Dr. Catherine Day:

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for inviting me to address them today on the topic of alliance building. This has always been an important part of how the EU works and it takes on a particular relevance in the context of Brexit. I commend the Chairman and the committee on their very timely initiative in considering this important topic.

We all know the EU will be very different after Brexit. I will mention a few areas because they are the background to the focus on alliance building. Inevitably, the EU will be more continental in outlook after the UK leaves. Among other things, it will mean that the civil law tradition, which is the basis of most continental law making, will be more dominant than when the UK, with its common law tradition, played a big role.

France and Germany will obviously play a bigger role in shaping the future direction of the EU. They will no longer have to contend with the questioning and reluctant attitude of the UK. In thinking about today, it struck me that the EU was already working before the UK and Ireland joined, but Ireland has never known the EU without the UK. It will be quite a change for us. We often saw issues in a similar way to the UK and we will certainly miss the role the UK played as a big member state in being a buffer between France and Germany and in terms of organising a different debate.

More than ever, in the future the euro will be the core of the EU system and further consolidation and deepening can certainly be expected.

Without the opposition of the UK, and this may be one of the positive sides of UK departure, the EU will develop stronger social policies. This will certainly be needed to address the challenge of populism and the feeling among parts of the EU population that they somehow have missed out on the benefits of globalisation and that they have been left behind by open trade. The EU needs to be able to show that it cares about all of its citizens and that stronger economic policies will be accompanied by social policies that deliver.

I have a couple of worries about how the EU will be in the future. I am concerned that the EU 27 could be more protectionist than at present and perhaps a little less open to the outside world. In my view, the current push to curb the competition rules and develop European champions is not a healthy development.

I also have a worry that what is called in Brussels the "better regulation" agenda process, which has improved EU policymaking through evidence-based, impact-assessed policy proposals resulting from wide stakeholder consultation will be given less importance without the constant pressure of the UK to combat red tape. These are merely a few of the changes that we can expect to see in the future.

For me, that means that the post-Brexit climate will require a different approach to Irish membership in the future. We have all seen during the Brexit negotiations just how deeply integrated we are as a Union and how much we benefit from things that we take for granted but that only exist because of our EU membership. Perhaps, most of all, we have seen the need to keep our citizens involved and help them feel that EU belongs to them and is not something imposed from the outside.

In my brief opening remarks, there are four areas on which I will focus: the need for much deeper understanding of the wishes and problems of other member states so that Ireland can build alliances with like-minded countries but also so that we understand the opinions and the positions of those who will differ from us; the enhanced need to anticipate what proposals are likely to come from the institutions and other member states and to seek to influence them at an early stage; the need for earlier work with others on proposals we want or do not want to see agreed; and finally, the need for continuous information to our citizens on how and why the EU is changing and Ireland's place and role within that future Union.

First, on the topic of the deeper understanding of the views of others, there is a need for a systematic approach. The EU is now so big through successive enlargements that it is impossible to keep up to speed with thinking in every member state unless one has an active information gathering and exchange system in place. While new technologies have made it much easier for us to keep in touch with people around the world directly, do we know whether they represent a considered national or sectoral position or are they are merely transmitting their own personal views to us? With the ease of contact, there are pluses and minuses.

In Ireland, we attach importance to personal contacts, but so do our EU counterparts. Building relations over time, based on a deeper understanding of their point of view, is crucial to building good alliances. In my time as Secretary General, I noticed a strong tendency to form groups of so-called "like-minded" member states. There are long established such groups, for example, the Francophonieof the French-speaking countries, the organisation of the Benelux countries, as well as newer ones, such as the Visegrad countries in eastern Europe and the so-called "New Hansa League", but it is important that we not only speak to those who are like-minded but also reach out to those who hold different views from us. The EU is all about finding workable compromises that allow it to move forward in the interest of all its members and reaching out to those with different views is just as crucial a part of the engagement as is talking to those who would agree with us.

We are all conscious of the huge solidarity that Ireland has had from the other EU countries and the EU institutions throughout the Brexit process. In my view, this has been achieved by the mobilisation of politicians and diplomats with our other partners with a clear message from Ireland, with a clear investment in time and travelling to meet partners, who, in turn, have been willing to take a serious interest in the case that we put. We will need to keep up that kind of effort in future. We have to reach out beyond the English-speaking world to our continental partners and that means travelling to them and keeping in touch on a regular basis, obviously, not only when we have a problem. It will mean a requirement for more staff increases, not only in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade but across all Departments that are dealing with EU matters. It will also require a bigger travel budget so that politicians and officials can regularly visit different countries as part of building deeper alliances. Thinking about this, it came to me that, in fact, what we need is something close to the mobilisation that Ireland engages in every time we hold the Presidency of the EU. Then we really gear up and we have similar messages across all messengers. Ireland has a good track record of successful Presidencies.

The good news is that all of the smaller member states are coming to the same conclusion. They all see what we see - the need to work together permanently to ensure that the voice of smaller member states is heard. This is certainly, but not only, a task for Government. The Oireachtas can do useful work with other national parliaments and social partners and civil society, all of which have a role to play in building long-term alliances.

I want to mention two organisations that I know of which, I believe, can play an incredibly useful role in supporting this process. I am on the board of both of them because I regard that membership as a pro bonopart of my continuation of public service. I refer to European Movement Ireland, EMI, and the Institute for International and European Affairs, IIEA. Both organisations are well known to members of this committee and with their connections in other member states and in their different roles, both can play a significant role in helping to inform Ireland about changing EU priorities and in helping to formulate wise national responses. The point I would like to raise here is that both of those organisations have to spend a lot of time and resources on fundraising every year. They are grateful for the public funding they get but it would be important to find ways to support them that allows them to devote themselves to the challenges of the tasks that lie ahead instead of merely being engaged in a constant quest for project funding. I hope that may be something about which the committee could have a think.

Having spent most of my working in the European Commission, I want to say that alliance building should not only be confined to other member states but that I see a similar need to invest in the European institutions. We have all seen the role that the Commission has played over the past two years in standing shoulder to shoulder with Ireland through the Brexit negotiations and in general the Commission sees itself, and should be seen, as a true friend of the smaller member states. My generation of Irish EU staff is retiring, however, and our numbers are falling. We need to encourage young people to think about a career in the European institutions and maybe also to take more active measures to support them when they make that choice. Without in any way interfering with the independence of Irish EU staff, they can be an important source of information and guidance on what is happening across the institutions.

My second point is about anticipating what will be coming down the track from Brussels and elsewhere. There will be less legislation in the future because the EU has a well-developed body of legislation in many areas and what is needed now is to keep it relevant and up to date, not necessarily to add to it. However, all the time there will be new challenges where co-ordinated action at EU level will be more effective than unco-ordinated national action.

In response to this change of need, the Commission has been developing an overall set of policy proposals for each of its five year mandates. This year, 2019, is going to be an absolutely crucial year in that respect. Ireland is following closely and feeding into the meeting that the Heads of State and Government will have in Romania on 9 May to talk about the future direction of the EU 27. Just after the European Parliament elections, most likely in June, the new President of the European Commission will be nominated. The European Parliament will then vote in July on confirmation of that President on the basis of what he or she sets out as programme priorities. The parliament will certainly seek through its systems and committees to influence that programme of work. When the parliament holds hearings with the nominated Commissioners, it will also be seeking to feed into the future work programme of the Commission for the next five years. Similarly, in the European Council, Ministers will also be wanting to feed into that programme. This is really a crucial year in terms of influencing and deciding the future direction of EU policy. Of course, that policy will not be set in stone. The next five years will bring new crises, coupled with the need to adapt and so forth but the basic backbone of the EU agenda for the next five years will be set before the end of this year. I really hope that civil servants and stakeholders are getting ready to feed in their ideas and to react to those that are advocated by their counterparts in other member states.

In terms of influencing future proposals, the Commission nowadays spends a lot of time consulting with and involving stakeholders long before it makes proposals. Unfortunately, many stakeholders, including member states at times, do not get involved early enough in the process and then have to scramble at the last minute to try to develop their positions and have them taken into account. We in Ireland would benefit from early discussion of upcoming proposals not just across Government but also across stakeholders. This would give a lot of opportunities to feed a really mature and well developed Irish perspective into the work being done with opposite numbers in other member states to develop like-minded positions. If Government and stakeholders can work together, at least on the key proposals, that will have the effect of ensuring a wider public understanding of how the EU works and how Ireland can have a role in shaping and influencing it.

This leads me to a very important point about the need for continuous citizen involvement. I am well placed to know just how badly the EU has suffered from bad press as a remote and soulless technocracy. In particular, the British Eurosceptic press has had a lot to do with that. It has used ridicule to try to undermine what is very solid and praiseworthy progress in a lot areas. Here in Ireland we have seen a strong desire, expressed through our many referenda campaigns and in other ways, among people to understand and be part of what is happening in the EU. We have also seen, in the context of Brexit, what can happen when people feel alienated from that process. While we may be enjoying a kind of Brexit dividend at the moment in terms of Irish support for the EU, we all know that it is very hard to maintain the intensity of interest and that level of focus in more normal times. Therefore, we need to think about how we can have a step change in how information circulates on the EU and on creating a greater sense of civil involvement. It is possible to make a complex and technical organisation like the EU accessible to citizens if we take the time and invest the necessary resources. We have examples like the Citizens' Assembly, the all-island civic dialogue on Brexit and the Government's future of Europe citizen's dialogue national engagement process which show what can be done. What we need is some kind of permanent programme of citizen involvement, not just on issues but on an ongoing basis. I have already mentioned European Movement Ireland and the Institute of International and European Affairs, IIEA, both of which have an important role to play. More frequent debates in the Oireachtas on EU policies would also be helpful and there are examples in other member states that are worth examining. This committee might like to consider whether there could be more regular reporting on the floor of the Dáil on significant EU meetings and issues as they develop. We need to find ways to stimulate a real debate in the media and to move away from the kind of polarisation and politicisation that has too often been how EU differences of opinion are portrayed. The first step would be to agree that we need a deeper and more inclusive debate and then I am sure there would be a lot of good ideas about how to make it happen. I do not think there is necessarily a need to develop a new body to do it but rather to use the existing structures to inject a deeper EU dimension into many of the ongoing processes already in place.

We all know that the EU post-Brexit is going to be different. The issue is how to prepare to get the best out of the next stage of our own membership of the EU and alliance building is clearly going to be a very important component of that. There are member states with which we have a lot of common and it will be easy to team up with them but there are also those who have very different views. We have a natural advantage because we are not in any one geographic or political grouping so we can move easily between different groups, depending on our interests. I have already explained why we need to have a concept of alliance building that includes the domestic arena and not just building alliances with other countries and institutions. The most important alliance of all has to be with our own citizens because they need to feel that they are involved and that their voice is heard. We have seen through the different referendum campaigns that we need a more sustained level of communication and information to maintain the high level of support for the EU in this country.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to appear today. I wish members success in their deliberations and look forward to seeing the results of their labour. If I can be of any help now or in the future, the committee should not hesitate to involve me.