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

I thank Mr. Laják No one else is indicating they wish to engage, so I will conclude. I return to a central point I raised with Mr. Laják at the start on the risks associated with a temporary solution. I appreciate what he said. I remain of the view, however, that it would quickly evolve into a solution that would work for a time and that it would possibly create more problems over a longer period in the form of a greater risk of disillusionment with and rejection of the EU if states were to be offered partial membership, particularly depending on how long the latter was to last. The scenario, as I see it and which Deputy Howlin alluded to, although it may be difficult for Mr. Laják to comment, is that there is a problem, as he mentioned, within the existing EU on what the principles, ideals and enunciated public statements are and what the reality is with enlargement. That is coming home to roost now. The appalling war in Ukraine has brought that to a head. From the EU perspective, we need to quickly realise that if we do not move to a position on enlargement that brings in countries in which there are four or five generations of people who have seen their country effectively rebuffed or not embraced regularly, we run the risk of alienating generations of young people across the Balkans and parts of Europe from the EU and from wanting to be involved in it. That is such an appalling vista in the context of the future of Europe. It is time for the EU to recognise that if it does not do something in this area, and relatively quickly, we are facing what could become, over the coming decades, a threat to stability as great as the war in Ukraine. That is why we must look again at everything, including the Copenhagen criteria, to see what we can do to bring about a sea change in how we tackle enlargement.