia may want to break away and there is conflict with central government. Britain is taking a certain route and there are worries about the British Labour Party under its new leader, whose support for the Union is questionable. Collectively, we are trying to strengthen the institutions, yet there is in the ether nationalistic turmoil of all sorts that will probably only grow. In this regard, one should consider what is happening in north Italy. These phenomena are evident, yet we are trying to strengthen the institutions. In trying to do so, we are talking about sovereignty. A major point concerning the British is the lack of sovereignty and their fear of ceding more sovereignty to the centre. In fact, they are trying to claw it back.

We are backbenchers. Somebody congratulated the Government on some sort of reform. We have reduced the number of seats in the Parliament by eight, or thereabouts. This is the committee responsible for EU affairs. There are up to five of us present, but there are 166 Members of the Parliament. How do the delegates believe the complexities spoken about by my colleague from Fianna Fáil can be relayed to the lad with the pint in his hand in the pub? It is a massively complex arena and there is considerable conflict. There is growth in certain areas of euroscepticism.

I should qualify my position and say I am a fanatical supporter of the concept of strengthening Europe. However, this raises very challenging questions. Somebody mentioned the House of Commons but we know that in England, the House of Lords is specially structured to deal with the EU issues. It does substantial work and produces mammoth documents. In the interest of democratic accountability, how should this national Parliament structure itself to engage more seriously in this debate, which is ultimately about us, as politicians, relaying what is occurring and evolving to the fellow with the pint in his hand? That is the major challenge.