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

I also congratulate the ambassador on his presentation. He outlined a very ambitious programme for the Slovak Presidency and all members join him in hoping it achieves its objectives. It is a broad programme that is fundamentally part of what the European Union is about and something that every country would strive to achieve in the Presidency role. The committee hopes it will be successful.

I fully concur with the points raised by my colleague, Senator Richmond, particularly in respect of Brexit. Ireland and the United Kingdom have had a common trade area for many years and Brexit presents a great obstacle to this trade. It is an obstacle that is not of our making. The European Union will have a major problem on its hands as it seeks to resolve the issues that arise as a result of Brexit. This scenario has never arisen previously in this context. The UK is an island off the mainland of Europe and Ireland, in turn, is an island off the west coast of the UK. Brexit gives rise to many issues that affect us.

Ireland is not located at the geographic centre of the European Union but at its outer perimeter. This issue has come into focus in recent days, as the ambassador will realise, as a result of the European Commission's decision in the Apple case. Ireland strongly resents the attitude taken by the Commission in this case. If applied broadly throughout the European Union in respect of other issues affecting different member states in a different fashion, the Commission's approach would have serious implications for solidarity in the European Union. Solidarity is a concept that the EU has embodied and one which was very much incorporated in the ambassador's address to the joint committee. Everybody has something to contribute to the European Union, whereas the tendency nowadays is to view the EU as an entity from which everybody should extract something. We must return to the precept whereby every country brings something to the table and makes a commitment to the EU, as a result of which the sum becomes much greater than its parts. I hope the Slovak Presidency will be successful in the pursuit of this objective.

The ambassador referred to bureaucrats, administrators and so forth. We have the height of respect for bureaucrats from time to time.

When they err, in our opinion however, we believe we have the right to fundamentally reject what they have to say.

For 20 years, I have heard about the abolition of roaming charges. It was a major issue in the European Union 20 years ago and its resolution was imminent then. It still has not been resolved, much to the chagrin of all member states. People roaming with their mobile telephones within the Union are penalised when making calls or downloading data. As we well know, there is no need for this. The benefit of being in a Union is that one avails of the services provided collectively by the Union. It stretches the imagination as to why this issue has not been resolved.

Technology is going to be significantly important in combatting crime in the future. We have seen countless examples of modern criminality and crime bosses who do not have problems with roaming at all. They seem to expand and improve their influences, as well as commit atrocities, as time goes by. We get affected by them, as do other countries in the Union. Some of our criminals have domiciled themselves in other European countries as well, much to our annoyance.

We all have fond memories of Slovakia’s accession to the European Union. It has made a positive contribution since. In recent times, there have been some discordant notes from various Heads of State across the Union on various issues, predominantly on migration. They need to be resolved. If we cannot live together as a Union, we should not be together. It would be utterly hypocritical on our part to attempt to pursue the objectives of a Union if we are not thinking as one.

We have all heard from time to time the fact that the Members of Parliament of each member state should expect to have a greater influence on the Union in the future. That is a contradiction and I cannot see how it can happen. If each of the 27 member states insisted on ensuring their policies apply throughout the Union, there would be conflict. There cannot be agreement if that were to happen. This is why it is important that the contribution each member state has to bring to the Union has to be such as is part of the Union’s own objectives.

I noted the oblique reference to continuing discussions with the western Balkans on enlargement. Many argue we do not need any more enlargement. We cannot divorce ourselves from reality. It is important this area achieves Union membership in the shortest possible time.