Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

Tá mé an-bhuíoch as ucht deis a bheith agam labhairt ar na ráitis maidir leis an gComhairle Eorpach. Ar dtús báire by mhaith liom a rá nár aontaigh mé leis an dTaoiseach nuair a dúirt sé gur fháiltigh sé go raibh an Freasúra chun obair le chéile chun an conradh seo a glacadh. Mar cuid den Freasúra, níl muidne i bhfábhar an conradh seo, ní bheidh muid ag obair leis an Rialtas agus táimid chun cur ina gcoinne go tréan. An tseachtain seo caite ag an gComhairle Eorpach san bPortaingéal, shínigh cinnirí ón Aontas Eorpach an chonradh Lisbóin. Níl aon pioc difriúil idir é seo agus an bhunreacht a dhiúltaigh pobail na Fraince agus na hÍsiltíre dhá bliain ó shin. Ba chóir go mbeimid ag meabhrú arís agus arís eile ar an "gcon-trick" siúd laistigh den Chomhairle Eorpach agus an gComisiún atá a tharraingt ar phobal na hÉireann agus ar phobal an Aontais Eorpaigh.

Is trua gur in Éirinn amháin a mbeidh reifreann agus is léiriú é sin ar an eagla atá ag cinnirí na dtíortha eile san Aontas Eorpach roimh an dteist daonlathach. Ba chóir go mbeadh sé seo curtha os comhair an phobail, gur féidir le pobail na tíortha eile ráiteas eigin a dhéanamh — go nglacfaidh siad leis, nó nach nglacfaidh.

The Lisbon treaty is not in Ireland's interests. It involves a massive transfer of power to the EU. It significantly accelerates the militarisation of the EU and advances an economic agenda based on the race to the bottom for wages and workers' rights. No amount of bluster from the Government benches will disguise the enormity of what is at stake when the people cast their votes next year in the referendum.

Proponents of the Lisbon treaty are already relying on tired old tactics, scaremongering on how other EU states will react if we reject this undemocratic treaty. They have failed so far to engage in serious debate. The public squabbling between the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Mary Hanafin, and the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dick Roche, this week about water charges shows how little they understand about the consequences of the decisions taken at EU level. It shows how little they understand about the consequences of previous treaties, to which they encouraged, or berated, as in the case of the Nice treaty, the public to sign up in the past. It is not good enough for the Government to be yes-men and women and to allow other EU leaders to dictate what happens in this country. That is what is happening with this treaty.

I notice the Taoiseach has invited the German Chancellor and the President of the European Commission to give him a dig-out on the referendum. I should like the Taoiseach to give a message to the Presidents, Prime Ministers and Chancellors who signed up to this treaty to the effect that if they want to be involved in referendums, they should organise one in their individual jurisdictions. If not, they should let the Irish people get on with their debate and decide for themselves as a sovereign people. The need for Ireland to have its place at the EU table is obvious. Many benefits have come about from membership of the EU. Sinn Féin has supported EU measures that are in Ireland's interests, such as agriculture, the environment and equality. We welcome, as we did in the past, EU support for the peace process and for the development of infrastructure on this island.

However, everything has not been good and the relationship has not always benefited the Irish people. The debate during the past week illustrates this to some extent, with the obligation on schools to allocate scarce resources to the payment of water bills, and this is not good. The sacking of Irish Ferries workers was not good, the inability of the Government to deal with the problem of Brazilian beef not good, neither was the shutting down of the Irish sugar beet industry. The privatisation of Telecom Éireann and Aer Lingus was not good. The proposal to liberalise the postal service is not good, the engagement of Irish troops in EU battle groups is not good and the proposed economic partnership agreements with developing countries are not good. Fortunately, African leaders told their EU counterparts as much, during the recent EU-Africa summit. The financial incentives to EU companies to relocate to low-wage low-cost economies outside the Common Market is not good, and is definitely of no use to the Irish economy for the future.

Tá an liathróid in ár gcúirt san gcás seo agus má ligeann muidne don chonradh Lisbóin rith, beidh níos mó de na fadhbanna atá léirithe agam ag teacht amach anseo. Tá na hathruithe is substaintiúla do na hinstitiúidí agus na bealaíreachtúla agus bealaí gnó den Aontas Eorpach laistigh de chonradh Lisbóin. Tá an aistriú is mó do cumhachtaí na baill stáit ins an gComhairle Eorpach go dtí seo ann chomh maith, agus by chóir go mbeimid ag cur ina choinne dá réir.

Despite claims of making the EU more democratic and more efficient, the Lisbon treaty will move political power further away from ordinary citizens, offering only cosmetic increases in powers to parliaments in member states and to the European Parliament. One of the most dramatic consequences will be that the EU will become a single legal entity for the first time. This means that it will be able to act in the international arena in the same way as a state. It will be entitled to a seat at the United Nations, to incorporate existing international treaties and statutes into its law, to negotiate treaties and trade agreements directly with other states, to form a diplomatic corps, appoint a public prosecutor and, through the new posts of president of the EU and high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, to speak on the international stage on behalf of all 27 member states.

As an Irish republican who supports neutrality and Ireland's long history of peacekeeping on the international stage, I fundamentally oppose such a move. The State should not be dragged into the resource wars of the 21st century. I do not see how a single entity, a high representative of foreign affairs and security policy, can represent imperialistic militaristic interests and the interests of a neutral State such as ours. It cannot and will not.

Ní féidir an dá thrá a fhreastal agus ar a laghad, léirigh Fine Gael go bhfuil siadsan sásta seasamh suas agus a léiriú go bhfuil siad ag fáil réidh leis an neodracht. Níl an Rialtas seo sásta é sin a rá lom amach, agus ba chóir go mbeadh sé de misneach acu é sin a rá agus a thabhairt le fios don phobal nuair a mbíonn daoine ag caitheamh a gcuid vótaí.

As I said, the Lisbon treaty involves a substantial transfer of powers from member states to the Union, but it is worth noting that not a single power has been returned to member states. To make matters worse, the composition of the European Commission will change, removing member states' automatic entitlement to a seat at the Commission table and changing the procedures that will see their voting powers halved. The Lisbon treaty gives 105 new competencies to the European Union and a further 58 areas which will move from consensus decision-making at the European Council to majority voting. Among the areas where the EU will have control are immigration, Structural Funds, judicial and police co-operation, economic policy, guidelines for eurozone members and initiatives of the new Foreign Minister. Major concerns are raised about the scale and range of this proposed transfer of power.

In order to make a comparison, let us examine previous treaties. The Treaty of Nice included a loss of veto in 46 areas, in the Amsterdam treaty it was 24 areas, the Maastricht treaty had 30 areas and the Single European Act had 12 areas. The original Treaty of Rome, the EU's foundation treaty, only contained a transfer in 38 areas. Possibly more significant and troubling than the large-scale transfer of powers is the inclusion of eight passerelle clauses in the Lisbon treaty. These clauses represent one of the most undemocratic elements of the treaty and will allow for decision making in the council to be altered from unanimity to qualified majority voting in matters such as common foreign and security policy and judicial co-operation in criminal matters without recourse to parliaments and referenda.

The referendum next year could be our last chance to vote on the direction of the European Union. This is extremely worrying considering the European Commission does not hide its ambition to control matters relating to corporation tax and many other issues. Powers contained in both the Nice and Lisbon treaties could assist it to do so and the weakening of our influence as a result of this treaty would make it even more difficult for any future Government to resist it, if it wished to do so.

So far, the Government has failed miserably in any attempt to ensure Ireland's interests are best represented in Europe, as can be seen by the debacle of schools' water charges. Perhaps President Barroso would like to campaign on the issues mentioned when he comes here to tell us we should vote in favour of the treaty.

While parliaments in member states are to be given new powers, these are extremely limited and insignificant in comparison with the powers transferred to the European Council and Commission. The European Parliament will not have the power to initiate legislation nor to amend it. Instead what is proposed is what is deceptively called co-decision. This is a cumbersome and lengthy procedure of bargaining between the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council and is unlikely to have any serious impact.

The first way for parliaments and member states to intervene is through the yellow card procedure. In this case, one third of parliaments in member states must reject the proposal to get the Commission to reconsider its position. However, the Commission does not have to take this advice. It can take whatever decision it wants.

The second procedure is even more complicated and will require a majority of parliaments in the member states to object to a legislative proposal on the grounds that it contravenes the principle of subsidiarity. This will only succeed if it also has the backing of the European Parliament and the European Council.

In reality, these are cosmetic gestures which will have little or no impact on the development of the European Union and they have the potential to be a bureaucratic mess. All of this copperfastens the dominance of the largest states and removes our ability to democratically reject laws which are not in our interest.

Side by side with this in the treaty is the outworking of the EU's military ambition. The desire of the EU leaders to be global players acting in concert with NATO is clearly set out in the treaty. The treaty also requires member states to progressively improve military capabilities. This will have a financial cost at a time when our public services are crying out for investment. Do we really want our tax revenue to be compulsorily spent in such a manner?

The erosion of neutrality and militarisation of foreign and defence policies is clear for all to see through the use of Shannon Airport by US troops on their way to occupy Iraq as well as through the ill-conceived French-inspired EU mission to prop up the regime of one of its clients in a former French colony. The Government position is clear. It did not even get an article in the treaty explicitly recognising the rights of neutral states. Creidim go bhfuil an bhuairt céanna ar thromlach an phobail faoi na nithe atá luaite agam. Creidim chomh maith nach bhfuil fios na gcúrsaí ag na páirtithe a chreideann gur féidir leo an conradh seo a bhrú ar an ghnáth pobal.

Irish beef farmers know only too well why their sector is under pressure. The people in the west and south know it was the privatisation of Aer Lingus which caused the withdrawal of Shannon services. Irish Ferry workers know why they lost their jobs. This time the debate will not be about the past. It will be about the impact of the EU on people's livelihoods, their mortgages and the safety of their children in an increasingly militarised world. The people of this country need to do what is in the interest of the country. I believe this will mean the rejection of the Lisbon treaty.

See this speech in context