Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I understand Deputy Connick has made his maiden speech. If so, it is on an auspicious day in the House, on which a serving Taoiseach attends for his last day. I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Ahern, has seen a few Taoisigh move on in his time and I have seen all the outgoing Taoisigh since 1975.

I am honoured, as leader of the Fine Gael Party, to say that we strongly support the EU reform treaty. We are urging our supporters all over the country to come out and vote "yes" for it. As things may not be going so well in the country economically, or from a health, education or other perspective, it would be very easy in a party political sense to use the opportunity to encourage people to use their vote on Europe against the Government here. Long before this debate started I said publicly, just as my predecessors in this party always did, that we would put Ireland first in the context of Europe and leave aside any partisan party political differences that I might have with Fianna Fáil, the Progressive Democrats or the Green Party in Government.

This is about ourselves, our children, our country and our Continent. From that point of view it is fundamental that the politicians understand that their remit, role and responsibility in this matter are to explain to people as clearly and as understandably as possible what this treaty is about, what it contains, what its implications are and why it is necessary. It is important that the people be properly informed when they go to make their decision. There are people who may have a different point of view and have an articulation as to why they want to vote against the treaty, which I respect. However, between now and 12 June, this debate should take place on the facts in the treaty and not on the misinformation that is being peddled about in various locations. That is not the way to conduct our business. While it is always easy to be negative — it is always easy to generate coverage or publicity by claiming to be a "no" person on the treaty — it is not in the interests of our people.

While I serve as leader of my party, in a European context I also serve as the elected vice president of the European People's Party, which as Members will know forms the largest voting bloc in the European Parliament with more than 272 Members. That bloc provided the President of the European Parliament, Hans-Gert Pöttering, MEP, who recently spoke in the Seanad. The President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, is also from that party as are Chancellor Angela Merkel and a number of other Prime Ministers, some of whom were here last Monday to discuss the challenges facing Europe economically. They did not come here to tell us what we had to do. They came here to demonstrate solidarity with this country as we move forward to face these challenges, which are not confined to Ireland alone.

From that perspective when I attend those meetings approximately every two months, I get a very clear picture of the problems, challenges and opportunities that face Ireland, Europe and the world in a global sense in the coming period. Over the next 20 years we will see major changes economically and around the world. Often in a place like Ireland we can become very focused on our own immediate problems without looking at what is staring us in the face in the next 20 to 50 years. A recent advertisement in some of the financial newspapers asked who is responsible for the weather in 2050, the answer to which is "You are, so do something about it now". The challenges we face include climate change, energy security, energy cost, food security, food production cost, water supply and the geopolitics of oil.

In the next 20 years there will be five presidential elections in the United States. Regardless of whomever the people might want to elect and whatever might be the political message or the consequences of that, there will be serious difficulties in many countries between now and then, including the great humanitarian crises we are facing and the implications of political decisions made around the world. We are witnessing the phenomenal advance of China with its 1.4 billion people, the advance of India economically with its 1.2 billion people, the coming again of Russia because of its energy reserves, the emergence of Brazil and South Africa, and the powering ahead of the United States. It would be a mistake for us to assume that 4.3 million people can afford to stand by and watch all these events from the sidelines. That is why the referendum on this treaty on 12 June is unique.

The Irish people are the only ones having a referendum, which is required following the Supreme Court decision in the Crotty case many years ago. It gives every elector the privilege and responsibility of deciding the fate and future of the main institutions of Europe to cater for a population not of 250 million, as it was when we had 15 countries, but of 500 million. As the eyes of Europe are on Ireland, it is important that this debate be healthy, robust, true and based on the facts in the treaty.

I have attended some of the 30 or 35 meetings the Fine Gael Party has arranged around the country. These are well attended. I recall the campaign for the first referendum on the Nice treaty. People did not support the treaty in that referendum because they were confused and did not understand it. On the second occasion my party arranged a series of public meetings around the country. Some 500,000 more people voted on the second occasion and the Nice treaty referendum was passed. As I see the same trend now, it is vital that people be encouraged to come to these public meetings so that they can stand up and ask the questions that are in their heads about this treaty if they have any interest in it. If they have no interest, it is our duty to try to stimulate an interest so that they can ask these questions because it is about themselves, their children and our future.

I recall, as in the campaign for the referendum on the Nice treaty, people saying they went to a meeting and witnessed a really good row about neutrality, abortion or whatever it was. Those people found they left the meeting much clearer in their minds about their position, either for or against. At least they had participated in a healthy, democratic and robust debate and were therefore in a much stronger position to make up their minds.

The usual stuff has been peddled about on this occasion suggesting that a vote for the European reform treaty is a vote for the backdoor introduction of abortion, euthanasia, single-child families etc., which is complete nonsense in the context of this treaty. As everybody should know we have protection in Bunreacht na hÉireann and a specific protection written into the protocol of the Maastricht treaty which is legally binding. In any event health is a competence of each individual country and no European dimension can influence that without the Irish people making the decision themselves.

The same applies in the case of neutrality. I have heard people of prominence and others claiming the treaty would introduce a European army with enormous costs for militarisation and that therefore we are likely to face the ravages of being invaded or whatever. We have a very clear position on the matter. We have differed with the Government in some aspects of neutrality and how we would approach it. However, we have always said the triple-lock mechanism that applies here requiring a UN mandate, Government clearance and Dáil approval in each case is very important.

A few years ago I went to Kosovo with Deputy Timmins, who is a former member of the Defence Forces and who saw service abroad. South of Pristina we met troops, and saw them on parade and doing their duty. We travelled out with them to the villages and townlands in the area. They were operating under Finnish command carrying out a peace-enforcement, peacekeeping exercise in which they wanted to participate and in which they excelled. People from different walks of life there in what was a political tinderbox said the Irish troops were manifestly able to command respect on both sides of the political divide. While the mission in Chad is difficult as were the ones in Liberia and Lebanon, these matters are all cleared by the Government and must accord with a UN mandate. There is no question of Ireland being forced into a military alliance. That is protected and requires unanimity. In our case there is respect and understanding for our constitutional position and the legal protocol inserted into the Maastricht treaty. That is not to say that we might not require help in the area of terrorism, which is a transborder phenomenon.

Leaders from the European People's Party, EPP, group discuss the problems they foresee and immigration, for example, presents both a challenge and an opportunity. It can be a divisive issue and just now I was outside with the Taoiseach for the Show Racism the Red Card campaign. Many countries, including Greece, Malta and others, have sent back many people who entered illegally. The point has been made that if the population of Africa doubles in the next 25 years, which it will, and if even 10% of young males decide to emigrate from Africa to Europe, no single country could withstand the pressure. There must be a fair, equitable and reasonable European response to this. When one examines the scale of the problems that exist one realises that Ireland is in a position to influence this matter greatly.

Two points in the treaty are fundamental to strengthening democratic links, namely, increasing accountability and improving transparency in the interest of citizens. Members who serve in this Chamber are directly elected by the people and are given a mandate through the secrecy of the ballot box. When people, hopefully, endorse the treaty we will enhance accountability and transparency. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny, which has been elevated to the status of a full Oireachtas committee and is chaired by Deputy John Perry from my party, will be responsible for ensuring that initiatives that come from the Commission and are sent to parliaments eight weeks before anything happens are scrutinised. The members of the committee, who were directly elected by the people, can call in officials and ask what the implications of initiatives are, what they will mean in Brussels and what they will mean when they come back. If an initiative taken in the Commission is not in accordance with the wishes of this Parliament or the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny there will be a facility, shared with other countries, to have it changed or withdrawn. This is an important element for the citizens of Ireland to understand. The European Commission is entitled to introduce initiatives, directives and regulations but the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny is an important element in scrutinising them. The committee can see that people are informed of what is going on and that things we do not want are not imposed on us. It should be clearly understood that nothing can happen in Europe unless that competency and authority is given to it by member states.

The co-decision making process between the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers is an enhanced responsibility that is very important. Members know that at the moment MEPs have little or no influence in terms of decisions that are made by the Commission. They have always had responsibility in dealing with the Parliament's budgetary position and there is a measure of co-decision there but this will be enhanced and increased. This means that when the treaty is, hopefully, passed, MEPs, elected by the public and, therefore, transparent and accountable to the public, may be lobbied by groups, agencies, organisations and individuals about issues that matter to them. It is important that every Irish citizen knows that MEPs elected to the Parliament will have this responsibility placed on them. In terms of increasing democratic accountability, transparency and responsibility these are fundamental areas.

The position of President of the Council is important. Over a number of years we held very successful EU Presidencies and the six months it is in our possession tends to be a very busy time for departmental officials and Ministers and Ministers of State. In 1996 we held the Presidency from July until the end of the year and it was an incredibly busy period that culminated, in my case, as Minister for Tourism and Trade, in dealing with the World Trade Organisation talks. I believe that what will emerge from this treaty is a better system that will see responsibility rolling on and the President of the Council appointed for two and a half years. The President will only be mandated to do what he or she must do through agreement by member states. This is a more effective and efficient way of dealing with business.

I mentioned World Trade Organisation talks and this is a matter of concern in Ireland. I have the privilege of chairing an ad hoc working group on agricultural reform in the European People's Party grouping and this is an important element. Europe's contribution to the Doha Round of talks, driven through by the former commissioner, Mr. Franz Fischler, was the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy until 2013.

The agriculture sector is now of increasing importance in the context of rising food prices, rising production costs and food shortages. There were riots relating to this in Egypt recently and the price of rice has increased by 100% in India, Thailand and other countries. This is due to changing demographics, the growing of crops for energy, the production of bio-fuels and deforestation. China has seen the greatest migration of people in history as people move to cities; they want rice to eat and food and production costs all affect this issue.

The agriculture sector here is important in this regard. Last Tuesday morning, at the ad hoc working group that I chair, I called the Irish Farmers Association, IFA, the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association, ICMSA, and the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association, ICSA, to give their points of view on how they see agriculture issues unfolding in the context of World Trade Organisation talks. They made clear statements and have legitimate concerns. However, the Government has confirmed, as did the European Commission President, José Manuel Barroso, when I put a question to him at the forum on Thursday, that when the WTO talks conclude they must be accepted unanimously. This means that every one of the 27 member states will have the power to veto any deal they do not see as fair and balanced.

The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Coughlan, did not speak clearly enough on this matter and Deputy Creed articulated the point of view of our party. This issue is of consequential concern for the country's agrisector and while people have the right to express their opinions strongly, their wrath should not be focused on the Lisbon reform treaty because every country has the right to veto the WTO talks if they not deem them fair and balanced.

I communicated the points raised by the agriculture and farming organisations to Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Barroso after the forum presentation in Dublin Castle. The agriculture sector has always voted, and farming organisations have taken the view that they are better equipped to deal with coming challenges as part of a strong Europe. From this perspective we support the treaty on the basis that CAP has been reformed until 2013. I believe that it is better to be part of a strong Europe and deal with WTO subsequently. There will be a presidential election in the United States and I will not dwell on the fact that the US decides what it will and will not deal with in the WTO. I saw evidence of this approach when I dealt with the United States.

When I attended those meetings, observer status was granted to other countries which want to join the European Union for a number of reasons. It is not just because they see Ireland as a development role model as a result of co-operation with and finances from Europe. They also want enlargement for other reasons — for the benefit of their peoples.

The EU Commission President José Manuel Durão Barroso explained when he was a young lad in Portugal he could not listen to the music or read the books he wanted to because it was a dictatorship at the time. The Ukrainian President, Victor Yushchenko, explained at another meeting how the Ukraine would love to do business with the West as it has lived under Russia for so many years. He made the point that when Stalin was in charge of his country, he issued an edict which resulted in 2,000 people starving to death every day for over two years. These countries want to join with Europe. They see the EU as a force for good in the world, given the challenges we face in the future.

I was struck by the question from the Polish Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, of what do we have to offer our young people. He replied: "Freedom." The EU and Lisbon treaty is fundamental to this.

Every Irish elector must remember that for the first and most important time, 500 million people look to our small country of 4.3 million to decide the future flexibility, efficiency and professionalism of the large EU institutions in which we are all part. We all have a part to play in these institutions, which will not be able to do anything against our consent.

I urge everyone to understand the fundamentals of the Lisbon treaty. My party supporters, Deputies, Senators and councillors should not be concerned by this treaty because I believe in its integrity, quality and consequence. That consequence will be for a better Europe and a better Ireland for all our people.

See this speech in context