Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Richmond asked when a conference chair will be appointed. There are two different positions. Both the Parliament and Council have published positions so it is not just a question of a chair being appointed; it is a question of reconciling the two positions. I am sure that can be done. An agreement document will have to be produced. I have not seen considerable work being done on this. I believe this is because of the pandemic and Brexit, and also because of the multi-annual financial framework and the next-generation EU negotiations. The Presidency is significant. When I was first appointed as Minister of State, I expected this to be a major item on the General Affairs Council agenda. It has not really been. It is on the agenda for the informal video conference next week. I believe it will be on the agenda of the main meeting of the General Affairs Council in December.

With regard to the conference chair, there is nonsense being circulated about Europe being for the elites but we certainly cannot have some grey-haired - I mean no disrespect in that I am going grey myself - elite person who has no relevance to every citizen. Whoever takes on the position will have to be really relevant to all citizens. We have to be very careful about who we pick. It will have to be a listener and someone who works with people, not somebody who is going to tell us what to do or what to think. It genuinely has to be from the ground up.

Most of my colleagues are aware that I have described the Citizens' Assemblies here as a genuine means not only of promoting debate among citizens but of promoting informed debate. We were sceptical of the Citizens' Assembly in opposition but one thing I liked was that its meetings were informed by experts who gave unbiased analysis of the issues. Discussions took place based on that expert input. This is something I envisage. There is obviously value in discussing and debating matters but this value is much enhanced if the process is informed by knowledge and unbiased advice given by experts. This is something I would like to see when it gets to citizens. If it does not get to citizens, it is not going to be very successful.

Policy priorities have to relate to issues of the greatest concern to our citizens. With respect, I am aware that everyone in committees such as this is sceptical of the Spitzenkandidatprocess. We do not believe something like that should be the focus of the conference. That would have little relevance to our citizens. The European Union necessarily has a complicated structure and I am not sure how it could be structured without an element of complication. The European Union is multilingual and, as John Hume said, it is the result of the greatest peace process in world history. The European Parliament clearly exists as an important expression of the democratic will of the citizens. At the same time, the European Council retains power as the representative of the governments elected by the citizens. Therefore, there are strong arguments to justify the complication of the European Union. It is not a federal system. Maybe direct election of a President is going too close to that. I suspect many citizens are not in favour of it. The bottom line, however, is that the system works. Generally speaking, it has produced excellent candidates. Nobody has had any difficulties with any of the individuals in position.

Issues raised at the conference should be issues of the greatest concern. People tune out when it comes to institutional issues, mechanisms and ways of dealing with procedures. At a time like this, I do not believe our citizens want to see us debating the ins and outs of processes and procedures; they want to see real action on real issues. An example of this was when there was a proposal before the Citizens' Assembly to reduce the minimum age of those entitled to vote in an Irish presidential election from 35 to 18. Most people around the table asked where it came out of and why it was relevant. It was rejected. It was not one of the recommendations made by the Citizens' Assembly at the time. It struck me as something that was just not that relevant whereas genuine societal change did occur as a result of the Citizens' Assembly dealing with many relevant issues. The assembly laid the groundwork for this change because people were interested and wanted to engage. They want real actions on sustainability and climate that will make a genuine difference. This is starting. There will be major challenges associated with how we implement all our commitments, including in respect of innovation in our economy, the digital economy, privacy issues and economic growth that includes all citizens. The ultimate outcome of the conference will be a report of the European Council, and then it will be up to the European Union to implement the recommendations.

The issue of own resources is a sensitive topic for many citizens, but certainly ours. With regard to the multi-annual financial framework, there is a very limited own resource in terms of a plastics levy but we have no legally binding commitments to go beyond that.

With regard to accession, negotiations have gone well with the Republic of North Macedonia and Albania but there are difficulties. I believe these can be resolved. The difficulties involving Bulgaria and the Republic of North Macedonia can be dealt with bilaterally and should not hold up discussions. We need to ensure that countries will be compliant and take on and embed the values of the European Union. Why should such states not be members of the European Union?

Brexit negotiations are what they are. People know what the main issues are. They cover market access, governance and fisheries. We constantly express our full support for the negotiating team. It seems to us that it is in everybody's best interest that a deal be done. It would be disastrous for Britain if it left without a deal. It would also be highly damaging for Ireland and the rest of Europe. We hope member states' interests are to the fore. If they are, Britain will reach an agreement.

I thank Deputy Ó Murchú for his comments. It is very easy to talk about a main tier involving the big countries that is going to take over Europe and run our lives. Deputy Howlin referred to a similar argument being made by the Prime Minister of a small country that is taking on the Presidency of the European Union in January. It is not a case of big countries versus small countries. Every member state, both big and small, has been very supportive of Ireland in regard to Brexit. Every time their representatives open their mouths on Brexit, the two priorities are the Good Friday Agreement and the Single Market. The solidarity has been tremendous.

Deputy Richmond said there are two speeds in that we are in the eurozone but not a full participant in respect of defence. Regarding various policy issues that arise daily or monthly, various groups come together where there is a common interest. Spain and Italy come together on issues of funding. Generally speaking, there is a group including countries that support further cohesion funding. There is the famous Frugal Four, or formerly the Frugal Five. This involves a mix of countries, not all of them big. Germany and France are not part of Frugal Four. Ireland would come together with a group of like-minded nations on fishing. This is a really important issue for Ireland. It is a much more important issue for those states by the Irish Sea or North Sea than for those along the Mediterranean. It is just a different issue.

We come together as issues arise but things are worked out in that complicated way in the European Council and European Parliament which, generally speaking, works out very successfully. The notion that it is a big country versus a small country is absolutely not the case and is not my experience of how things operate.