Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome iar-Thaoiseach, Mr. Ahern, to our committee. He has an important perspective to give us. I was privileged to serve together with him through his time both as a Member of the Dáil but also as a member of the Cabinet.

I wish to ask a few questions, the first focusing on the political. The European Union started off as a economic entity. It is an economic community. However, always, from the beginning, it was at least a coequal political entity. The various enlargements we had were always as much, if not more, a political process as an economic process - even the earlier ones, bringing in Spain and Portugal after their dictatorships and Greece after the colonels were in charge there. That brings me to my first question. Regarding the processes we now have for enlargement, we set out the Copenhagen criteria, which is an elaborate, complicated and difficult process to achieve. In many instances, it will take well over a decade and sometimes two decades to achieve. I am interested in Mr. Ahern's take on the implications that has in a changed geopolitical world, which he instanced, on countries that want to belong to the European family politically but, to use the vernacular, get cheesed off with the endless wait and are currently being wooed by other geopolitical forces.

Should the focus be on the political as much as economic compatibility and the imperative to bring people in and then normalise economics and politics to the European standard or is it a golden rule that the European standard has to be achieved first? North Macedonia has really stood on its head. It has changed the name of the country to suit one member state - Greece - and now Bulgaria has put in its démarche in terms of its ethnic minority. One can really dissuade people by the belief that it will never happen. I would welcome hearing Mr. Ahern's take on that.

My second question concerns the movement of citizens post accession. Deputy Haughey referenced the great fear at the time of the very significant enlargement of the EU over which Mr. Ahern presided that Polish carpenters or plumbers would arrive in their droves. I wish to God they had because we could do with a few more. I feel existing member states have not done enough to properly integrate people who have a right to move within the EU. You notice it even when out canvassing. People do not know what their rights are in terms of what elections they can vote in and so on. Should we work harder to develop the concept of European citizenship, which is touted in the treaties but not really made manifest in any real way?

My third question covers some ground already touched on by Mr. Ahern's statement. Regarding the ultimate goal of enlargement, is there a limit? Mr. Ahern said he had this debate at a previous European Council. Is there a limit to what constitutes the right of membership? It could be something like Australia and Israel competing in the Eurovision Song Contest. What is the limit? What are the conditions of membership?

Linked to that is the issue of autocracy and the rule of law. As we have learned, it is all very well and good that people can have pro-European governments that cherish the value systems of the EU but that can change at any time. We do not seem to have a way of expelling countries that have simply disavowed the values that are intrinsic to the EU. Is that something that should be considered or should we be like the US where, if the Trumpian world dominates, then the Trumpian world dominates and the values just diminish? My question does not apply only to the obvious candidates such as Orbán in Hungary. What happens if someone like Marine Le Pen is elected President of France?