Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I agree with the Taoiseach that Chancellor Schüssel did an excellent job in the performance of his duties as President.

At last week's EU Summit, once again it was perfectly clear that as a community we have rather a long way to go towards meeting the ambitious objectives set out in the Lisbon Agenda — to make the most comprehensive and dynamic knowledge-driven economy in the world by 2010. That is practically unachievable from my perspective of what is happening. Certainly, there has been some progress. As we saw again last week, however, even with the relaunch of the Lisbon Agenda by the Commission last year, focusing on growth and jobs, it is perfectly obvious that the reform necessary to see our Union reach these targets is simply not fast enough. Consequently the innovation gap between Europe and the US continues to grow and the fact that China, for instance, builds more airports, roads and bridges in five years than the EU and the US combined build in 20, should spur us on to try to reach the Lisbon objectives and secure the future of the Union in the longer term.

The March EU Summit took place under something of a cloud. Last week's Summit coincided with the popular preoccupation with the World Cup. The business of the Summit certainly was not earth shattering. The year 2008 was set as the target for making changes to the rule book, allowing further expansion. Decisions were made to televise ministerial meetings, to honour commitments made to those countries that want to join the EU. A plan was backed for donors to release emergency aid to the Palestinians, bypassing the Hamas-led government. Energy, security and diversification moved up the EU agenda.

There were a few happy faces, the Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson being one of them. He abandoned the usually cool Scandinavian tradition to let out a few guttural screams when Sweden beat Paraguay one nil. The Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa also looked happy, not because of football, but because of his economy. Booming Slovenia has been quick to meet the Maastricht criteria and will be the first of the ten new members to join the eurozone. Chancellor Merkel, my fellow EPP member, looked happy at the prospect of taking over the EU Presidency in 2007. An ardent supporter of the EU constitution, she intends to do everything she can to accelerate movement on this somewhat fatigued issue.

The period of reflection on the EU constitution is to be extended. We certainly need more time, but the constitution could be stranded unless we move with some alacrity to sell it to our citizens as a powerful, democratic, transparent entity capable of effecting real results and making real change. Here at home, we must re-ignite the public debate with a view to reactivating the ratification process. It is time to evangelise, answer, explain, persuade and communicate by every means possible the why of Europe to the peoples it serves.

The people of Europe feel they do not own their Union and it is no wonder. They see it as a bureaucracy-laden, inefficient policy club. Our challenge and duty is to present the EU to the public as a genuinely reforming, effective working group. We must make the workings of the EU more democratic and transparent. We must start talking to people about the bread and butter European issues so that they can at last start to feel like the Union is their own and that they are the ones in charge.

That said, it was domestic politics, not EU politics, that saw the constitution fail in France and the Netherlands. President Chirac, in particular, was stymied on Europe owing to mass protests at unpopular employment legislation designed to tackle rigidities in the market. There is also what has been called "economic nationalism" overshadowing the Union's stated ambition under the Lisbon Agenda to be more competitive in the globalised world. At the March summit, President Chirac and Chancellor Merkel disagreed publicly about our economic future, with the latter criticising French attempts to limit foreign investment.

The tradition of individual rights is one of the great realisations of European civilisation, but there is a danger for Europe and the EU when we start to ring-fence the rights and demands of the individual state without thinking about how they connect with the needs and good of the community. We have seen this economic introspection in recent months and it should not be allowed to continue. We cannot be open for business with the rest of the world and be closed to each other.

I am glad that energy security and diversity moved up the EU agenda. Energy has become increasingly scarce and increasingly geopolitical. The conclusions of the summit called for an energy policy for Europe that reviews oil and gas stocks and develops internal electricity and gas markets. At the time, I suggested that Ireland join a single EU energy market. The new year spat between Russia and Ukraine, had it continued, would undoubtedly have affected Ireland with rising costs and competitiveness issues.

A common approach to energy is both desirable and necessary. Europe's energy imports are 50% of the total and rising. Energy is also becoming more expensive. Despite moves to efficiency, the price is increasing by 1% or 2% per annum. At a time when 80% of our energy use is based on oil, coal or gas, hydrocarbon reserves are decreasing. At the current rate of growth, greenhouse gases could be 5% higher in 2012 than they are today. That is alarming when we consider that our Kyoto target is an 8% reduction in these gases.

Our energy infrastructure needs serious improvement. Up to €1 trillion is needed over the next 20 years to meet expected energy demand. The spectre of global warming is fast reaching the level where it will be not just a question of how we live our lives but the extent to which life can be lived. This is especially the case in those areas of the world most exposed to its effects. Ironically, it is those very same countries that have contributed least to the problem of climate change.

While I welcome the common approach to energy, we must be clear that different countries will have different needs. Our island status gives us energy needs and demands vastly different from other members states. Our individual requirements, such as access and so forth, must be taken into account. There is an economic and moral imperative for Ireland to develop a serious workable policy, not a token one, towards renewable energy.

The green agenda has gone mainstream and Fine Gael is convinced of the national need and duty to develop modern, exciting alternatives in renewable energy sources. It is appalling that, while we are the second richest country in the world, we belch out greenhouse gases that will have risen by 130% in 2012. That is six times the EU average. This phenomenal increase could have been minimised if the Government had looked to the future and pursued policies that promote the use of biofuels. With the collapse of the Irish sugar market, the Government has not pursued with the necessary vision and resolve an energy agenda based on biofuel use. That agenda should be pursued in a strong way, ensuring that we make the most of our biofuel opportunities at home and live up to our international responsibilities in the European Union and beyond. Businesses are aware that, over the next ten years, 90% of gas imported will come from one gas field in the Russian Arctic, which will also supply China and the US. There is an urgency in developing a second interconnector and getting involved with a European grid to ensure security of energy supply.

The European People's Party, of which Fine Gael is a member, met alongside the summit to discuss some emerging issues of human rights and development. Taking note of the decision adopted by the EU Foreign Affairs Ministers on 12 June, the EPP strongly condemned the constant violation of human rights in Cuba, deploring the fact that the number of political prisoners in that country is increasing since the change in EU policy towards Cuba in 2005. The EPP urged Cuba to release unconditionally all political prisoners and asked the communist regime to respect human rights and human dignity. It urged the Cuban authorities to give Internet access to dissidents prevented from having contact with the outside world. In particular, the EPP urged the Cuban Government to grant an official permit to Oswaldo Paya to allow him to visit the EU institutions, as has been repeatedly requested. The EPP believes that the Damas de Blanco, the Ladies in White, should be allowed to come to Europe to receive the Sakharov Prize which they were awarded in 2005.

I was especially supportive of conclusions reaffirming the need for the Union to improve its responsiveness to emergencies, crises, and disasters, both within and without. A report by the former French Foreign Minister and member of the European Commission, Michel Barnier, made especially engaging reading. Entitled For a European Civil Protection Force: Europe Aid, Monsieur Barnier's report contains 12 workable proposals to improve Europe's crisis response capability. He stresses that these are personal proposals with a four-year implementation timeframe. However, in terms of the possible natural disasters, complex humanitarian crises, pandemics or conflicts Monsieur Barnier's report covers, there is obvious merit and potential in what he has produced.

The accession of Turkey continues to be problematic. The Turkish negotiations are built on sand in the absence of a resolution on Cypriot question, as Deputy Allen and Deputy Durkan have said in the House repeatedly. Turkey, an aspirant member, persists in failing to recognise Cyprus which is a full member state of the EU. The hardening of approaches was seen clearly in Prime Minister Erdogan's assertion that he would rather accept a standstill in negotiations than make concessions to Cyprus. He stated that, so long as the Turkish Cypriots remain isolated, they will not open their ports and airports. He also stated that, if the EU negotiations halt, so be it. President Chirac took an equally tough tone in response. With Austrian Chancellor Schüssel suggesting that "another option apart from full membership should be considered for Turkey", obviously Prime Minister Erdogan's uncompromising views must be seen in the context of the elections facing him in 18 months' time and the rising Islamist element within his country.

With just a year to go to a general election in this country, I urge the Taoiseach to make every effort possible to address the deeper European issues of communication, persuasion, belonging and public engagement. Unless we tackle the deficiencies in the functioning of the Union, we risk institutional paralysis, but unless we tackle the public perception of Europe as remote and distant, we risk further alienation from the people our Union is supposed to serve. Only by tackling those issues will we be able to create a Europe of real opportunity where all our people can realise and share the huge potential of our Continent.

I wish to raise a matter I raised with the Taoiseach previously. All other European leaders have given representation to the various parties in respect of the EU Committee of the Regions. The purpose of the institution is to bring together elected representatives of local and regional authorities from all 25 member states. Following the previous local elections in this country, there was a commitment to maintain political and geographical equilibrium in the selection of members, but unfortunately the Taoiseach appointed — although fortunately for him — five Fianna Fáil full members and a further five Fianna Fáil alternative members to that committee, which amounts to a denial of the democratic results of the 2004 elections. I have written to the Taoiseach on this matter and he might revert to what every other leader is doing and ensure there is equilibrium of representation in respect of the EU Committee of the Regions in so far as the people gave their verdict in the local elections.

See this speech in context