Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)

It is important to remember the origins of the reform treaty. The process began some years ago with the Convention on the Future of Europe. Deputies Roche, Bruton and Gormley participated and the proceedings lasted a long time. The convention took on board the views of many people before it formulated its proposal for the EU constitution, which ultimately evolved into the reform treaty. Like Deputy Kenny, I welcome the reform treaty's ratification by Hungary.

It is good that Ireland is to have a referendum. There will certainly be considerable focus on us. The former Latvian President, Dr. Vaira Vike-Freiberga, was speaking at the National Forum on Europe last week and mentioned how Latvia has adopted a very pragmatic approach. The treaty is not having a negative impact in that country and is regarded as necessary to making the institutions of the European Union more efficient.

One downside of the welcome referendum in Ireland is that there will be a very strong "No" campaign by people who always begin by advocating openness and truthfulness and talking about deals behind closed doors but then proceed to circulate misinformation left, right and centre. I find it slightly amusing that they always use the preamble that Ireland has not done too badly out of Europe but that the forthcoming treaty is the one that will finish it off. The same rhetoric is trotted out each time. It is stated we lost our sovereignty in 1973, and again after the Maastricht and Nice treaties, and that we are now to lose it again. It is quite amazing how they air these views, often unchallenged by sections of the media. As well as analysing what the proponents of the treaty stand for, it is important to analyse what those against it stand for and their various supporting arguments over recent years.

I agree with most commentators that the reform treaty document is very bulky. It is divided into several parts. The Preamble and Article 1 deal with the changes to the Treaty on European Union and Article 2 deals with changes to the treaty establishing the European Community. These are accompanied by final provisions, protocols and the declarations. I was going to bring the document to the Chamber but it was almost too heavy to carry. Had I known Deputy Durkan was coming, I would have got him to carry it down. He is a strong man from the west of Ireland and has picked potatoes and all that goes with it.

It is very important that the document be user-friendly. The Government is considering addressing this. We have covered many of the provisions of the reform treaty, including the concept of the President of the European Council and the troika of countries operating together for the various defined periods. Continuity is certainly needed. The difficulty with the European Presidency is that each country that has held it has had its own agenda. Very often they made changes and veered in a certain direction. There will now be a little more continuity.

One area that will probably cause difficulty is the establishment of a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Declaration 13 deals with this issue. It is important to read it into the record because the opponents of the treaty will try to dress it up in acrid colours:

The Conference underlines that the provisions in the Treaty on European Union covering the Common Foreign and Security Policy, including the creation of the office of High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the establishment of an External Action Service, do not affect the responsibilities of the Member States, as they currently exist, for the formulation and conduct of their foreign policy nor of their national representation in third countries and international organisations.

The Conference also recalls that the provisions governing the Common Security and Defence Policy do not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of the Member States.

It stresses that the EU and its Member States will remain bound by the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and, in particular, by the primary responsibility of the Security Council and of its Members for the maintenance of international peace and security.

This sets out the position on the issue very clearly. There is also a role for national parliaments in this regard. The scrutiny period recommended in the proposed constitution was for six weeks, but the reform treaty has extended this to eight weeks, which is welcome. If the national parliament votes on an issue, a quarter of all members is needed for freedom, security and justice issues and a third is needed for other issues to refer the issue back to the EU, which must give a reasoned opinion if it decides that it will not change its policy. For the first time ever, there is a correct procedure laid out on how a country may opt out of the EU if it so wishes. Double majority voting will also make things clearer.

I am sure that members of the Government are familiar with the recent EU barometer, which stated that 57% of the population distrusts the Government, whereas only 23% distrusts the Union, which is an interesting statistic. Support for the EU is at a high at 74% and there is recognition by 87% that we have benefitted from Europe in the past. However, there is a concern among six out of ten people that their voice is not heard in Europe. That is not strictly true, but the perception is out there. It is based on the gap between Europe and the public, and is something we must work on. That is why the Forum on Europe was set up, as well as the European affairs committee. The forum is doing a very extensive tour of the country to bring the message of what the reform treaty is about in a non-partisan manner. I encourage people to try to visit that forum.

The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, alluded this week to the tendency of everyone in this country to blame Brussels. The national Parliament blames Brussels, while local authorities blame the Government. We are always blaming somebody, but the buck stops somewhere. We can always say "No".

Deputy Kenny spoke about Kosovo. By the time the Dáil returns in the new year, I feel this issue will have evolved. There will almost certainly be a declaration of independence. The north-western section of Kosovo, which is dominated by Serbians, may look to secede to Serbia. We must be very conscious of the desire of Serbia not to see an independent Kosovo, notwithstanding the fact that the situation cannot stay as it is. There is the potential——

See this speech in context