Dáil debates

Wednesday, 18 June 2008

Lisbon Treaty: Statements (Resumed)

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Bernard DurkanBernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

I am glad to have an opportunity to say a few words. I agree with other speakers that there is no sense in looking back but we should learn our lessons from the recent events.

Other speakers referred to the recognition of the sovereignty of the people in the exercise of their democratic franchise. That is certain, but it is a little confusing from time to time as well. Just a year ago the people exercised their franchise and they voted for the Members of this House. In the recent referendum the people went against the advice of the elected Members of this House and voted for a series of advices that they received from persons, many of whom were not elected at all and all of whom proclaimed to have a much superior knowledge of the workings of the European Union. That is difficult to understand.

I am not trying to second guess the people. A study of fairly recent European history would show that the people, in the exercise of their universal franchise throughout Europe, were not always right. One can think of a certain part of Europe in the 1930s. The modern generation might say that a certain individual was elevated to political prominence by virtue of a seizure of power. He was not. He was elected by universal franchise.

I am not one of those who state that we will never get another chance, that the Lisbon treaty is dead and buried. That is a dangerous route to take. The treaty has been rejected by the people in the way it was explained to them. We may come to a situation — this is from my knowledge of the European institutions — whereby there are changes and we may be lucky to have another chance to look at it.

One matter worries me. I have reasonable intelligence — I am not Einstein. However, I find it difficult to engage in a public debate, for example, on a programme live on air, where it is incumbent on the station to call on somebody with a directly opposite view who contradicts what I, as a public representative, have to say. We are told we are bound by the McKenna judgment in so far as these matters are concerned. In fact, the Joint Committee on European Affairs received a letter from RTE explaining it was bound by the McKenna judgment in covering the affairs of the committee long before the referendum was announced. I do not accept that. There are strict rules laid down on the separation of powers in so far as the courts can exercise their power in the operation of the Oireachtas. If we were to go down that road, it would be a serious matter.

There are those who say that this is a rejection of the political establishment, for want of a better description. There are those who say that it has come to this point and that the public has no confidence in politicians for whatever reason. That may well be, but I advise those who say so to ask themselves what other professions in this country have come through the past 25 years with their reputations untarnished. I will be discreet by not mentioning any profession, but each and every one, whether we like it or not, must take its fair share of the blame for not being able to deliver what it professed to deliver in terms of public accountability, clarity etc. There are a number of issues in that regard we need to look at carefully.

Incidentally, we need a great deal more time to discuss this issue. I am so sorry that we did not have this kind of debate before the referendum. We did not have time for it. We should have had time for it. It is hugely important.

The Lisbon treaty is a complex document. It must be. It is made up of the hopes, worries, fears, aspirations, prejudices, hatreds and loves of 27 member states. That must add up to a complex document. As those who were involved in the Good Friday Agreement, where there were only two or three groups involved and in which no doubt there are many contradictions, will be aware, in all such agreements there are contradictions and in order to bring the people on board it is necessary to put them into it in black and white and argue about it afterwards. That is the way it should be.

Deputy Coveney made references to posters and misinformation. Of course the people did not understand. Of course the people were confused at the end of the day because they received contradicting information.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.