Dáil debates

Wednesday, 24 October 2007

European Council Meetings: Statements

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Billy TimminsBilly Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)

I assume the draft declaration of 5 October is the same as the final one to which the Taoiseach will be signing up. Having listened to his comments in this debate, I would be of the view that the Government was very reluctant to take the step it took in this regard. It is important to put the issue to bed once and for all today.

I said last week that it took member states more than four years to agree on the evidence warrant. Several countries, particularly Germany, sought several opt-out clauses. On foot of the need for changes to the arrest warrant system in the wake of the events of 11 September 2001, the countries concerned came together very quickly and the average extradition time was decreased from several months to 40 plus days.

I imagine from looking at the declaration that Ireland may opt for all measures and seldom, if ever, opt out. If so, will the Minister for Foreign Affairs state during questions to the Minister (at the end of the debate) whether we may opt in before the three-year review period?

Deputy Kenny stated that every headbanger in the European Union will be present for the referendum campaign in Ireland. We have many of them at home, many of whom believe they are quite justified in what they are saying or doing. However, it is very important to learn from the first referendum on the Nice Treaty and recognise the reality that exists rather than the one we want. It is not enough to state the Union is good for Ireland and that one should vote for the treaty as a consequence. We must outline the content of the treaty and state how it will benefit the electorate. Ultimately, self-interest is very motivating. While one must be aware of the common good, it is easier to appeal to self-interest. We have to ensure many of the side issues such as the Common Agricultural Policy which was mentioned by the Taoiseach are seen as important. The agricultural community was assured a couple of years ago that the CAP budget would be maintained at current levels until 2013. There have been mutterings recently that this approach may be reviewed in the near future. It is important for us to deal with such side issues. We need to tie down certain EU trade issues, for example. We should deal with them in a way that leaves no room for ambiguity.

While we are trying to inform the public about the treaty, many will be concentrating on what it is not about. We have to be aware of this. I understand the treaty will have to be ratified by the end of 2008. As Ireland is the only country that will hold a referendum on it, there is a huge responsibility on us to ensure all the issues are debated. It is hoped the treaty will come into effect on 1 January 2009, before the European Parliament elections later that year.

The treaty provides for the reform of the institutions that is needed as a result of the increase in numbers. I refer to the changes which will be made to the European Commission, for example. Representation on the Commission will rotate equally between all member states. Just two thirds of member states will have a Commissioner at any given time. One of the first effects of the new treaty on the State will be that it will not have a Commissioner all the time, as it has at present. In that context, it is important to point out that the Commissioner from any given member state is independent of his or her home state. In the overall scheme we will have a greater percentage of Commissionerships than we have at present. It is important for us to point that out. As matters stand, some countries have two Commissioners but Ireland has just one. In the overall scheme we will actually have a greater share of the cake, even if we will not have a Commissioner for one third of the time.

The proposed position of President of the European Council will be an important one. Difficulties have arisen when each Presidency has set its own short-term agenda. I understand the Presidency of the Council will be shared between teams of three member states for periods of 18 months. That system will give rise to greater continuity of agenda. The proposed new position of High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy also has an important role. We are always asking the Minister for Foreign Affairs to use his influence at EU level to send various messages to countries such as Sudan and Burma. It is good that the European Union will have a recognised figure who will be able to contact governments in countries such as China and India that have some power in trouble spots.

I would like to talk about the changes being made to the system of voting at Council level. I welcome the new system, under which a qualified majority will be reached when 55% of member states, representing 65% of the population of the Union, reach agreement on any given issue. Many find it hard to understand the current weighting system, but the new system is very clear. If the Council is deciding on a proposal that did not come from the Commission, 72% of member states will have to agree on it before a qualified majority is reached. In such circumstances, the population requirement will stay the same. While there will officially continue to be 750 Members of the European Parliament, that represents a nice play on figures to disguise the fact that the President of the European Parliament will bring the membership of the Parliament to 751.

Protocol 2, included in the treaty at the behest of the Dutch Government, provides that national parliaments can submit their reasoned opinions within eight weeks of legislative proposals being made by the Commission. The House should examine the possibility of availing of this worthwhile mechanism. Perhaps someone can advise me whether it has been used previously. I am pleased that domestic parliaments will be able to make an input into the decisions of the European Union. EU policy areas are classified under three headings in the treaty. Exclusive competence policy areas include areas such as competition rules and the Internal Market. Shared competence policy areas include the area of freedom, security and justice. Supporting competence policy areas include areas such as tourism and education.

While I do not want to conclude on a bad note, I would like to mention the provision in the treaty whereby member states will be able to legally and officially terminate their membership of the European Union. Many have wondered what member states should do if they really want to get out of the Union. There will now be a mechanism in place to allow them to do this. As the leader of my party, Deputy Kenny, said, Fine Gael is prepared, as it has been, to participate fully in informing the people about the treaty, how it will benefit them and how it will add to the common good. If Ireland was not a member of the European Union, it would not be long before we would have to try to reach a number of bilateral agreements.

I welcome this debate. It is important that the Government should liaise with Deputies on all sides of the House on the issue.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.