Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)

I have a question from a member of the public on scrutiny of decision making. It states that wherever decisions are made, the process of arriving at them should be fully transparent and the decisions should be adequately explained to the public. The President of the Commission and various national figures in a number of member states have referred to the fact the EU is frequently undersold. National ministers often attribute the blame for unpopular EU decisions to the EU institutions, but they claim the credit for popular decisions for themselves. This member of the public states that the European Council should adopt a code of practice, to be followed by member state governments, in conveying and commenting on EU decisions.

We are discussing the purpose of European Union scrutiny in the operation of this Act and the Minister of State should take on board the recommendations that are made. Is there any mechanism to show that a relevant Minister takes on board any recommendations that come through from the scrutiny process? Can we have a review of the pre-decision making scrutiny? What about scrutiny of Council and Commission decisions after they are made? The Act makes provision for a Minister to make a report to each House of the Oireachtas not less than twice yearly for all measures within his or her jurisdiction. That report is not debated on the floor of this House.

See this speech in context