Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

The job will be ours and it is a matter of doing it. This is something we predicted at least ten years ago. It became obvious to some of us on the committees dealing with European and foreign affairs that a great improvement in resources would be necessary if national parliaments were to do the expected job effectively. For example, there is a notion in some quarters of this House that Oireachtas committees are extensions of Departments. They are not; they are extensions of the Parliament instead, which is important. That must be clarified very quickly.

I congratulate my colleague, Deputy John Perry, on the production of the report from the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny. I thank him for his help in compiling our report from the Joint Committee on European Affairs, as he travelled around the country with us when we brought to the people the trappings of Parliament for the first time in an outreach programme. Deputy Costello also did so. It was an effort to bring to the people the dialogue and facts relating to the Lisbon treaty.

We found much confusion and we still hear people say they are confused. I am not surprised people are confused because there is so much contradictory information being poured from all corners in this country; I have never seen the like of it in my life. The people concerned must have read The Catcher in the Rye because there are so many conspiracy theorists out there, one could write several books from the information.

I find it difficult to understand how, with a Parliament where the vast majority espouse a "Yes" vote in this referendum, any time we speak here and throughout the country there is reportage of the number of people who spoke on the opposite side. If such people have not spoken, they must be found and there should be "balanced debate". I find it very difficult to understand how that would be a balanced debate as the vast majority of the 166 Deputies in this House, for example, espouse one side. I would have thought there should be some reflection of that numerical strength in the amount of coverage.

There is room for a change in legislation that must take place in the not too distant future. If this does not happen, it will make life extremely difficult and we will have this contradictory debate at all times throughout the country. People say they cannot read the treaty, while others have no difficulty doing so. I cannot understand how this is the case because the facts are there in black and white. The crucial fact is that most of what is contained in the Lisbon treaty has already been passed in previous treaties. Some of those who complain about elements of the treaty have already voted for them in the Nice treaty. It is extraordinary.

We must pay attention to the work of the committees. We cannot afford to allow our concentration to lapse for one moment. There is a great responsibility involved in this and resources must be provided by the Government or the work will not be possible.

I want to concentrate on two points raised by previous speakers. Much has been said about the loss of our Commissioner but every one of the 27 member states can say the same. It was never intended that a member state should regard a Commissioner as its own. It was always intended that the Commission would represent the entire European Union. The agriculture Commissioner, whoever he or she may be, represents Irish, UK, Danish and French interests, with those of all other member states. The same goes for the trade Commissioner, the financial services Commissioner and all other Commissioners. Unfortunately, as other speakers have noted, Commissioners were created in order that every country could state "we have our Commissioner". That is what occurred with Mr. Mandelson. He saw himself as "their" Commissioner and set off on a world tour that, I hope, will not be as successful as he wished. If it is, it will have serious consequences for food producing countries in the European Union, not only Ireland.

See this speech in context