Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the fact that time has been allocated in the House in order that we might discuss Ireland's engagement with Europe. I also welcome the fact that the Minister of State is present. He has shown considerable zeal for developing Ireland's position in Europe, particularly in the context of his constant travelling through the European Union each week to meet our partners, to network and to maintain and build upon relationships which were first established when we joined the European Union. The approach he has taken is the correct one and I wish him well with it.

Our discussion on the European Union during the past four years has continually and understandably focused on our engagement with the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund and their implementation of the bailout programme. Thankfully, that programme is now in the past. Not forgetting that experience, I hope that our discussions on this topic will broaden again. We need to begin to focus on the future of Europe and on Ireland's place in that future. In the context of current debates, we often forget how far the European Union has come in the short ten years from 2004 to 2014. Ten years ago, Ireland led one of the most successful presidencies in the history of the European Union. On 1 May that year, then new states, many from the former Soviet Union, joined the European Union. If anyone wants to understand the importance of that development, he or she need only consider what is happening in Ukraine at present in the context of the battle taking place between Europe and Russia for the hearts and minds of a people who want to progress, to embrace that for which the European Union stands and the principles of democracy and who want change for themselves and future generations. I welcome the support taken by High Representative Catherine Ashton and others, with the assistance of the Irish Government, in assisting in bringing about a peaceful resolution to the crisis in Ukraine. It is worth noting that, yet again, Europe is somewhat powerless in this instance. Thankfully, however, there has been an easing of the tension in Ukraine. It has not eased to the degree most people would like but the country has retreated from being on the verge of outright war. Europe is still ill-equipped to deal with a crisis of the magnitude which could have developed in Ukraine. Yet again, the US began making statements directed at Russia and suggested that it might involve itself in the crisis. Europe has a long way to go in the context of reaching a point where when issues of this nature arise in states on our borders, it will be ready to deal with them.

Ten years ago, when the countries to which I referred earlier joined the EU, our neighbours and friends who had previously been kept apart from the rest of the Continent by the Iron Curtain were finally welcomed home. The official ceremony to welcome them to the EU took place in Áras an Uachtaráin in the Phoenix Park and it represented a high point in Ireland's engagement with the European Union. At that time, the President of the European Council, the President of the European Parliament and the Secretary General of the European Commission were all citizens of Ireland. We often lose sight of the level of engagement we have had at the centre of the European Union's decision-making process. That level of engagement speaks volumes for the way in which successive Governments have engaged with the European Union project. They did so in a way which encouraged senior civil servants and senior Government advisers to identify a path towards becoming part of the administration of the EU. They did so because they saw the benefits which could accrue to Ireland. As part of that process they have made moves designed to allow them to work within the structures of the various institutions of the European Union. This has been of immense assistance to Ireland, not because those to whom I refer have done us favours but because - from an Irish perspective - they have played a role in developing the thinking relating to the direction which the Union should take. The engagement to which I refer is real and tangible and it ultimately benefits this State. Such engagement means that we can have a real and permanent influence on the direction in which the EU is going to go.

My concern, which is probably shared by the Minister of State, is that over time we will lose that unless we continue to remain engaged at a political level and until we continue to regard it as important as it was when we joined Europe. This is more difficult now because the engagement is different. When we joined we looked to Europe as being the cash cow that resolved issues we were unable to resolve from our own Exchequer returns. The funding streams from Europe provided the capacity to build up our infrastructure that had been left in a relatively diminished state. I refer to the social gains that resulted from our co-operation with other European states. Now the tangible benefits do not seem as obvious to the people. The financial crisis has created a level of dissatisfaction and the blame game has developed. In many cases politicians are responsible for this dissatisfaction. When measures in our interest need to be dealt with, it is very easy to go back to the constituency and blame the bad Europeans for foisting this upon us. That is a negative attitude which will not be helpful in the long run to the attitude of the people to the European Union.

Under the 2004 Irish Presidency the treaty establishing a constitution for Europe was agreed which eventually led to the comprehensive reforms of the EU contained in the Treaty of Lisbon, a treaty regarded by some academics as the final treaty change in Europe for decades to come. We know now that has not been and will not be the case. The financial and economic crisis which engulfed both sides of the Atlantic was to threaten the very foundation of the European Union. The constitutional and economic framework of the Union was to prove grossly inadequate at a time of extreme turmoil and led not only to a financial and economic crisis but to a political crisis from Lisbon to Athens. This crisis has left a deep scar on the societal fabric of the union. This will take time to heal. One of the biggest scars is that of unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, which hit 23.5% in 2013 within the EU. Parts of Europe are now threatened with the possibility of a lost generation. Many young people view the EU in a very negative light. Where the Union was often associated with opportunity, it is now viewed with great suspicion and often fear. If the Union is to have a future, it must address these problems with greater urgency than has been the case. It must ensure the benefits of EU membership are spread equally among the member states and citizens of the European Union. The EU must reform itself if these goals are to be achieved.

This links to my earlier point that when we joined the European Union we saw the benefits because they were real and tangible. We have reached a level of infrastructural development on a par with many states of our size. We are in a different phase now and the demands are different. If we try to explain our engagement with Europe by pointing to what it has done for us and arguing that we should stick with the programme, that argument will not be sufficient to hold this current generation. We must show that the European project, which is all member states working together, has the capacity to address the challenges facing today's generation. This must mean finding an appropriate resolution to the youth unemployment crisis.

Fianna Fáil firmly believes that the reforms which have been enacted do not go far enough to guarantee the future prosperity of the EU. Key elements are missing from the constitutional and economic framework of the EU which leave us all vulnerable. Despite some significant reforms enacted to battle the financial crisis, the EU has still found itself asking the same question of where it goes from here. That question has yet to be answered by those who driving the European project. The only constant since the economic and financial crisis in Europe began five years ago, is the absolute lack of leadership being shown by the European political elite. This is a great shame as the potential of unlocking the energy and talent of 28 countries with more than 500 million people has been lost in those years.

Thankfully, we have moved away from the continuous crisis model of management, thanks more in part to actions in Frankfurt than in Brussels. However, many deep problems remain for Europe. As a small but highly respected member state which has been the poster boy in both the good and the bad times, Ireland must engage with Europe and seek to offer credible solutions to those problems.

I reiterate my party's position regarding Ireland's future in Europe about which there should be no doubt. Fianna Fáil is committed to Ireland remaining at the core of the European Union. We must ensure we remain at the centre of the European Union and the eurozone while being at the vanguard of further institutional and political developments. With this in mind, Fianna Fáil is determined to restore the Community method of decision-making in the EU institutions. We believe the EU must rebalance the institutional powers of the EU back in favour of the European Commission and away from the intergovernmental approach which has become increasingly prominent in recent years.

The Minister of State and I have discussed this issue in the House. During the crisis the European Commission was not equipped to deal with the crisis that befell the European Union. I remind the Minister of State of the weekly spectacle of the premiers of France and Germany holding crisis summits in each other's country which, in my view, did very real damage to the citizens' perception of how the EU was managed. Confidence in the Community model was eroded and the Commission was sidelined with decisions being taken by the two big countries. This did more to damage the entire perception of the European Union than the economic crisis. Crises come and go. The measure of a man or a woman or an institution is in how crises are dealt with. Sadly, we were found lacking. While the Community is progressing in dealing with the banking crisis by establishing a banking union that it is hoped will deal with any future similar crisis, I still do not believe the Commission has an appropriate level of confidence in the Community model and the level of support is not sufficient.

As the guardian of EU treaties and the common European interest, including protection of the interests of smaller member states, the European Commission must be restored as the guiding force in European affairs. Otherwise, the unfairness inherent in intergovernmental leadership will create a great division between large and small member states. This would threaten the stability of the EU in the long run.

My party is of the view that Ireland should lead the call for rebuilding the economic and monetary union. Now is the time to re-examine the structures of the EMU as well as the mandate of the European Central Bank. The architecture to ensure the long-term sustainability of the eurozone is still absent. This must be corrected and provide a basis for the future prosperity of the EU. The ECB's mandate must require policies for targeted growth as well as targeting inflation. Its adherence to German economic theory may well work for Germany, but this is a monetary union of 18 member states, not one. This should be reflected in ECB policy-making.

I hope the Members opposite will agree when I state that a fully functioning banking union is also an extremely necessary part of the rebuilding of the EMU. Any future banking union must include common regulation, common deposit insurance and a common resolution mechanism. Without these elements, a fully functioning banking union will not be achieved and we risk repeating the very serious mistakes of the past.

While I accept that achieving agreement between 18 member states on banking union, including the agreement of member states who have not suffered the same kind of economic crisis as Ireland, is difficult, it highlights the lethargic approach to achieving banking union. A key element for Ireland in these developments is the separation of sovereign debt from banking debt. Fianna Fáil believes the EU must fulfil its commitment to separate sovereign debt and banking debt within the EU. The euro area Heads of State or Government agreed in June 2012 to break the vicious circle between banks and sovereigns. It is time to fulfil this commitment by retroactively recapitalising Irish banks. Although banking union needs to be agreed before these commitments can be implemented, it sends out the wrong message to the citizens of this State and other states. It shows that Europe is not equipped to deal quickly and succinctly with a problem.

If we are serious about this, we have to be far more progressive and efficient in getting decisions made. Ireland must continue to play its full part in all of the institutions of the European Union. Decisions made in Brussels, Strasbourg and Frankfurt have dramatic implications for our country and our citizens. We must remain engaged in the discussions on the future development of the EU and play our part in shaping that future.

See this speech in context