Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)

The Lisbon reform treaty is a significant legal document, although some of its proponents have erroneously tried to dismiss its importance or its impact on Irish society if it is accepted by the Irish people and adopted into law. For this reason, I welcome that the Irish people have the right to exercise their democratic right to vote on this treaty. It is extremely regrettable that none of our fellow citizens in any other EU member states will have the chance to do this.

It was disappointing and rather perplexing that one of our most celebrated aviation entrepreneurs recently admitted that he simply could not understand the treaty document after reading it four times. I wonder if he checked the Government's White Paper, the consolidated version of the treaties, edited by Peadar Ó Broin and supported by Brendan Halligan, documents produced by Deputy Costello for the Labour Party or the various helpful websites. Even after a cursory reading of the treaty, several key measures are striking and highlight its importance.

Since the Maastricht treaty established the European Union in 1993, the Union has operated on three distinct pillars — the European Communities, the Common Foreign and Security Policy and police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters. Significantly, the Lisbon reform treaty provides for the merging of these three pillars and establishes the EU as a legal political identity. It provides for EU citizenship, a permanent Council President, an EU prosecutors' office and, importantly, the new Charter of Fundamental Rights. Even from this brief list of some of the treaty's measures, it is obvious it will fundamentally change key structures of the EU.

The core of the treaty — and a core reason for voting "yes" — is the series of innovations that represent positive moves in the better governance of the EU. This is particularly important given the expansion of the Union to 27 member states. The EU is not a perfect construct or organisation, far from it. For those of us who want an EU that is more effective, more democratic and more responsive to the needs of its citizens, the measures contained in the reform treaty will contribute to achieving these aims. Most significantly, the new measures include the extension of the co-decision powers, particularly in terms of the European Parliament and the budgetary area, the proposed election of the President of the Commission and enhancing the transparency of European Council procedures by having public Council sittings. The citizen's initiative must also be welcomed because it allows EU citizens to act and I note the term "significant group of states" in respect of the necessary 1 million signatures, but in any serious consideration the reform treaty is an important constitutional development.

The reform treaty strengthens the weight of national parliaments within the overall EU system of governance and proposes a new orange card. All Deputies and Senators would be interested to know how that system will work in practice because we find managing certain European legislation, such as that currently before the Joint Committee on Transport and to which I shall return shortly, difficult. We need more supports and resources to invigilate European legislation.

An important element of the reform treaty is the enhancements to the social Europe agenda, which will prioritise new social objectives for the EU in terms of full employment, social progress and inclusion, justice and tackling poverty. The social clause ensures that these objectives must be given full consideration in any EU policy. A critical innovation contained within the treaty extends the qualified majority voting, QMV, system to social services for workers, which will hopefully benefit temporary and migrant workers. The expansion of the new QMV system to include 40 new policy areas will strengthen EU-wide efforts to tackle a range of issues such as climate change, asylum, immigration and border issues and the important areas of crime and justice.

Undoubtedly, some elements of the developments approved by the reform treaty raise concerns. It is regrettable that Ireland will lose a European Parliament seat under existing legislation, most likely in the Dublin region, even though the citizens of Dublin are probably already under-represented in the European Parliament. From 2014 on, the reform of the Commission will also see Ireland without a permanent commissioner for five years out of every 15 years. As a small country and irrespective of party, we have always believed the presence of an Irish commissioner at the table was beneficial because the person would know our issues. Last week, we marked the passing of our first distinguished Commissioner.

The new double majority voting system of 55% of member states and 65% of the EU's population raises concerns, particularly for smaller states. On many issues, the Union divides into three main blocs according to the size of member states, namely, the six large states — often, one or two differ with the others vigorously, such as in the current case of France and Germany — the ten middle-sized states, such as Holland and Sweden, and the 11 smaller states, of which Ireland is one. The six large states have a combined population of approximately 350 million, 70% of the EU's population of 500 million. It is true, however, that four states will be able to constitute a type of blocking minority under the so-called Ioannina clause, but there are concerns for a small state of 4.25 million people, constituting less than 1% of the EU population under double majority population rules.

The changes to representation and voting structures have some logic in the context of an expanded EU of 27 member states. However, I have listened with interest to the contributions of some of the more thoughtful advocates of a "No" vote and accept that there are three areas in which Ireland needs to be constantly vigilant in terms of the reform treaty and beyond. The EU has a strong defensive element. The treaty refers to a common defence. The incorporation of the Petersberg Tasks in the 1997 Amsterdam treaty and the subsequent establishment of the EU battle groups programme have raised grave concerns among many people. It is also an unassailable fact that, for many states, particularly the newer members from central and eastern Europe, NATO membership has preceded EU membership. For some of those states, NATO and the EU appear to be two sides of the same coin. The EU must not be allowed to become interchangeable with NATO or become in any way its political wing. Instead, it is important for the European project that the traditions of countries such as Ireland, with our strong commitment to neutrality, should be given complete equality within the culture and governance of the EU. To be fair, our negotiators attempted to achieve this in the document.

However, it is also true and must be celebrated that one of the EU's outstanding achievements in the past 50 years has been the creation of the largest zone of peace and security in European history between countries that were riven by war and strife for centuries. Recently, some historians compared the peace and stability zones of the United States and Europe and rightly called them two of the greatest achievements in political history.

We must be vigilant of the effect of EU policy on Ireland's fiscal well-being. The euro has been a successful currency and we have become used to the idea that monetary policy is decided in Frankfurt and that the ideal of a strong currency seems to take preference over states' employment needs. None the less, the euro is flourishing and has achieved much in economic terms. However, the right to set taxes is a core and exclusive privilege of a democratically elected national government. This right must be protected by every means possible. The recent comments by the French Minister of Finance, Madame Christine Lagarde, on this matter displayed an unwarranted and unacceptable breach of the national rights and prerogatives of EU member states. We have safeguarded our taxation rights in treaties to date and it will be necessary to continue to do so to the advantage of our people.

Ireland and our neighbour, the United Kingdom, have a common interest in enhanced legal and security issues as regards crime, but there are question marks over the operation of the common asylum policy. The development of the prosecutor's office must take into account differences between the Irish common law tradition and the Roman civil law tradition that is common in many other EU states.

Taking into account these serious concerns, EU involvement in the past 35 years has benefited Ireland considerably and the reform treaty will strengthen the ability of the EU as an institution to govern effectively and to address the social and economic concerns of its citizens. On balance and after intense consideration of all the issues involved, a "Yes" vote is the right choice, which is the recommendation I make to my constituents and supporters. I was first asked this question last December by a new Chinese-Irish citizen. The referendum may be the first time he will vote here. I examined some of the documents to which I referred and reverted to him. The points I am making today are my considered opinion.

Given Europe's difficult history and the recent East-West division, the achievement of the EU is unprecedented and undeniably great. The EU constitutes the successful working together of an unparalleled number of nations, cultures and 21 languages, in which Gaeilge is proudly included. Recently through a series of parliamentary questions and my membership of the Committee of Public Accounts, of which the Acting Chairman is also a member, I asked the Secretary General of the Department of Finance about the exact figures for Ireland's contributions to and funding received from the Union. He informed me that Ireland has received just less than €60 billion in payments and made contributions to the EU budget of €20 billion. While we will become a net contributor, this may not occur until 2011-2013.

I will remark on the benefits of that funding, particularly in areas such as the north side of Dublin and in my constituency. The EU's Social Fund has played a critical role in providing funds and support for many local and community programmes. The Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, and I are long-standing directors of the Northside Partnership and other local bodies, such as the Coolock Development Council. We could not have run the types of training and jobs programmes undertaken without the fund. Hopefully, the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and his colleagues will introduce other initiatives in light of the economic downturn towards which we are moving and during which such projects will again become significant. We depended on EU support considerably. An area of my constituency — the Acting Chairman was made aware of this matter when it was discussed at Dublin City Council level — is that of the Darndale-Belcamp village centre. The key seed money for the centre came from the EU Urban programme through a people's initiative, which I supported at city council level. When European officials visited, they went to Ballymun and Finglas in the constituency of the Minister of State, Deputy Carey, and Deputy Shortall and also decided to include those areas. For us in Dublin North East, Darndale village was a major achievement.

Having noted the continuing grave concerns and the fact that we must be vigilant — Commission President Barroso recently told my colleague, Deputy Quinn, that this treaty will probably not be the last — in defence of fiscal and taxation matters, we are still better off in the heart of Europe. I support a "Yes" vote.

See this speech in context