Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for attending. I echo the comments of the Chairman regarding Deputy Crowe, a constituency colleague of mine whom I have known for many years. His depth of knowledge and contribution to the committee was valued.

There is a good line in the EMI's presentation about there being five options, which are not mutually exclusive.

At the heart of it we see the real contradiction in respect of how to tackle further development in Europe. My own view is that federalism has, ironically, probably increased democracy because federal countries view themselves as incredibly democratic. Yet I would have a huge problem with the notion of a federal European state. I am pro-European. I have supported the EU in every referendum we have had. I believe in greater and deeper integration but, to echo Deputy Haughey's comments, I certainly do not believe that the Irish people or the European people buy into the notion of a super-federal Europe. The founders of the European Economic Community, the EEC, did not believe in that.

A key argument is coming up for us. Unfortunately, this is where Europe will really feel the loss of Britain. On many issues Britain and Ireland combined together to provide a particular viewpoint on the dynamic of Europe and the development of its policies. There is therefore a worry that the loss of a country of that size might allow a Franco-German alliance or co-ordination of policy to dominate. The biggest risk to deeper European integration is the feeling among the remaining states that their voices are not as important. I always find it really, deeply disappointing. I know there is sometimes a tendency for the media to report things in a certain way rather than how they are in actuality. A statement by the French President or German Chancellor can be covered as if it was European policy. It is not. It is a statement by one leader of one country within the EU which has as much validity as the viewpoint which any other leader brings to the table. That has to be fought and looked at.

I disagree with some populist viewpoints, for example I disagree with Deputy Haughey on the proposal to cut the Commission. I have major objections to such an action. The Commission is at the heart of driving much of the reality of European progress. A reduction of the size of the Commission would affect the marginalised smaller countries and their ability to contribute to the Commission. We had this discussion before. They tried it the last time around as well, for want of a better description. I know commissioners swear an oath to Europe and that there is no room for national interest, but we could end up in a situation where Ireland could be without a representative at Commission level for ten years. I would not like to see that. Those are the type of things against which we need to guard as we progress towards greater integration between the member states. If decisions are made to structure a future Europe in that way it will eventually result in more countries wishing to leave. I would be very interested to hear where the witnesses' views on this issue tie into mine. Some European leaders are in danger of running away and building an edifice to themselves, before realising that an awful lot of people do not want to be involved in that particular version of Europe.