John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)

This discussion is somewhat redundant given the rejection of the constitution by France and the Netherlands. Already there are some voices saying we must continue with the ratification process, that these countries cannot be allowed to stall progress, including Angela Merkel, who has been elected as the Chancellor of Germany. It is a pity people are arguing this point because these are the people who rejected the idea of a Europe-wide referendum, a proposition I put to the Convention on the Future of Europe. This would have operated with a double majority — a majority of citizens and a majority of states. It makes sense. It made no sense that a member state could have a veto on such an important issue. However, my proposal was voted down and those same people who voted down that proposal argue that a referendum is a crude instrument and one cannot give such an important decision to people.

Democracy should be at the heart of the European project. That is the reason a Europe-wide referendum is a good proposal. I ask the Minister to put that proposal back on the table. If the Minister says the French will have to vote again and if we are continuing with the ratification process, that means the French and the Dutch will have to vote again. If one thinks the French riots are bad now, they are a picnic compared with what will be experienced in France if this issue is put to them again. We Irish like to think of ourselves as rebels but, in fact, we are pretty docile and passive compared with the French. I ask the Minister to take that issue on board. We ought to have a Europe-wide referendum.

A constitution for Europe is not only necessary but desirable but this constitution, if we did have a Europe-wide referendum, would be rejected. We must go back to the drawing board. It is possible to get a constitution the people of Europe will support. I say the people because there is a democratic deficit. There is a European elite that is pushing a constitution which people do not want. The Minister will have to accept that. Let us go back.

There is no question there are good things in this constitution, including the opening up of European Council meetings. I welcome the citizens' initiative, the first draft of which I put forward. I welcome also a charter for fundamental rights but I refer to the Government's White Paper in which it is clear we have different interpretations of such a charter. Recently, I had a debate with John Palmer who said this charter of fundamental rights is fully justiciable. It is important because there is no doubt this constitution also enshrines neo-liberal values, as has been alluded to already. We need a charter for fundamental rights which is fully justiciable. There are right-wing elements in this Government that boast about the fact they and the British have stopped the charter for fundamental rights in its tracks. This document suggests that the Government has managed to stop the so-called horizontal clauses. Point 15 of Chapter 4 of the White Paper states: "An important distinction is made between rights and principles. Principles are not directly justiciable". I wish that they were. Examples of articles containing principles are those relating to the rights of the elderly the integration of persons with disabilities and environmental protection. The Government is stating that it has managed to stop progress in these areas, which I do not welcome.

I agree with Deputy Ó Caoláin that considerable spin is going on here. I do not welcome that the White Paper states: "Member States shall undertake progressively to improve their military capabilities. But no specific requirements as to the level of military spending are involved, nor is there any binding requirement to increase it." The Government is trying to inform us not to bother our little heads about it, as it is not that important. I know it is important, as I was a member of the defence working group.

I want to comment on what the previous speaker mentioned. Environmental protection is very important. It is an area in which the EU has made advances, which is why I support rigorous EU environmental legislation. However, at World Trade Organisation negotiations environmental protection is often seen as a protectionist measure. Environmental protection must be integrated into the World Trade Organisation talks if we are to have a sustainable future.

The type of Europe I want is a social, sustainable, democratic and peaceful Europe.

See this speech in context