Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)

This is how Members earn their money. Europe is pushing parliaments towards a more central role but we are not taking a similar initiative to avail of the opportunities that now exist. We can establish a stronger link with EU institutions and, in particular, with our MEPs so that important issues are raised at the outset, when we are composing legislation, rather than at the end, when we are transposing it. That is one way by which MEPs can earn their salaries. The Government operates at the Council of Europe but elected representatives can player a bigger role in the activities of the EU.

The German constitutional court recently decided that the Lisbon treaty does not undermine the German constitution but that parliamentary mechanisms were required to ensure maximum participation in the treaty's provisions. The German courts told legislators what they needed to do before they could fully ratify the treaty. More than anything else, this legislation is about the principle of payment, how it will take place and the type of payment. It is also about whether the payment of new members of the European Parliament will be struck not at the level of Members of the Oireachtas or any other EU national parliament, but at 38.5% of the basic pay of a judge of the European Court of Justice. Courts of justice are certainly not on their uppers at present; they are doing quite well in that respect. Most judges could volunteer to take a little cut in their payments, as we have seen in our own case. I acknowledge, however, that the principle is important.

I seek clarification on the national taxation side of it. As I understand it, provision is made for the salary to be paid by the European Parliament and the Irish Government or the Oireachtas will act as the agent for payment. The European Parliament will be the paymaster, but the Bill states that there will be no double taxation. That seems to suggest the taxation that will take place is national taxation. If the national taxation is the only one that takes place, we are reintroducing a new principle which will not be along the principle of parity of treatment. It will undermine that if all national tax codes of the 27 member states will kick into place for that payment. I would like some clarification on that matter to see if there is a common taxation of all MEPs' salaries. Otherwise, it would seem that by simply applying national tax codes of member states one will be reintroducing the flaw that was there when the salary was tagged on to the salary of each national parliament.

I suppose we will have to accept the idea that MEPs are barred from membership of certain bodies. Members of the Oireachtas have been disbarred from membership of a range of bodies, including quangos, but in some cases one wonders why that situation is required. If it is now established that members of parliament are to be disbarred by virtue of being members of parliament, then I would be inclined to agree that the principle should also extend to the European Parliament.

I welcome the legislation and hope that it will prompt a wider debate in this House along the lines I have suggested. We need a full-scale debate on our entire relationship to the European Union, not just concerning MEPs salaries. The debate should include how that relationship has developed over the decades and what structures are pertinent to our present and future participation. Maybe the time to do it is when, hopefully, the Lisbon treaty has been passed. That will be the time for a broad-ranging discussion on the implications of the Lisbon treaty, the enhancement of EU structures and how the Oireachtas can maximise and optimise our involvement in the EU.

See this speech in context