Dáil debates

Wednesday, 24 October 2007

European Council Meetings: Statements

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Aengus Ó SnodaighAengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

Tá sé go hiontach go bhfuil deis againn arís an seachtain seo déileáil leis an cheist rí-thábhachtach seo. Measaim go ndéanfaimid athrú suntasach ar todhchaí na hÉireann má ghlacfaimid le conradh Lisbon. Is iad na hathruithe atá i gceist sa chonradh na hathruithe céanna a luadh nuair a rabhamar ag déileáil leis an conradh bunreachtúil — nó bunreacht na hEorpa — cúpla bliain ó shin. Bhíomar ag ullmhú chun reafrainn a eagrú maidir leis an bunreacht sin, ach ní raibh gá don reafrainn de bharr toradh na vótaí a tharla sa bhFrainc agus san Ísiltír. Measaim go dtabharfadh muintir na hÉireann vóta "Níl" sa reafrainn toisc go dtuigeann said cé chomh bunúsach is a mbeadh an athrú a ndéanfaí ar an ngaol idir an tír seo agus tíortha eile na hEoraip. Tuigeann siad freisin an méid d'ár rathúnas a bheadh caillte de thairbhe an chonradh. Is é seo ceann de na conarthaí deireanacha a rachfaidh chun reafrainn. Ina dhiadh seo, beidh Airí nó Taoisigh na tíre seo in ann an cinneadh a dhéanamh.

As much as possible, I want to have open and honest debate. I do not want head-bangers of any type, particularly those on the "Yes" side, including Commissioner Charlie McCreevy, interfering in this referendum. The EU Commissioner from Ireland, who was chosen by the Taoiseach supposedly to represent the State in a role akin to a civil servant, had the gall to state recently that if the State voted "No" to the treaty it would be turfed out or excluded. How does the Taoiseach view this intervention and scaremongering by Commissioner McCreevy, a former senior Cabinet Minister who is in a powerful and highly-paid position in the EU? I am thankful he stated he will not seek another term of office considering his attitudes and the policies he pursues while in the position.

The EU Commission is supposed to be the servant of the people of the European Union. This type of intervention in the run up to a referendum here is not justified. The Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs should repudiate it. The decision is for voters alone. As I did during the run-up to the constitutional treaty, I urge the Minister and the Taoiseach to give a commitment that the answer of the Irish electorate will be respected. It is obvious the decision of the French and Dutch electorates on the constitutional treaty was not respected. Neither was the result of the first referendum on the Nice treaty here.

The matter of referenda is interesting. Part of the propaganda about the Lisbon treaty is that it has substantially changed from the constitutional treaty of a number of years ago, so much so that everybody should be happy with it. On that basis it will be put to the country in a referendum. However, other EU countries such as Spain and Luxembourg state is has not substantially changed and will not be put to a referendum as a decision on it has already been taken. I note the Taoiseach stated ratification is a matter for each member state and this is true. However, it would be a pity to lose the opportunity to find out what the public in all EU countries has to say on such a major fundamental change in the European Union institutions and on the future direction of the European Union.

While the Council meeting was held in Lisbon, more than 200,000 people demonstrated on the streets. Perhaps it was not as many as 200,000. I have read a number of reports on it. This was democracy in action and people demanding the right to have a say on the treaty. They seek a social Europe and employment with rights and they oppose the liberal agenda contained within the treaty. It is interesting that Irish newspapers and national daily newspapers in many other member states did not cover the major demonstrations. This shows where many national newspapers stand. This can be addressed by those of us urging a "No" vote for the treaty.

Given that it is too late, I will not appeal as I did last week to the Minister to represent Ireland's views and demand and secure changes to the treaty. He agreed a document which will substantially undermine Irish sovereignty, our independence in foreign policy and the powers of this institution. It was a bad day's work. Once again, the erosion of the neutrality of this State continued apace. We signed up to further militarisation of the European Union albeit not with the same size of leap as in previous treaties. However, it is still a move in the same direction.

We did not manage to ensure the treaty would allow member states to promote public services and oppose privatisation. We did not ensure member states were given the freedom to develop their economies in the interest of their people. We are still slaves to the European Union's liberal agenda and the worldwide globalisation agenda. We had an opportunity to push the protection of the interests of small nations.

Nobody can deny Sinn Féin has modified its position on Europe since the time of the EEC because we are realists and it does exist. There have been tremendous benefits from our relationship with the European institutions, at different stages in terms of workers' rights, women's rights and, on occasions, environmental issues were to the fore. We have moved obviously and logically from a position of outright opposition to one of constructive engagement. There are not many in Europe at this stage who would ask that the EU be dismantled, but that it be refocused in the interests of its member states rather than in the interests of the major countries, such as France, Germany, Britain, Italy and Spain of late.

Our MEPs have engaged positively with the issues which can improve the lives of people on this island and we have advocated a positive role for the EU in overcoming the legacy of partition and the promotion of Irish reunification. There are people who will say that Sinn Féin is part of the naysayers and that what we have said in the past has not come to fruition in regard to the EU and Ireland's participation in it. Yes, we are a much more prosperous country than in 1972, we are a totally different economy than at that time but some of what was expected has come to fruition. One has only to look at the debacle of our fishing industry and how it has been destroyed time and again by the failures of the Government to protect it but also by interference from the EU. The same could be true in other areas. Not all our economic benefits are tied to our membership of the EU, many have to do with the different Government policies in regard to welcoming and encouraging multinationals into Ireland. Those benefits may be short lived — hopefully not — where in the event of a downturn they are the first to leave. We have suffered the consequences of major multinationals pulling out of Ireland. Instead of building up our industries and our economy based on our own ability, our own workforce and financial bases we have depended on outside help which is fickle and we might suffer the consequences of depending too much on multinationals in this globalised world.

In our debates over the years we have reached out to other parties and groups which have been interested in defending Ireland's national interests but others have remained awe-struck by the might of Brussels and have been continually eager to satisfy the demands from the EU and, in particular, the EU Commission but also those who seek to build an EU empire — their words, not mine. There are people in this House, in particular, the two largest parties and also the Labour Party, who appear eager to satisfy that diktat at every whim. They have supported without criticism every treaty proposed, every concession of power to the EU and every dilution of sovereignty demanded. They have even justified every move for the militarisation of the EU. It will be interesting to see how one of the parties in Government will square that with its members given what it said up to the last election.

These parties have accepted every step to undermine Ireland's capacity to determine its own fate in terms of our public services and they have defended recent attacks on workers' rights. There is an agenda that says we need to open our economy to all outside influences, which regrettably means a race to the bottom. Those parties are unable to recognise that the EU has lost its drive for social progress. It is interesting that the Lisbon treaty and the Lisbon strategy were put together in Lisbon. One key element of the Lisbon strategy was to try to tackle poverty and social deprivation but in that aspect it has failed because Ireland is more unequal than when the strategy was put together. The latest Lisbon treaty is going much the same way.

Tiocfaimid ar ais go dtí an ábhar seo. Mar a dúirt mé, ba chóir don Taoiseach a rá le Charlie McCreevy a srón a choimeád amach as ceisteanna na hÉireann mura bhfuil sé á dhéanamh mar saoránach, seachas coimisinéir mar a bhí sé á dhéanamh an lá faoi dheireadh.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.