Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank our two speakers. This was a very useful meeting in terms of clarity. Mr. Schlegelmilch mentioned that nothing in the agreement would preclude services. He gave the example of water coming back into public usage. He mentioned that was provided there was no discrimination. How do we define discrimination? A private company or consortium's discrimination may not be my discrimination.

Mr. Brown mentioned questions of interpretation. It is not just academics because lawyers and politicians tend to do a lot of that questioning too. Fine aspirations were laid out this morning by Mr. Brown and Mr. Schlegelmilch but, when lawyers get their hands on things, they can be different. They can be framed differently. Today's view of the ECJ is strong and the clarification is welcome, but it can be changed tomorrow by a different ruling in a different context. What guarantees protect the current view and statements of the ECJ, which are important in protecting national democracies?

What may change in future depending on the make-up of a future ECJ and on legal texts changing throughout the Union? What exactly will be the relationship between the investment court and the ECJ? Will there ever be a consequence whereby the investment court could supersede the ECJ?