Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)

As I said earlier, the Lisbon treaty will introduce a greater level of democracy in Ireland and throughout Europe in general, despite the impression being given that it will not. It will strengthen our democracy because for the first time a mechanism will be in place so that the Dáil will be able to signal at a very early stage its unhappiness with proposals from Brussels. The Oireachtas will be able to communicate with other parliaments and in co-operation with them can put a stop to any such initiatives. The Lisbon treaty will enable Ireland or an individual citizen to bring a case before the European Court of Justice if it is felt the European Commission is overstepping the mark. That is very important because people have a fear of the Commission opting to do what it likes. If it is thought the Commission has gone too far, there is a backup plan.

The role of the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny will be copperfastened with the ratification of the treaty. This will allow for a more thorough investigation of EU legislation prior to its adoption in Ireland. That is a very important committee, which I believe does not get sufficient recognition in the House. It is especially important as regards the Lisbon treaty. I am lucky enough to have served on it for the last seven or eight months. It deals with hundreds of items of legislation annually. In the five years before I was a member, it dealt with more than 5,000 items of legislation that came from Europe. Irish people do not appear to know that this work is being done and they would be very reassured if they did. I found that when one tells people about the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny, they really open up to the whole idea of Europe and are reassured that things do not just get shoved through. There is an opportunity to discuss such matters in this House, bring in people to research issues and to make suggestions to the Commission and our own people as well. Irish departmental officials go to Europe to discuss such legislation well before they are passed. It is important that this should be clarified and we need to highlight accordingly the role of the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny, which will have greater powers as well when the treaty is ratified.

The Lisbon treaty will foment greater EU influence for member states on the world stage. A new and purposeful approach to the common foreign and security policy will see the European Union finally strengthen and enhance its role internationally. After it is ratified, there will be one EU high representative for foreign affairs which will enable us to have a strong united voice speaking on our behalf as regards world affairs. In the past, foreign policy was implemented by the representative of foreign affairs and security policy, while the EU budget was controlled by the EU Commissioner for External Affairs. These roles will be merged to provide greater coherence and unit to EU external policy.

Europeans will have one strong united voice, which will be critical in global trade negotiations, such as the WTO talks. A strong unified voice representing a Europe of more than 490 million people puts all Europeans in a much stronger position. Remember, Ireland has only 4 million people against a global population of 6 billion. It makes common sense to be part of a stronger united negotiating hand. The new EU high representative for foreign affairs will have a dedicated diplomatic service at his or her disposal, one that will be superbly equipped to fight our corner globally, and we need that, going forward, to take on the other superpowers.

The Lisbon treaty will ensure that the European Charter of Fundamental Rights will become legally binding within the EU. This is a very positive move as it will strengthen the protection rights for citizens of Ireland and other member states. These fundamental rights include the right to life and the prohibition of torture as well as the broad range of economic rights. There are no new rights, but greater protection for existing ones. Basically, if a person believes his or her rights are not being adequately protected in a particular member state, he or she will have recourse to the European Court of Justice. This is a much clearer and stronger path. Basically, citizens will have more protection in law for the future, which is right.

I spoke earlier about the benefits for business under the Lisbon treaty. Under the treaty there will be faster more efficient decision-making in Europe, which will lead to greater value for money and speedier decisions. In the world of business, one needs to be moving fast to maintain national economic competitiveness. A "Yes" vote will see qualified majority voting introduced in more areas, namely in respect of the environment, energy, security, justice and urgent humanitarian aid. This system will speed up decision-making by ensuring that just one member state can no longer hold up the entire process for the other 26 member states. A "Yes" vote will mean a majority of states and a majority of the EU population will be required to block a process to protect the right of opinion and consequently the big states will not be seen to dominate the decision-making process. Importantly for Ireland, a vote in favour of the Lisbon treaty will ensure that we retain our veto in vital areas such as taxation and neutrality.

If the treaty is accepted, Ireland will have a greater role in peacekeeping. Ireland has been a successful participant in a number of UN-EU peacekeeping missions, such as those in Bosnia and Kosovo. A "Yes" vote to the Lisbon treaty will increase our Defence Forces' participation in conflict-prevention missions and in post-conflict peacekeeping missions. This will happen through the introduction of permanent structured co-operation between EU member states that wish to commit to taking part in EU military equipment programmes and to provide combat units available for immediate dispatch as EU peacekeepers.

The provision on structured co-operation is a long way from a provision for a European army. It negates the fear of our losing our neutrality. I hope those who are campaigning for a "No" vote will realise what is being asked of us. The treaty encourages those countries that want to co-operate and train together and pool resources for peacekeeping and post-conflict missions. The treaty does not force countries to send troops on peacekeeping missions to areas to which they do not agree to go. We still have our neutrality and it can only be changed by this House and the people.

There is a belief that acceptance of the treaty will result in new armies. There is a provision in the treaty that encourages countries to strengthen and greatly increase their armies and give them better equipment. This is correct. We would be crazy if we sent our own troops, both ladies and gentlemen, abroad with equipment that was less than perfect. Imagine if they went to Chad with equipment that is not up to scratch. Addressing this is what the treaty is about. It is a matter of equipping armies properly and not of having a European army or removing Ireland's neutrality. This issue has been twisted and turned, which is not correct.

Concerns were raised over the fact that we will not have a permanent Commissioner. We must be very clear that we will have one for ten of 15 years and this provision will not come into effect straight away. This is not the end of the world because every other member state, including Germany, France and all the big powers, will be treated in the same way. We are on a level playing field.

EU legislation involves a very slow process, as we all know, and can take three to five years to be passed. It is more than likely that if legislation is initiated when we do not have a Commissioner, we will have one when it is being passed. The Joint Committee on EU scrutiny will have the opportunity to discuss everything. The treaty will give greater powers to our MEPs and therefore there is no cause for concern.

It is important to point out that a Commissioner is meant to be independent. A former Minister and member of Fianna Fáil, Charlie McCreevy, became a Commissioner and often sends us information we do not like to hear, such as threats to fine Ireland. However, he is acting independently and that is what he is meant to do. Commissioners are supposed to wear their European hats rather than their national hats. It will not be the end of the world if we do not have a Commissioner from Ireland for a couple of years.

I have said repeatedly that politicians in this House, especially those on the Government side, very often use the European Union as a scapegoat. They blame it if a measure is being implemented that is not very nice. The charging of schools for water rates was blamed on the European Union but it was not its fault. We got it wrong and did not fight our case correctly. All legislation that comes through Europe is debated by our Ministers, officials, members of the Joint Committee on EU scrutiny, etc. We have ample opportunity to improve circumstances for Ireland.

It is not good enough to blame Europe in this House because doing so does not help our case when we try to sell a treaty. If the public is told membership of the Union is not always good for it, it will not necessarily vote in favour of a treaty. If membership failed any Irish citizen, it is because we sent the wrong people to Brussels to battle for us. There is ample opportunity for good, strong politicians to fight our corner. We should be glad to be a member of the Union.

I stated some of the negative campaigners are trying to make their case with fancy posters without using proper facts. This is not good enough. We must ask what will happen if we vote against the treaty. Will we be laughed at if we must vote for a second time, as was the case with the Nice treaty referendum? There is nothing wrong with voting again, or with voting three or four times; that is democracy and it is great. Voting is good, especially if it is the paper system of voting. We should not be worried and will not have to vote "No" but I fear that if we do not back the treaty or delay it, it will affect the goodwill of other countries towards Ireland. I do not like saying this publicly too often because I do not want to be seen to be scaremongering. Ireland is well regarded in other member states but they will lose some respect for us and their good-will will be eroded if we continue to say "No" to positive developments in Europe. It is therefore important that we vote in favour of the treaty.

If we delay the treaty or vote "No", we will have a less efficient European Union, still moving along under old treaties in a haphazard way that could have been made more efficient. We will not have new initiatives in respect of cross-border crime prevention, climate change and energy security. Progress in this regard will be slower. If we vote against the treaty, I fear other member states will claim there is no point waiting any longer for Ireland. They will get together and work on initiatives themselves, leaving us behind. We would be much better off as a major player at the negotiation table, fighting to make progress at every chance we get.

See this speech in context