Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)

I strongly agree with Deputy Kenny's assertion that the European Union should not spend too much time analysing where it should go from here and that it should deal with certain issues. I thank the Taoiseach for providing an outline of what happened at the Council meeting.

Since the establishment of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union, I have been struck not by the lack of information available but by the lack of knowledge and also the absence of a desire to acquire such knowledge. We must consider every mechanism possible to make what is a boring subject interesting or to encourage people to at least learn more about it and how it impacts upon them. The Taoiseach could assist in this regard by addressing the Dáil before each Council meeting and indicating the issues he hopes to raise and the matters that will be on the agenda. The relevant Ministers come before the Joint Committee on European Affairs before each Council meeting they attend. I accept that if the Taoiseach came before the Dáil to provide information such as that to which I refer, his actions might never be publicised because this matter does not help to sell newspapers and, by and large, members of the media are not interested in it.

I wish to highlight a number of issues, although it might be more appropriate to raise them at Question Time. Will the Minister for Foreign Affairs elaborate on the proposed establishment of a financial crisis cell, indicate what will be the composition of such a cell and outline the role it will play? It is stated in the Presidency's conclusions to the report that, "The European Council calls on the Member States to ensure that their future national measures also respect those principles, and to take account of the possible effect of their decisions on the other Member States". Was it apparent at the Council meeting that other member states were somewhat dissatisfied with the Government's decision to guarantee all deposits and bank dealings before discussing the matter with the European Commission? Was there a backlash in respect of this decision, which was the correct one and which was well within the rules of the Commission? Did the Government discuss with the Commission any aspect of this matter before it made the decision to which I refer or did it contact the latter when the decision had been made?

Deputy Kenny referred to energy security. The Council dealt with the matters of energy and climate change which are supposed to be dealt with before the end of the year. It also agreed to speed up the work relating to energy security. Energy efficiency and production are perhaps the most important economic issues with which the world will be obliged to deal. We have not given the necessary time to considering either issue. The cost of energy has been relatively low in recent decades. This has impinged upon the desire to arrive at an energy policy. We have to look at every aspect of energy production. Ireland is a small country, which does not consume very much in the global scheme of things. Perhaps we should examine the possibility of Ireland becoming a hub for energy production.

The establishment of the reflection group on the future of Europe is an important development. When people vote on the Lisbon treaty and other EU matters, one of the problems is that they generally tend to feel like they are on a train and do not know where it is going. Some countries may have an idea of what the endgame will be. It is important that all member states know what the EU is actually aspiring to. Like all democracies and organisations, the EU has to evolve. The reflection group will serve a good purpose if it outlines where we are going. Are the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs disappointed that Ireland is not represented on the group?

As a member of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union, I have listened to representatives of many groups over recent weeks. The sub-committee was told that 152,000 people are directly employed and 300,000 people are indirectly employed as a result of foreign direct investment in this country. Such companies pay €16 billion directly to the Exchequer. In that context, it beggars belief that we voted "No" in the referendum on the Lisbon treaty. It is a reflection on us all. It is something we have to address. It is good to hear the implications of our "No" vote being articulated. One of the weaknesses we had during the referendum campaign was that the public felt a "No" vote would have no implications, but that is not the case.

See this speech in context