Bernard Allen (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)

The Minister of State should not raise matters of history. We are looking to the future. Ireland is one of eight EU member states that have not met the targets they were set for the implementation of Internal Market directives and faces 51 separate legal cases arising from its failure to adopt legislation in this important area. Over the second half of 2005, the Government's performance in the implementation of Internal Market directives deteriorated and Ireland was specifically called upon to take steps to address this unacceptable situation.

Irish people are losing out because of the Government's lackadaisical approach to EU directives. Some directives are long overdue for transposition, including directives pertaining to health and safety requirements — an issue which only yesterday brought people onto the streets of Dublin — engine pollution and emissions, as well as directives which could drive down the price of gas and electricity for consumers. At a time when energy prices are increasing, these directives should be transposed quickly and effectively. The delays must be addressed and the problem acknowledged.

We should also recognise that the European constitution will deliver benefits for Ireland and other EU member states. Enhancing the role of national parliaments in the European decision making process makes sense and the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights as a key European treaty is welcome. The Minister of State should clarify the current position and indicate whether he is confident that a way through the current impasse can be found.

Returning to the question of enlargement, Romania and Bulgaria are the next states to join the EU. It is clear these countries, as with all applicant countries, must meet the criteria for entry. These criteria, commonly referred to as the Copenhagen criteria, stress that applicant countries must meet three key requirements before membership can be extended. Applicant countries must demonstrate that they have a functioning market economy, that the rule of democracy and respect for human rights and the rights of minorities is upheld and that they can meet the legislative standards and requirements put on all members of the EU. These three criteria are vitally important and must be applied equally and fairly in all cases. Reports suggest that the European Commissioner for Enlargement, Mr. Olli Rehn, may delay until autumn his announcement regarding the timeframe for accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the EU. I acknowledge the considerable work that has been done by both countries to prepare for membership but the Commissioner's concerns regarding the strength of organised crime and reform of the judiciary in Bulgaria will have to be addressed.

Last week, members of the Joint Committee on European Affairs had the pleasure of meeting the ambassador from Bulgaria, Mrs. Benisheva, who outlined her view of the situation. Some members raised concerns about aspects of Mrs. Benisheva's presentation and questioned her on issues such as the rights of minorities and the independence of the judiciary. I inquired about the regulations in place to govern the operations of banks and financial institutions in the context of the allegations of money laundering which had been made last year. I also raised concerns about a number of outdated nuclear installations which need to be safely decommissioned but I did not receive a clear response on that from Mrs. Benisheva. As the EU may be forced to inherit the enormous cost of decommissioning the installations, I would like to have that matter followed up because, although my concerns may be found to be groundless, they were not addressed by the ambassador. However, I compliment her on the clarity she brought to other aspects of her contribution and hope we can say "yes" to Bulgaria and Romania at the earliest possible date.

I missed the Romanian ambassador's presentation, as I was discussing related matters in Macedonia when she attended the Joint Committee on European Affairs. The attitude in Macedonia is that, if the country holds an open and democratic election in July and addresses its ethnic divisions in a democratic manner, its path to membership is all but assured. I would welcome a country such as Macedonia if it passes the litmus test for entry. It is a small and historic nation which has been torn by ethnic tensions over the years and has suffered a great deal from the economic embargo recently imposed by Greece but its people are full of hope and ambition. They have crossed hurdles such as an earthquake in 1963 which levelled the capital, Skopje. I hope the Bulgaria-Romania expansion and Macedonia's application will be considered.

The western Balkans must be addressed. The question is whether one should balance the problems that enlargement will have for the structural absorption factors against peace and stability in the Balkans. Once Croatia can deal with the issues raised and has dealt with the war criminal, it would be in our long-term interest to deal with that. We must lead and bring our people with us and convince them that an expanded, strong European Union is in their interests.

As I said about Bulgaria and Romania, membership brings responsibilities to the European Union and to the citizens of all member states. We are focused on the steps being taken in prospective member states such as Bulgaria and Romania in their moves to meet the criteria for entry but are not as critical of our own responsibilities. For example, the Irish Government has allowed Ireland to be the only EU member state in which human trafficking is not a crime. We saw "Prime Time" on Monday night and one question that occurred to me was how young people from a non-EU state, targets for the sex trade and victims of human trafficking, got through the security and passport controls at the boundaries of the State. I would like to see the status and definition of human trafficking as a criminal act addressed in our legislation. Failing to categorise it as a crime is an abdication of our responsibilities to women here, in all member states and outside the EU. While there are proposals for all sorts of legislation, this is one of the most basic. It is not Deputy Treacy's responsibility. However, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, who seems to have an answer to everything, should have an answer to this most basic principle.

A decision must be made on the level of free movement granted by individual member states to the citizens of Bulgaria and Romania upon accession. I stated earlier, and recent reports from the European Commission confirm, that the move to allow citizens of the ten accession States freedom to work and live in Ireland brought with it considerable benefits, for us and for them. That was outlined in the good document on migration that we discussed earlier, albeit over a limited period. I remain disappointed, however, that other EU member states still retain work restrictions for people from these states and I acknowledge that this situation will have to be considered by Ireland when it reaches its decision later this year. Can the Minister clarify when the decision will be taken whether to allow citizens of Romania and Bulgaria the freedom to work in Ireland and what that decision is likely to be? One of the concepts we must impress on some of the stronger states in the EU is that they have responsibilities to abide by the fundamental principles of the EU: they are, the right to work and the freedom to move from state to state. We have adhered to our responsibilities and I hope we can continue to do so in the context of the accession of Romania and Bulgaria. I would like the Minister to address that in more detail in his response.

See this speech in context