John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)

I have followed the debate over the course of the afternoon and having heard the contributions of some Members I am concerned. I had not planned to speak in the debate. I contacted the staff of the Committee on European Affairs and was told that they were first contacted about this Bill yesterday and again this morning. They were asked whether it would be appropriate to refer it to that committee. Obviously it should be, given that it is part and parcel of the committee's business.

I should have been consulted about this Bill before it was brought to the House. Given that it pertains to the functions of parliamentarians this is not the proper way to deal with it. Obviously I must be balanced in my comments because I am chairman of the Committee on European Affairs. It is not a divisive committee; we do things by consensus and it has never had a vote. I do not believe that will be the case if this Bill is referred to the committee. We can anticipate votes and a divisive debate.

I accept that the State is vulnerable following the Supreme Court decisions. However, concern has been expressed by Members with regard to their role as parliamentarians and, ultimately, the circumvention of the Oireachtas as a result of this legislation. That is very serious. Deputy Quinn spoke about eurosceptics, the European constitution, the erosion of trust in the European Union and the removal of decision making power from the member states and from the Oireachtas. He made a fair point and a genuine concern has been registered in that regard.

It is clear that the debate on this Bill will not conclude today. That is probably a good thing. I hope to speak to the Minister with a view to addressing some of the concerns voiced by Members. When the role of Members is potentially affected so significantly, a different procedure from the one being followed today might be more appropriate.

Last week the committee dealt with the scrutiny of EU directives. IBEC came to testify before the committee and was firmly of the opinion that many of the directives from Europe were not being scrutinised properly. There was no insight and investigation into the outcome or the effect they were having on Irish law, and the proper regulatory impact assessments were not being made. The decisions were not being taken appropriately. When one looks at this Bill and considers the concerns expressed in the Dáil today, and taking into consideration that the Committee on European Affairs is not divisive, I do not believe that this is the appropriate place to deal with this legislation.

I am glad the debate on the Bill will not conclude today. The Minister made a mistake in not consulting the staff of the committee and me, as chairman, more rigorously before bringing the Bill before the House. I am trying to temper my comments and to be constructive. However, I take seriously the concern Members have raised regarding the erosion of their role as parliamentarians.

See this speech in context