Professor Brigid Laffan:

I thank Deputies Calleary and Richmond for their questions. I must say thanks to digital technology. It really is lovely to see everyone. I am sitting here in Florence so it is very nice to hear Irish voices and engage on Irish topics. The questions are all really important. I do not want to be misunderstood when I say that the EU needs to focus on substantive issues. What I worry about is that whenever there are conferences on the future of Europe, intergovernmental conferences or conventions of one kind or another, those who know a lot about the EU are privileged and EU nerds tend to talk to each other about the niceties of this or that article or this or that method of election and, frankly, people do not care. People want the EU to succeed in terms of substantive issues.

In respect of what Deputy Calleary said about eastern and central Europe, it is profoundly damaging to the EU that there are two countries that are authoritarian, do not adhere to the rule of law and have become a cancer within the EU. The fact that both Warsaw and Budapest are vetoing the recovery fund as we speak is a Rubicon. They must change their minds or pay a high price. If in a pandemic, Budapest and Warsaw, which have received billions of euro from the taxpayers of Europe, engage in this kind of political posturing, they do not deserve to be EU member states. I would put it that strongly.

We should not be surprised that 20% do not know about the Conference on the Future of Europe because why would the public know about it, particularly given the pandemic? In addition, the conference has not happened and we do not know what the structure is. It does not surprise me at all. If the Irish electorate is to be informed of this, there may or may not be a referendum and I will leave that aside, and knowledge and information matter, we must find hooks. We should ask why it is important to talk about the future of Europe rather than this grandiose abstract thing called the future of Europe. It is also important for us to be cognisant of the fact that the future of Europe will also be worked out on how the Biden presidency works and how relations between Europe, the US and China work, etc. Am I hopeful of a successful outcome? There must be sufficient ambition to do something substantial but not so ambitious as to be in the realm of fantasy. It is that judgment between serious things but not trying to remake Europe because one will not remake Europe. One will change Europe but not remake it. Transformational power is not available.

Regarding the role of national parliaments, it is hugely important, which is why this committee is so important so that nodes of knowledge and interest in these issues are within all national parliaments. It is not enough for governments; it must also involve parliaments. I stress two roles. One is the committee's role as a participant in this conference through representation and co-operation across COSAC but also the educational role it has - the fact that it is talking about and interrogating it. One of the issues with which this conference will deal will be public health. Citizens across Europe now understand public health matters as do co-ordination and European capacity. Europe will deliver the vaccine so that is also very important.

Regarding how to harness the digital, one of the upsides of Covid, of which there are very few, is the proactive nature and capacity of our public institutions, including our parliaments, to leverage the digital. That can certainly be accentuated and deepened but, of course, and I say this having held stakeholder forums for one of my research projects with Warsaw, Budapest and The Hague in the past month, we also need to return to a face-to-face world because of the nature of deliberation online. Digital is important. We have learned it will never go away and will play a larger role in our lives but I also look forward to a time when I am not Zooming all day.