Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

I thank you, Sir, for affording me the opportunity of contributing to this important debate on the Lisbon treaty. I also thank the Minister for sharing time with me, even though I take an opposing view. It is important to hear the different views in this debate. As an Independent Deputy, I must constantly challenge and test the treaty on behalf of citizens. I accept that it may not be popular to do so but it is essential for everyone to hear all the facts. This debate is about the Lisbon treaty. I accept that it is not about the European Union and the positive aspects of European co-operation. While I may criticise and challenge, I will also present my view on the European Union and the broader international scene. Let us put to bed the isolationist tag mentioned by some previous speakers.

In my broader vision for Europe and Ireland, I seek to extend popular sovereignty and promote democratic values in Irish life. I oppose EU supranational control at all levels of society and seek to counteract its dominance in Irish life. I want to defend and enhance our national democracy and accountability, thus ensuring the maximum amount of power for decision making will be in the hands of the Irish people. My long-term aim is to establish more equal and democratic relations between all the nations and peoples of Europe, from the Urals to the Atlantic.

I am concerned about the progressive transfer of power from the elected representatives of the people to unaccountable supranational institutions. In my vision for Europe I support the development and enhancement of national and local democracy. I want close co-operation with neighbouring EU member states. I believe in moving towards a more socially desirable, environmentally aware and sustainable model of development. I am opposed to proposals that increase the competence of the European Union or reduce the influence of member states. I seek a devolution of powers from the European Union to national level, and from national to local level, in order to increase democratic control and promote a culture of political participation. I am opposed to all measures of liberalisation involving the transfer of services or utilities from public to private ownership.

I seek the maintenance of Irish neutrality and oppose membership of any military alliance. The drift towards membership of such an alliance is the issue in this debate. My vision includes the development of an independent foreign policy based on support for human rights, national self-determination and economic solidarity with the exploited peoples and countries of the world. This is my vision for Ireland and Europe and it is one that many in this country understand and support.

I note that most contributors to the debate have not examined the details of the treaty. I am concerned that it will endorse the creation of a centralised and militarised super state. It will also strengthen the European Union internationally through the establishment of a permanent EU President, foreign Minister and a department of foreign affairs. I am also concerned about the incorporation of the European Defence Agency, EDA, into the European treaties. The purpose of the EDA is to promote the European arms industry which accounts for 29% of global arms sales, as well as assisting the development of the European Union's defence capabilities.

Under the terms of the treaty, there is an obligation on member states to increase their military capacity. An expansion of the so-called Petersberg Tasks is to be carried out by the European Union's military and civilian forces, to include combating terrorism and possible pre-emptive military action against perceived threats.

A new innovation called "structured co-operation" allows for mini-military alliances to be established within the structures of the European Union in order to carry out "more demanding missions". Mutual solidarity and mutual defence clauses will oblige all member states to come to the assistance of any member state subjected to armed aggression. It is important to point to these issues.

Article 28.3 of the treaty states:

"Member states shall undertake progressively to improve their military capabilities. The agency in the field of defence capabilities development, research, acquisition and armaments shall identify operational requirements, shall promote measures to satisfy those requirements, shall contribute to identifying and, where appropriate, implementing any measure needed to strengthen an industrial and technological base of the defence sector, shall participate in defining a European capabilities and armaments policy, and shall assist the Council in evaluating the improvement of military capabilities".

These are the facts.

As regards the broader issue, I have legitimate concerns that Ireland has only 12 members out of 750 in the European Parliament. I am also concerned that two thirds of Irish laws now come from Brussels. I am concerned, too, that some 95% of the Lisbon treaty is from the rejected European Union constitution. That is the hidden agenda in this debate. The European treaty would be far superior.

That is a summary of my concerns and it is essential for the public to hear them. As regards the broader debate, it is important to let the people know that 80% of Members of the House and practically 90% of the media support the "Yes" side. Hence, as an Independent Deputy, I will always raise such concerns. There are serious democratic questions to be raised on the issues of balance and proper information.

Article 9.2 of the Constitution states: "Fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State are fundamental political duties of all citizens". As an Independent Deputy, all I want to do is achieve the intent of that article. I do not want to pledge my loyalty to any other state.

Let us deal with the economic issue, to which the Minister referred. The recent statement by the French finance Minister, Christine Lagarde, that the common consolidated tax base is "one issue that we are determined to push", has seen people in Brussels and Dublin go into damage limitation mode to try to limit the perception that this would be the first step to a common corporation tax rate. Commissioner McCreevy identified this measure as a long-term hidden agenda for a common corporation tax base. He described it as a sinister idea that refused to die and added that permanent officials in the Commission were seeking to impose deliberately unworkable proposals that amounted to a Trojan horse to enable the Commission to take control of taxation issues.

Let us examine the detail further. Article 93 of the Lisbon treaty proposes an important amendment to Article 113 of the consolidated treaties which makes harmonised company tax laws across the European Union a mandatory requirement, although it must be done by unanimity. The amendment states such harmonisation must take place, if necessary, to avoid distortion of competition, allowing a country or firm to take a case before the European Court of Justice alleging that, for example, lreland's 12.5% rate of company tax constitutes a distortion of competition compared to Germany's 30% rate. It is legitimate to raise these issues.

Article 42(2) states: "The common security and defence policy shall include the progressive framing of a common Union defence policy." This will lead to a common defence policy. I object to some countries and their foreign policies. It is legitimate for an Irish Deputy to challenge them.

I conclude by quoting the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, Jean Claude Juncker, on the issue of sovereignty, a legitimate concern. He stated: "Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of the public to this fact?" The answer must be that any Irish politician of integrity must do so, irrespective of the personal or political cost. Fundamentally, the treaty provides for a massive shift of power from the nations of the European Union to Brussels, effectively making us a province of Europe. These are the concerns I raise.

We need an honest debate, with less name calling, with openness and vision to ensure all people of the world, not just those in the European Union, can live in peace, justice and harmony.

See this speech in context