Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)

I thank the Taoiseach, the Minister, Deputy Martin, and the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, for coming to the House to discuss the recent important meeting of the European Council. I echo Deputy Timmins's point that it would be constructive to discuss matters which are due to arise at Council meetings in advance of such meetings. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union have discussed the need for more plenary debate in the Chamber. I hope the Taoiseach and his colleagues will take that on board.

I would like to raise a few issues which arise from the Taoiseach's report on the Council meeting. I have attended a few meetings in Brussels since the meeting in question. It seems to me that a clear view has developed at EU level that some kind of referendum will take place in Ireland before June 2009 to facilitate the European elections. Rightly or wrongly, that impression is filtering down from Brussels to the heads of Government and the member states. I do not suggest the Irish Government has put that idea forward, but it has not expressed disagreement with it. I would like some clarity on the matter. There is a sense that the European elections must be run under the terms of the Lisbon treaty. I do not feel we should be put under that kind of pressure, as it would not be productive or constructive.

I would be interested to hear more about the EU proposal to develop a kind of rapid response unit to deal with the economic and financial crisis. It is extraordinary that the heads of Government of the eurozone countries recently met for the first time ever, as that should be a common occurrence. It is extremely important that we provide for co-ordination between those member states which comprise the eurozone. If such a structure were in place, the other member states would inevitably follow the eurozone states as a matter of necessity. I would like that to be placed on a firmer footing. Perhaps the Taoiseach will comment on that.

It became clear, not just during the financial crisis but also during the Georgian crisis, that having a high-profile President of the European Council is a hugely valuable asset for the European Union. It is important for the Union to have such constant representation for longer than six months at a time. The EU is fortunate to have a man with the personality of President Sarkozy, who is the head of a large member state, in charge. That was an asset during the course of the financial crisis. It is important for the Government to keep the need for a more permanent President of the European Council on the agenda, by means of the Lisbon treaty or otherwise. That would benefit all member states in the long term.

I would like to speak about the EU energy and climate change package. Does the Taoiseach believe that Ireland has received a positive response from other EU member states in this regard? This is one of the areas in respect of which I have concerns. Ireland has certainly lost some goodwill at EU level as a result of the "No" vote earlier this year. There is no question about that. As I said to the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, at last Wednesday's meeting of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union, I do not believe the Government has been sufficiently forthright in transmitting to the public the negative implications of the "No" vote for Ireland's credibility at European level. Does the Taoiseach feel that when the climate change package is being agreed, Ireland will not get the type of deal we might have hoped for if there had been a "Yes" vote in the referendum earlier this year? Will the result of the referendum damage us in that respect?

I would like to conclude by speaking about an issue that was raised at the sub-committee last week. Deputy Timmins alluded to the establishment of the reflection group. I understand that Ireland nominated a high-calibre, top-quality individual for membership of the group, but we did not manage to get him on to the group. Is the Taoiseach disappointed with that? Does he think the rejection of the nomination results from the "No" vote? If we had secured a "Yes" vote in June, is it possible the outcome of that process would have been different? Perhaps there would be an Irish voice at the reflection group.

See this speech in context