Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I am telling him our point of view and I have laid out clearly what we must do to have endorsement of the Lisbon treaty. The Taoiseach's speech mentioned nothing other than four issues of the European Council in October. I guarantee they will go through at the meeting but I want to know his response. He knows that himself.

The Minister knows there must be meaningful discussion with the people to rebuild understanding of and support for the European process. There is a deep appreciation among people for the pivotal role and meaning of EU membership in the economic and social progress of the country over the last decade. People can see the immediate reduction in mortgage repayments as a result of the ECB reducing its interest rates. These are important elements of everyday life in considering being of the Union.

There is a recognition that this country's future best lies at the heart of a reformed, efficient and effective Europe. The Taoiseach mentioned that the referendum campaign and subsequent voter research revealed a very low level of public understanding of the role and functioning of the Union and a perception that Europe is responsible for excessive bureaucracy and regulation. That is obvious from the meetings the Minister and I attended around the country. This disconnect is a significant challenge for everybody. I have argued, since before the referendum when the Government was involved in other activities internal to it, about the importance of Europe and Ireland's future progress. I pointed out that, for younger people in particular, the initial monumental success of the European project in securing peace and stability is simply an historic fact. Many do not remember, because they were not yet born, a time when we all had our different currencies. For us it happened relatively recently but for them it is a different era.

Those committed to the European process cannot depend on past achievements if we are to build public support in the future, because they are simply historic facts. We must move with the times and change for the future. We must persuade people that a reformed, democratic and efficient Europe is essential to meet economic and political challenges we face with the growth of emerging economies all over the world. Other issues are climate change, energy security and Third World development.

In the past five months, we undertook comprehensive consultations on this matter, within the party with legal advisers and other experts. Arising from these consultations we published a list of initial proposals to improve public support for the European process, with the ultimate aim of creating the conditions whereby this country can ratify the Lisbon treaty. We want a strengthened role for the Oireachtas on European issues. Given the proportion of legislation that originates from European Union directives and regulations, the work of the committee on European scrutiny is a crucial function.

The Minister's predecessor upgraded it to full committee status and I respect this. It is a crucial committee and must be resourced properly to understand the significant directives coming and what they mean for Ireland. This role will be further enhanced should the Lisbon treaty come into force with a provision to strengthen the role of national parliaments in the EU decision-making process.

The current powers of the committee are too narrow. Fine Gael wants the European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002 to be amended to increase the powers of the committee so it can require Ministers to appear before it prior to attending meetings where decisions are made in Brussels and to return and seek reports. We also favour giving the committee the power to invite submissions or accept petitions on EU law or legislative proposal from members of the public.

Fine Gael proposed the establishment of a new constitutional office of a European Union citizens' officer. This appointee would act as an independent advisory officer on all aspects of European Union legislation, including its transposition into Irish law. He or she would work closely with the European committees of the Oireachtas and have the power to make recommendations to Government on all aspects of European Union legislative development.

This watchdog role would be parallel or comparable to the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General, and would also be responsible for providing impartial information on the facts of European issues, including when conflicting arguments arise. People often do not have much faith in the political process. A constitutional officer, as part of the Constitution, would be a form of comfort, protection and absolute objectivity. The creation of this office would require a constitutional referendum which could be held on the day of the local and European elections or with the children's referendum.

Many groups and individuals have complained bitterly about the impact of regulation and red tape, which is a consequence of how the European Union does its business. In some cases, such as the imposition of water charges on schools, the EU is wrongly blamed by Ministers. When the news is bad Brussels is blamed and when it is good they take the credit. There is a perception that the European Union is responsible for excessive regulation of the environment, food safety, business and direct payments to farmers. We have had this all over the country. Have we done anything about it? We have not. There is also a sense that for some of these sectors, there is a more stringent and vigorous approach to implementation in Ireland than in other member states. Some say directives are transposed into law here to the tenth degree on the first day, rather than phased in with flexibility and common sense as happens in other countries.

An independent audit should be commissioned into the transposition and implementation of EU law in Ireland. This audit would prioritise areas that have caused concern and controversy for farmers, sheepmen, bog cutters, small business people and so on. It would include an international comparative analysis in order that it can be established if greater flexibility is being applied in other member states. Such an audit should invite submissions from the public which feels aggrieved at the impact of the implementation of EU legislation on their lives or business activities. There is no clarity on what aspects of international treaties require constitutional approval. Fine Gael proposes a second constitutional change to allow future international treaties — not the Lisbon treaty — to be referred to the Supreme Court when agreed in order that we could establish what exactly was in those international treaties that would require a referendum. Can anybody in the House tell us what aspect of the Lisbon treaty actually requires a referendum? It would make eminent good sense for a future Government to send an agreed international treaty to the Supreme Court to find out what elements of the treaty actually required constitutional endorsement. The Government should also pursue negotiations with our European partners aimed at establishing a transparent vetting procedure for judges nominated for appointment to the European Court of Justice.

It is clear that the referendum result has created doubts about Ireland's position in the European Union. It is also clear, from the evidence of Irish officials before the sub-committee, that the perception of Ireland as a positive and constructive participant in EU decision making is weakened by the current situation. The fact that 25 of the 27 member states have already ratified the treaty — another member is likely to do so — creates a dilemma for Ireland. It is clear that the other member states are opposed to any renegotiation of the treaty, but there is a willingness to help this country in other ways.

Some experts have suggested it may be legally possible for the Lisbon treaty to be ratified in whole or in part through the Oireachtas. I do not agree with that approach because it is very uncertain and open to the perception that it is bypassing the will of the people. The eventual solution to this question must be based on a referendum. On the day the referendum votes were counted I said the same question could not be put to the people a second time in the same way. There must be a tangible difference in the proposition in order that we propose that each member state retain the right to nominate a Commissioner. This cannot be achieved without ratification of the Lisbon treaty, as the current treaties require a reduction in size at the end of next year. The Government should seek a formal, binding, European Council decision to the effect that, should the Lisbon treaty be ratified, it will use the reverse clause in the treaty for the appointment of a Commissioner in every country. I campaigned differently before the referendum, but if that is what the people in Europe need, that is fair enough.

We should opt in on co-operation on justice and home affairs issues. We have seen €700 million worth drugs seized off the Cork coast and €100 million worth of drugs seized beyond Mizen Head. We should face up to this issue and support the efforts to combat international crime across countries. The results of crime are there for everybody to see, with tragic consequences such as the expansion of anti-social behaviour in Dublin. The Government should abandon the opt-out in this area, which would make eminent sense.

There are a couple of other clarifications to be made. During the referendum campaign concerns were expressed that the Lisbon treaty could lead to changes in the powers of national governments on direct taxation, military neutrality, conscription and abortion. All of these issues can be dealt with and some of them have been dealt with in other treaties. Given the doubts generated, Fine Gael believes the Government should seek clarification from our EU partners, confirming that the Lisbon treaty will not change the current legal position on these issues. We favour these clarifications in the form of directives and decisions, similar to the form taken by Denmark following its rejection of the Maastricht treaty. Such decisions can be deemed to be legally binding when registered with the United Nations as international agreements and subsequently incorporated into protocols attached to the next treaty.

These initiatives would make a real difference to public attitudes towards the European Union. Ireland can be restored to a central role in the Union in a way that will be both understood and supported by the people. These proposals, put forward constructively by Fine Gael, would add greatly to dealing with the concerns of the people about the Lisbon treaty and the future of the European Union. The Taoiseach should not take for granted the support we have always given in European referenda. I want to see this endorsed fully, but the Taoiseach should not get locked into some half-hearted, woolly strategy that could put the future of this country's participation in the European Union at risk. I regret that there has been no real consultation by the Government parties with the Opposition parties about something that is so fundamental to the future of every person living on this island.

See this speech in context