Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)

Will the Minister outline the implications for his Department in terms of writing or rewriting the White Paper? I presume the draft in existence before the French and Dutch referenda must be examined in the context of the extended period of engagement and dialogue. While it may not necessarily be in the remit of a conventional or traditional White Paper, some of the mistaken myths that Deputy Finian McGrath put on the record of the House should be confronted. One cannot build a federal super-state with a 1.27% budget or if that so-called super-state is not allowed to borrow money. One cannot claim it will take on all of the manifestations of a super-state or refer to page 18 of the constitution for Europe and state that the law of the Union will override the law of the member state. That was the position when we joined the EEC in 1973, although many people may not have fully realised it. It makes sense that if one agrees to play a game of international football, everybody must agree to the rules in the first instance and then empower a referee to enforce them. That is what is behind the judgment in the Luxembourg decision, as the Minister is aware.

I could ask many questions. What are the implications, if any, for the publication of the White Paper in terms of addressing some of the concerns that exist? Will the next meeting of the Council of Foreign Affairs Ministers be the forum where discussion will take place on the interactive measures, this proactive engagement, or must the Commission bring forward a set of proposals? What is the next move as a consequence of creating this space for reflection?

See this speech in context