Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State was smiling when I mentioned this in the Chamber last week. If we are to have a discussion, we must talk about this. Where is the Europe of Jacques Delors? Are we being offered the Europe of Jean-Claude Juncker with a multi-billion euro investment plan that has no levers to provide for investment by countries such as Ireland? While the plan is very welcome, it does not do anything. Europe has done a Houdini job of locking itself up with a set of rules largely on a German imperative. However, unlike Houdini it does not seem to be able to find the key. It is full of good intentions but contains relatively little action.

People in many European countries feel that things they or their parents took for granted - constant and continual incremental improvements in their lifestyle - are put under threat by changes that appear to come from what for many people is a remote location, namely, Brussels, and from a leadership that seems remote from most people, including those in their home countries. The Minister of State knows what it is like to go to Brussels. While it is a great project to bring many people together, there must be a change in style in European leadership. Maybe Jean-Claude Juncker will say he got it wrong and did not deliver the investment to all those young people who are unemployed. Maybe he will have the grace and courage to stand down. If one wants to fight poverty and have a social Europe, the most important thing is employment of young people. When I was in government I prioritised, and the Government agreed, reducing youth unemployment in Ireland and across the EU. It was a critical priority for our economic, social and political future. The diffidence and, in some cases, the downright hostility, of the European right, however, has meant this aim has stalled in many countries, including countries that desperately need a recovery in the number of young people going to work.

Last week, I asked the Minister of State and the Taoiseach, who was beside him at the time, whether the Government had a plan B. I have heard much of the detail that has been rolled out, some of which has been helpful. However, I am not convinced as yet. With the benefit of hindsight, it was stupid to take the debate on the summer economic statement. As I said last week, I was firmly in the "Remain" camp and I am, and always have been, strongly pro-European, yet the Government parties launched the summer economic statement. They were so confident last week when I said I was not sure if the referendum would pass based on conversations I had with many people involved in politics in different parts of the UK, particularly members of the British Labour Party. There was a great deal of scepticism about whether this might come to pass.

Last week, we also discussed the murder of Jo Cox. There has been a development in politics of the language of hate as opposed to the language of argument and that is no good, whether people are totally opposed to Europe, as is the case with some Members, or are strongly in favour. Hate will not replace argument in politics. Argument means people disagree and put forward different cases while hate involves doing what the Nazis did, namely, turning the people opposed to them into the other and then any action against those people - such as the murder of Jo Cox - becomes a possibility. We need to guard against that in this debate. We need to be particularly careful about this extraordinarily destructive language. On the extreme right, however, no more than on the extreme left, a language of hate is corroding most of our democracies and inhibiting good discussion that could help us reach better decisions and solutions. For example, women, in particular, have been targeted on social media.

The fading connection between citizens and EU institutions will not be restored simply by diplomatic work and choreography, vital and all as that will be. It will not be enough to restore what has been shattered. The European Council and the Commission have to convincingly answer the charge levelled by the eurosceptic camp that democracy is being undermined by the EU system. Their argument is based on the idea that only by reversion to the nation state can we restore to people the sense they can kick out their rulers at elections and choose new ones, if that is their wish. It is a powerful argument, which needs to be met by convincing reform of the European Council and the Commission. Reform is important in this context.

As a social democrat, I believe that the best protection against poverty is secure and fairly-paid work. I was appalled by the EU's initial response to the financial crisis, which was too slow, dictated from the centre and ideologically bunkered in outlook. From 2011 onwards, I repeatedly argued, together with my colleagues in the Labour Party, that the EU needed to shift from austerity towards a policy based on investment, growth and job creation, with full employment the central target. I pressed the case for that at European level at every opportunity. I hope, during the upcoming discussion, that the Government will press that case because confidence in the profoundly democratic European idea of providing a decent education, good prospects of securing decent, well-paid work. and services to people during their lives will not return.

Young people, as the referendum in the UK demonstrates, grasp the advantages of an open, diverse Europe. It is a shame that this link is in grave danger, and if it is further weakened, Europe could unravel. This is the one priority that should obsess those who sit in Brussels. The European Council and Commission need to restore among European citizens, particularly those in Ireland, Britain and France, a sense that a collective endeavour of solidarity, a founding principle of the Union, and of social values can deliver what they need and want. There is no point blaming the voters for the disconnect between citizens and the EU. Those in the EU leadership must examine what they offer. We want to restore the great solidarity that underpinned the European ideal because that will be essential if we are to deal with global challenges such as migration, climate change and unemployment. Going it alone, which many eurosceptics want, is not an option. We are stronger working together. Ní neart go cur le chéile. Following the recent financial crisis, as has happened generally throughout history, the consensus on policy shifted to the right and social progress stalled. We have to face today’s great challenges.

John Hume, the architect of the peace process for Ireland, made many political sacrifices to persuade, for example, Sinn Féin to be involved in negotiations and to put down the guns and stop the killing, torture and maiming. That was a great achievement. We need to be conscious, as we enter this difficult phase when people in the North have clearly voted in favour of remaining in the EU for a variety of sound reasons, that there is not an opportunity plucked which would return us to the old days of simple head counts and majoritarianism and which would oppose the vision of people such as John Hume to bring everyone together and to foster unification rather than division. People may mean well in what they propose but they need to look further down the road because not much more than a year ago, David Cameron took a political gamble that seemed to have a certain answer. Like him, they could be very wrong.

See this speech in context