Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

In brief, as I sought to outline, this country's position is clear and unequivocal. It was set by the Crotty judgment although we have never tested the extent to which that is the case.

First, there was virtually no enthusiasm for the proposition that voting rights should be removed; rather there was a significant amount of opposition to it. Second, if that were to be the ultimate decision, which would surprise me, it is very clear that if there were to be a major treaty change it would be necessary to take the convention route. There would then be a series of ratification issues across the member states. A treaty change would have to be ratified in any case, but whether this would be by referendum would depend on whether it crossed the line drawn in the Crotty judgment.

I do not wish to disrespect the Deputy's concerns but I do not see the basis for them. It is very clear that if very significant changes were to be proposed which would have subsequent major impacts on the treaty, there would be a convention. Members states simply do not want that. If one opens a convention, one opens up everything and finds oneself in grave difficulties. The argument was made during the course of the Council and the current position of President Van Rompuy is to see how it is possible to accommodate these concerns, which are valid. We all want to have a robust mechanism which will not fail a constitutional challenge. The almost universal belief is that this can be accommodated within the existing treaty arrangements and will not require opening up a convention.

Again, we cannot make that judgment until the final wording becomes available in December. It would be imprudent to get over-excited about it or to be absolute in our view of it until we see the final wording.

See this speech in context