Michael D'Arcy (Wexford, Fine Gael)

It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to speak on the Lisbon treaty. As a fairly new backbencher, it is not always easy to get speaking time and when one gets the opportunity to speak on an issue as important as the Lisbon treaty, I am glad to take that opportunity.

I listened to the Tánaiste speak about the youngest people who will vote in this referendum. The youngest people who will vote in this referendum were born in the early 1990s. I am a child of the 1970s and during my second level education in the CBS in Gorey, I went on a school tour to Dachau. I do not know if anybody knows where Dachau is but it was one of the first concentration camps established by the Nazi regime. Something that struck me on that visit was that we, as young people in our teens, were told that what happened in Dachau could never happen in Europe again, but little did any of us realise that within a decade, within a few hundred miles of that concentration camp, it happened again in what was then Yugoslavia. One of the reasons it happened was that Europe was not strong. It was unable to deal with the issue. NATO and the United States had to come in and try to resolve what was an appalling act of genocide by one nation on another.

Many people have questioned the need for the Lisbon treaty when the process appears to be working well. The European Union cannot expand from 300 million to 500 million people and assume that the procedures in place are sufficient. I have used the analogy that it is the equivalent of merging Canada, the United States of America, Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean Island nations into one trading entity similar to the European Union. The entire population of that area is 500 million people. There are no circumstances in which that could happen and they have a far greater benefit in that approximately 350 million of them speak primarily one language. Ten were brought in, the 15 went to 25 and now it is 27.

The EU is perhaps the greatest political democracy in the history of mankind. Ireland is very fortunate — I am absolutely pro-Europe — that we took the opportunity to play our part in the European Union. Who would have believed that just a decade after the Second World War Germany and France could have got together and started what has evolved into the European Union? I heard the Minister, Deputy Coughlan, give concise historical detail on how the EU came about, but we must not forget — the Tánaiste touched upon this — that twice during the 20th century Europe went to war on a scale that nobody could have believed possible.

I am inclined to agree with Deputy Burton about the campaign. It has been lethargic and slow, and regardless of whether the Government likes it, there is a perception that it has been lethargic in starting the campaign on the Lisbon treaty. I believe it was Disraeli who said that a lie is half way around the world before truth gets its boots on. I am not saying those people who are advocating a "No" vote are lying but they are getting a far better hearing than anyone would have anticipated at the early stage of the campaign. Many people are following the campaign in the United States. We all know it is very difficult to decrease momentum but the momentum appears to be on the side of the "No" campaign. I say to those on the Government benches that it is time to ditch the lethargy and get on with campaigning to ensure the public gets the message that the Lisbon treaty will be a benefit and that it is not something about which it needs to be concerned.

The treaty is aimed at making Europe a more effective and efficient trading and political bloc. Measures will be introduced to streamline the representation, making the Parliament and the Commission much more effective and less unwieldy. It will lead to faster decision-making in the areas on which we must proceed, including global warming, in terms of what happened in the 1990s in Yugoslavia and the current problem of energy and food security or, as they are now being called, energy and food insecurity. It will make the Union more democratic. Some people are trying to cloud the issue about qualified majority voting. Ireland has a strong benefit in that regard in that we are punching way above our weight on the issue.

I want to touch upon the issue of taxation. There has been much talk that if the Lisbon treaty is accepted the EU will have a unified corporation tax. Mr. Barroso, President of the European Union, was here last week and he could not have been more clear that that will not happen. Ireland benefited greatly from the progressive corporation tax rates introduced here in the mid-1990s. Other countries are looking to our success and will try to mimic it. It has worked well for Ireland and they will ask why it cannot work for other countries within the European Union. The other countries looking to compete for foreign direct investment jobs will bring their corporation tax rates down. The challenge for us is to get on with changing the current position. What stood for us well in the past 12 to 14 years will not stand for us well in the next 12 to 14 years. Switzerland is not a member of the European Union but is one of two countries competing better than anywhere else in Europe — the other being Austria, where a zero corporation tax rate is offered. We must accept that we will not be able to leave our corporation tax rates as they are.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union will become legally binding. The treaty will make the charter law, thus giving people recourse to the European Court of Justice. Some concerns have been stated in this regard. I also have some concerns. It will be a matter for the European Court of Justice to adjudicate and it will make its decisions and rulings. As the charter will become law, it will be incumbent on each member state to ensure national laws are compatible with European Union laws.

Will the treaty strengthen the European Union? It will, as there will be greater cohesion and unity. It will also create a stronger voice at a time when it has never been more necessary. The European "nation" is facing a global economic downturn which will affect every country to some degree. A strong and united voice will be critical in World Trade Organisation negotiations, upon which I will touch.

The agriculture sector has been very good to Ireland for decades. The European Union closed down the Irish sugar beet industry and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food did not cover herself in glory in how she handled the matter. We should not pretend or beat about the bush on the issue — she was poor. She now has a significant challenge with the beef industry, as the industry here is very different from that anywhere else. It is grass-based and has a lower cost base as a result. We must export 90% of our product, although we do not produce a very significant amount. As beef must be exported, we are left in a position where we are absolutely obliged to ensure the markets to which we are exporting remain open and lucrative. If this does not happen and there is a flood of international beef traded on the surplus markets into the European Union, the Irish beef industry, in particular, will take a much harder hit than that in any other country. Although it is hard to believe because of the amount of beef we actually produce, we are the fourth largest exporter of beef internationally.

In terms of fair trade, I speak as a commercial dairy farmer. It is inconceivable to me that there are world dairy shortages. We are coming to the end of the quota year and farmers will be charged for oversupplying quota at a time when there is an international shortage. That makes no sense to me and at some stage the matter will have to be dealt with. Despite an international shortage, Irish farmers will be charged a super levy because of oversupply. That is a little rich.

For the first time in the history of the European Union, we are reaching the point where we will not be capable of supplying our own market with required foodstuffs, let alone export to other markets. Rice has doubled in price, while the cost of wheat is up 80% or 90%. The price of barley is also up. The price of every product on world trade markets has increased by between 50% and 100%. One of the major reasons is bio-fuels. I support all products from the land but to produce bio-fuels, an acre of land is required to produce two tonnes of crop which is processed into three quarters of a tonne of oil. That makes no sense, as the scale that we need to produce oils will not be achieved. In time, the position we have taken internationally on bio-fuels will be seen as a crime against humanity.

Ireland has gained enormously from being a member of the European Union, to the tune of $58 billion in receipts from the EU budget. There have been billions received in Structural Funds which have helped us construct roads and improve the rail network. Farmers have also benefited significantly. However, they are using the Lisbon treaty to influence the World Trade Organisation talks and are not wrong to do so. People in business use every opportunity possible and there is now an opportunity for the Government to act. I was glad to hear the Taoiseach state today that he will use the veto with regard to the talks. We must make it very clear to the European Union, Mr. Peter Mandelson in particular, that we will not accept the sell-out of Irish agriculture. The sector is worth billions of euro annually to the Exchequer.

Membership of the European Union also confers responsibility and we are responsible for being a committed member. If all the political parties in favour of a "Yes" vote played a role and got on with the matter, the treaty will be passed in the referendum. As I stated, the momentum is with the "No" side, from which certain myths have emanated, one of which is that the treaty could possibly lead to the legalisation of abortion within the State. The treaty will do the opposite, as it confers upon the State the right to deal with all of its own health issues. The Irish position is clear. The treaty strengthens it — it will be a matter for the State to deal with the issue internally. Neither the European Commission, the European Court of Justice nor anybody else will be able to make a decision and force Ireland to accept the legalisation of abortion.

There is a suggestion the treaty will lead to the creation of a super state, which many would decry. The treaty will not lead to this; instead it sets out how it will bring democracy to the European Union. The European Union has a responsibility to limit certain areas and a super state will certainly not come about.

There is also a suggestion being peddled that we will be forced into joining a European army. That will certainly not happen. Ireland's position on the matter is quite clear. Its neutral standpoint has always been respected within the European Union. Participation in peacekeeping and crisis intervention missions is optional for each member state, rather than an obligation. This could not be any more clear but, unfortunately, the idea has been mooted that Ireland will be part of a military alliance. It is very difficult to argue that this is not the case. More often than not the word gets out and some organisations advocating a "No" vote will argue against the truth. We can continue to decide to participate in peacekeeping missions on a case by case basis, taking into account what we have agreed within the European Union. This incorporates the triple lock principle, which requires the support of the Government, the Legislature and a United Nations mandate. Ireland has a very proud record of involvement in UN and EU peacekeeping missions during the years in places such as Kosovo and Bosnia. Most recently we had a significant debate on whether we should send our troops to Chad.

Further myths and untruths have been spread with regard to immigration. The treaty adds nothing new in respect of EU emigrants entering Ireland. When we signed the Treaty of Rome in 1973, we agreed to the free movement of workers within the European Union. The Union, which now comprises 27 member states, has been of major benefit to Ireland since the early to mid-1990s. Many people involved in commerce have benefited from the labour that entered our market when it was badly needed.

It has been stated that EU membership will now begin to cost us money. We have received many billions of euro — either in respect of infrastructure or through the CAP — and we must at some stage realise that it is time we stepped up to the mark and signalled our willingness to transfer funds from our country to other member states. The benefit of doing so is that when those states become more flathúileach, they will hopefully become consumers of Irish products.

I agree with the Tánaiste's comment to the effect that we must make this debate relevant to Irish citizens. Due to the fact that the requisite information is not available and also that members of the public are obtaining information and hearing more coherent arguments from those on the "No" side, it is not being made relevant. I appeal to all of the parties in the House to get the campaign moving and reverse the momentum from the "No" side to the "Yes" side.

See this speech in context