Paul Connaughton Snr (Galway East, Fine Gael)

Like almost every other Member of the House, I am of the view that the referendum on 2 October will be a crucial test for the Irish nation and its people. I have been a Deputy for some time and I cannot recall a more important test.

Despite the complexities of the EU laws deemed necessary to help direct the lives of 500 million people across 27 countries, there are few enough questions which arise to be answered in respect of those laws. When the referendum is held on 2 October, everyone will be required to answer a central question, namely, whether the 4.2 million people who live in this country, which is located on the periphery of Europe, should enjoy the benefits - and in some instances the shortcomings - of having access to the potentially massive market that exists across the 27 countries of the Union. They must also evaluate whether we have a better chance of selling, at a premium, the vast array of goods and services we produce inside or outside the European Union. In other words, we must ask whether we need the EU more than it needs us.

Will Ireland's participation as a fully integrated member of the EU lead to low interest rates? There is no question that Ireland will be always a member of the Union but we must ask whether we will be at the centre of things if we reject the Lisbon treaty. If Ireland remains on the periphery of Europe, literally and otherwise, will that be good or bad for the countless thousands of young couples that are up to their eyeballs in debt as a result of the large mortgages they took out to purchase their homes?

Will the changes that have been introduced to the Lisbon treaty make the mood more conducive in the context of allowing people to make up their own minds or will the famous slogan "If in doubt, leave it out" so successfully employed by the anti-Lisbon treaty lobby during the previous campaign again hold sway. I heard that slogan on a thousand occasions when campaigning on the previous occasion. Many people said they did not fully understand the treaty and that those opposing it must be right so, therefore, they voted "No". That is a trap into which we cannot fall on this occasion.

As already stated, the laws governing the EU are extremely complex. Hundreds of students write PhDs on the subject each year. However, I am concerned with regard to the fundamental questions that arise for the ordinary man and woman which will have to be answered prior to 2 October. If one were to research and study the myriad laws deemed necessary to run Galway County Council, not to mention a Department, one would easily come to understand how seemingly complex are the laws required to order the lives of 500 million people across 27 countries. That does not mean, however, that we should not try to bring the EU closer to every citizen of the Union.

In 1971 I was involved with Macra na Feirme, which canvassed extensively to bring about Ireland's access to the then EEC. The principles behind the EU, which I do not have time to discuss in detail at this point, are the same now as they were then.

We must ask whether the new version of the Lisbon treaty is more appropriate than that which was rejected by the people. Many people either did not vote on the previous occasion or they voted "No". In fairness to the Minister, the Government, the leaders of Fine Gael and the Labour Party and everyone else involved, I am genuinely of the view that the new version is more appropriate. I wish to provide a number of examples in that regard. I know the Minister has heard them a thousand times but there is no harm in placing them on record again.

I have always believed that preventing each country from having a Commissioner was a major mistake and I said so during the previous referendum campaign. Not only did those on the Minister's side of the House disagree with me, so too did certain Members on this side. Irish people and those of most other nationalities like to see their man at the centre of power. Whether they are right or wrong in this regard is another story altogether. The fact is, however, that many Irish people want to see one of their compatriots representing them in the green jersey. It can be argued that this is not what EU Commissioners do. However, countless hundreds of people in my constituency did not vote on the previous occasion because Ireland was going to lose its Commissioner. I sincerely hope that the fact that this will no longer be the case will make a major difference to the result on 2 October.

The issue with which we are dealing is extremely complex. The European Union is comprised of separate countries which have many and diverse interests and among which there are vast cultural differences. These countries are joined by a strong thread which demands a Europe of rights and values, freedom, solidarity and security. Citizens' rights, the Charter of Fundamental Human Rights and the freedom of European citizens surely must be core democratic principles to which all law-abiding people in Europe - and their counterparts throughout the world - would aspire. In light of the principles it espouses, it is fitting that Irish people are at the heart of something as great as the European Union.

I agree with Deputy Ned O'Keeffe's assertions in respect of farming and agriculture. However, I do not have time to deal with that matter now. Although it was presented as being otherwise, it always has been the case that, under the Lisbon treaty, we will retain control over our tax rates. That is a major issue for the Irish people. If I succeeded in doing nothing else other than getting that message across, I would be satisfied. This is an extremely important matter.

We must move forward and run the referendum campaign on the basis that we have respect for those who wish to vote "No". We must take into account their views but we must also get our point across and ensure there is a resounding "Yes" vote.

See this speech in context