Deirdre Clune (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak in this debate as in two months the country will vote on this issue. It is very important for us and our future and I am certainly supporting the treaty and will be campaigning positively in support of it. I am very proud of Ireland's membership of the EU and the contribution we have made.

It is not all about how good the EU has been to us. Although it has helped us, we have played a very strong role in Europe. We have had very successful Presidencies and we have always played our part. We are playing our part this time as the eyes of Europe will be on us because we are the only country giving citizens the opportunity to vote on the treaty by referendum. That is good as I welcome discussion, which is important. Issues may be raised that are not relevant to the treaty and do not arise because of it, but it is very important that they are raised.

We had a public meeting in Cork last week where members of the public could hear Fine Gael's opinion on the question and raise questions, or just come along to inform themselves. A former Deputy in this House, Alan Dukes, spoke at the meeting, as did former MEP John Cushnahan, who is now a member of the National Forum on Europe. It was heartening to see the turnout that night and that people came with concerns and questions.

Some of the issues raised had nothing whatever to do with the treaty, but they were concerns nonetheless about Europe. A number of the matters classed by some people as scaremongering were raised, thrashed out and debated on the night. A part of an opening statement that night struck me, which indicated that the two world wars focused in Europe in the first half of the last century led to 67 million people losing their lives in Europe. That is a striking statistic because over the 51 years of European integration since then there has been no such widespread war in Europe. We have turned the corner as a group of countries and we are now contributing to peacemaking and facilitating others in developing democratic structures. That is a long way from recent history.

There were originally six states grouped together, which expanded to nine to accommodate Ireland, Denmark and the United Kingdom. This group expanded to 12, taking in Greece, Portugal and Spain. Those three countries had relatively large populations and were quite poor, so there was an opportunity for them to benefit from EU Cohesion Funds. They could also establish their fledgling democracies as they were coming from military rule.

There was a contrast when Austria, Finland and Sweden joined, bringing the number to 15. They were relatively independent states financially that had access to Europe. They saw it to be in their interest to join and wanted to contribute to a united Europe and be part of a single market. More importantly, they wanted to be part of a European bloc which was playing its role on the international stage.

There was an addition of ten eastern and central European states, bringing the number to 25. Cyprus and Malta have also been added. We had the Amsterdam and Maastricht treaties, the latter having developed the European monetary union. We had the Nice treaty and now we have the Lisbon reform treaty.

The reform treaty has been a long time in its formation as it has been under discussion for the past six years. Much detail has gone into it and it is simply about reforming the institutions of the EU to accommodate what is now 27 states and likely to grow. I hope the EU will expand.

We currently have 500 million people in the EU. We should not forget this treaty is replacing the constitution rejected by the Netherlands and France. We should respect any country's opinion and the vote of their people. It is nonetheless important to acknowledge that eight countries ratified the constitution and Spain, Luxembourg and Romania did so by referendum. At this time we are the only country voting on the reform treaty, so it is important we have a debate. Red herrings can be raised and addressed so we can debate the issues of concern to people.

There are many such concerns. One example is whether this is part of developing a European army. It is not, as Ireland is a neutral country and its stated position as a neutral country is recognised. This is so with other countries in the EU as well. We are contributing to forces in Chad and we have done so in Kosovo. Any mission which Ireland chooses to be involved in, be it peacekeeping or crisis intervention, is subject to the triple lock and must have the approval of the Government and the Oireachtas, as well as an EU mandate. We may hear that again and again but it is important to repeat it. We look at peacekeeping missions on a case by case basis, getting involved when and if we see fit.

Social issues, including abortion and stem cell research, have been mentioned and it has been argued this treaty is opening the doors so our ability to make law and decisions in this area will be taken from us. That is absolutely untrue. This treaty sets out areas in which the EU can have a say and social issues are not mentioned. Competition regulations, commercial policy, transport, agriculture and others are included but social and moral issues are not. As a result, it could be argued that the treaty affords us greater protection on social and moral issues.

We have heard much about agriculture but this treaty will not affect the Common Agricultural Policy. It could be argued that the European Parliament and Council of Agriculture Ministers will now have a greater say, so this could be a better position for Irish agriculture and Irish farmers.

See this speech in context