Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I add my voice in expressing sympathy to the family of Rory Mason. Everyone was very taken with his father's tribute this morning. In fairness, he involved himself in a fight that was not his and he paid the ultimate price.

We discussed some of these points in the context of the Conference on the Future of Europe. That was definitely a process that improved as it went. It started with many flaws. As with politics in general, some people are still on the periphery and well removed from politics at a European level. Work needs to be done on this. As I said, that is the case across the board.

In fairness, the Minister of State has answered some of the questions I was going to ask. Regarding citizens' involvement, there was probably a need for a greater level of conversation on what Europe as a whole and the individual institutions were doing and to get into the ins and outs of issues. The issue of qualified majority voting versus unanimity seemed to come up in the sense that people saw everything very simply as Hungary being the problem and that we could not have it holding things up. Even where there is not a Union-level competence, such as in health, it was still able to organise the buying of vaccines as a bloc. That showed that the opt-in system has been working. The Minister of State said several times that the problem with democracy is that it can take a long time to come up with deals but that is the reality. We have all seen the alternative, and it is not a place we want to go. This needs to be considered. It is understandable that the focus of citizens has sometimes gone in this direction, based on almost every issue being dealt with as if it were a silo.

Regarding the issue of energy security, the Minister of State is obviously involved in conversations at a higher level than any of us. I accept what he said regarding the EU having begun actions in this regard, including the solidarity tax, etc., but it is necessary to go further. Where does the Minister of State believe these endeavours can go in respect of dealing with the entire energy market? I accept there are difficulties in bringing about change and there can be unintended consequences. We have all seen the idea put into action where Europe can act as a collective in buying as a bloc. Everyone sees the sense in doing that. On another aspect now in the public domain in the context of security issues, I refer to our protection of critical infrastructure and the conversations under way in this regard in Europe. We are in the age of hybrid warfare. The concept of security and what that looks like has changed.

I also wish to hear the Minister of State's view concerning the age-old question of our relationship with our nearest neighbour. The British Government now has its own economic issues. The language it is using has improved regarding possible deals and perhaps we will be able to get movement on the protocol. The protocol Bill is still in play, however, and we need to deal with that issue in and of itself. A conversation needs to be had with unionism from the perspective of the protocol being the only show in town and of streamlining what needs to be done in this regard. Succour must not be provided, though, to those at the extreme end who may be looking for something that is not a possibility. Will we get a decent level of movement not only on the protocol but also on the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 and the amnesty legislation? I think that is enough questions.