Peter Power (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)

I pay tribute to the architects of this treaty, whose identities and backgrounds are instructive to consider. The former Taoiseach and leader of the Fine Gael Party, John Bruton, should be commended on the critical role he played during the early stages of the construction of this treaty. Tribute should also be paid to the outgoing Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, who took up the baton by bringing 27 countries together to agree on a common agenda for dealing more efficiently with issues. The Tánaiste and incoming Taoiseach, Deputy Cowen, and the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Roche, should also be complimented for the crucial roles they played in facilitating the negotiations that led to the treaty. If ever there was a compelling reason for Ireland to support the Lisbon treaty, it is that former, present and future Taoisigh have played key roles in formulating it. This demonstrates that Ireland's place is at the heart of Europe and the influence we have had on this treaty. Our role in drafting it has ensured our national interests will be protected. It could never have been envisaged 30 years ago that the role Ireland plays in Europe would be so disproportionate to our population and size.

Those who invite us to oppose the treaty would ask us to agree that the referendum will not be about Europe or the European project but about the merits or otherwise of the detailed text of the treaty. I fundamentally disagree. This is a referendum on the European Union and it presents Ireland with an opportunity to pass judgment on where we stand in Europe. This vote is as much a referendum on the European Union as it is about the arguments and complexities of qualified majority voting or the rotation of commissioners. The destiny and ambitions of this country are intricately tied to the European project so we cannot consider the treaty in isolation. Weighing up its pros and cons without having regard for the wider issues would be a fundamental misunderstanding of what is at stake.

This is an amending treaty so it must be considered in the context of the legislation that preceded it. That is a fundamental flaw in the positions being adopted by opponents of the treaty who claim that our national strategic interests will be protected by a "no" vote. In the same way that Ireland's interests are best served by ratifying the treaty, our worst interests would be served by opposing it. That should not be misinterpreted as scaremongering because it is a reality which the citizens of this country need to grasp before they cast their votes. The consequences of rejecting this treaty will amount to a complete abdication of everything we have contributed through the central role we play in Europe.

The facts that should be put before the people are simple. Perhaps more than any other country in Europe, Ireland has benefited from participation in the EU. Our embrace of the European ideal recognises a rapidly changing world in which the benefits for countries of co-operation greatly outweigh working apart. That reality was recognised 40 years ago by Seán Lemass, Charles Haughey and senior civil servants who understood what was involved.

The Tánaiste, speaking yesterday, mentioned the concept of practical patriotism. Surely, if ever there was an example of practical patriotism, it was Seán Lemass with foresight embracing the reality that Ireland's future lay in the heart of Europe, not in isolation at the edge of Europe. I take this opportunity to compliment and congratulate our new leader, Deputy Brian Cowen, on his central role in the process of bringing forward this treaty.

Just 30 years ago it would have been unthinkable for Ireland to be a main player in Europe, which we now are. The reality is that this country, more than any other, has grasped the opportunities that are available through membership of the European Union and we have also contributed to its development. In this debate, we should not forget some of the fundamental driving forces behind the EU. As my colleague, Deputy Rory O'Hanlon, clearly pointed out, the Union — the European Coal and Steel Community as it then was — was born out of the turmoil, chaos and conflagration in Europe half a century ago. Its ongoing development has given us the most prolonged period of peace and economic prosperity for hundreds of years, undreamed of in previous generations. The goal of continuing that development, economic prosperity and peace is a noble one. The lessons of previous treaties are that unless we continue to develop the Union to make it more accountable, effective and efficient to deal with the requirements of the citizens of the European Union, we will be at a loss.

In the same way that the European project was developed to deal with transnational problems of conflict and fascism in Europe, it is now best placed to deal with transnational problems of international terrorism, the diminishing supply of energy, security issues, globalisation and of course climate change, to which reference was made by many Members in this debate. Those who suggest otherwise are flying in the face of reality and logic. I was taken by the comments of a former Attorney General, former member of Fine Gael, former Commissioner and the highly respected chairman of Goldman Sachs, one of the premier international finance houses, who said that this is by far the most minor of any of the EU treaties in terms of transferring sovereignty or competences to Europe and that those who argue against it produce arguments of little substance which are absolutely illusory.

What are the key changes? We are giving virtually no new competences to Europe, except in the area of climate change, which is welcome, as has been acknowledged by all. We are increasing the availability of qualified majority voting, QMV, which is the only way to give the EU greater efficiency and effectiveness to deal with the issues we have been discussing. The one competency which we have not transferred in this treaty, and which we should not transfer, is in the area of taxation. I compliment the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, on his steadfastness and consistency in dealing with this issue. Taxation was our red line in the negotiations.

As I said at the outset, engaging in Europe and having our best people engaged at the heart of Europe, no matter from what political tradition or party in the House they come, is the best guarantee of protecting the interests of this country in the years to come. I commend the treaty and the Bill to the House and the country.

See this speech in context