Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 18 November 2014

Joint Oireachtas Committee on European Union Affairs

Accountability Report 2013: European Movement Ireland

3:00 pm

Photo of Joe O'ReillyJoe O'Reilly (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome our guests and thank them for the report, which is extraordinarily positive. Chapter 3 is particularly relevant in an Irish context. It should be highlighted and emphasised that the average Irish ministerial attendance at 2013 meetings of the Council of the European Union was 99%. Ireland is joint first with Greece and Lithuania in this regard. Also, 39 out of ten Council configurations had an Irish ministerial attendance rate of 100%. The Taoiseach attended all of the meetings of the European Council which took place in 2013. That is an extraordinary result, with which we should be very happy and proud of. As a Government Deputy, I am very happy that our commitment in this regard has been delivered.

I agree with Deputy Durkan's comments in regard to our system being preferable to that of other countries representatives of which are confined by parliamentary or committee decisions. While they should take cognisance of those decisions they should not be conclusively bound by them. The performance of our MEPs is very heartening. The average attendance of our MEPs, who represent all political groupings, at plenary sessions of the European Parliament during 2013 was 93%, and during 2013 they asked 384 parliamentary questions. While that is a slight decrease in the number of questions asked in 2012 it is still a substantive number. There was also a 143% increase in the number of speeches made by Irish MEPs. The cynical interpretation might be that an election was imminent. Despite this and cynicism aside, performance levels, measured against any objective criteria, are high. That is good.

Oireachtas input is also good. The less than stellar attendance at this committee can be reflected in the fact that responsibility for European scrutiny has transferred to the sectoral committees. This means that where issues arising out of directives or European legislation impact on one's constituency or a particular sector of the economy one is more likely to go to the sectoral committee to have it addressed. This tends to have a more abstract quality now, albeit very relevant.

Like Deputy Durkan I will have to leave the meeting soon. While I hope to return later I will also read the transcript of today's committee proceedings in terms of witnesses' responses. I was taken by the comment that we do not have enough popular engagement around the country in terms of public meetings. A mutual friend of Councillor Richmond and I, who is a particular opponent of this process and who achieves much in his sphere of influence, regularly holds meetings about Europe, including meetings to commemorate European Day etc. I am interested in hearing how the witnesses think we could popularise Europe, including through the use of the town hall meeting concept and so on. Getting people at local level engaged is a challenge. I suspect it is a challenge in every European country. That is the only critique of the report which I believe is worth looking at.

Otherwise, I see the report as great news. I prefer a situation where we have a PR system in Ireland and a multi-seat constituency, albeit with its own difficulties. Senator Reilly and I compete - it is friendly competition - in one of those situations. However, that is preferable to a list system where some great mandarins and some centralist bureaucracy in Dublin decide who will represent the constituencies. It is much better that it is organic and generic, that it comes up from the people and that the people decide, albeit with the limitations of our system. Deputy Durkan is right. We have the best democratic system in Europe.

I am delighted with the performance of our Ministers and our Taoiseach. The performances of our MEPs across the board - of all parties - are stellar also and we should be proud of them. I am also happy with the make-up of our committee given the limitation I pointed out and given the other limitations. I do take the criticism as valid and I am interested in direction, assistance and advice on how we might address the issue of town hall involvement and public meetings discussing European issues.