Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this amendment to Standing Orders. I would disagree with Deputy Barry on the reason this has come before the House tonight. He said it was because of the Fianna Fáil Bill that was introduced some weeks ago, but that is not the case. If we had had a functioning Parliament from 2009 onwards, this would have been in Standing Orders from that time after the Lisbon treaty was passed by the people in a referendum. Such a measure was not required in the past because of the reality that a Private Members' Bill would never have seen the light of day beyond Second Stage. It is happening now because it is possible for Private Members' Bills to move beyond Second Stage. That is a factor in view of the minority Government that we have in place.

Ordinary people are shocked and surprised by this measure. One of the characteristics of the European treaties we have been adopting here is that people do not actually know what they contain. It is only as years pass and the outworkings of what people voted on become clear that we see that the German Parliament sees our budget before we do and gets to consult on it and that the ECB, which is unaccountable to anybody within the European Union, has to see our Bills also before they come before these Houses. That is what shocks people, but they do not make the connection between the decision they made in voting for this treaty and what is happening now, namely, the undermining of our sovereignty across the board, which I always outlined in the past when European treaties came before the people in terms of their far-reaching effect. We saw it last year in the decision of our Minister for Foreign Affairs to go along with a European motion attacking the Palestinian Authority. We signed up to the Common Foreign and Security Policy so we went along with that decision and gave up our traditional independence in our foreign affairs dealings. These situations are the outworkings of the treaties we have passed, and that is what people find disturbing.

I welcome this debate in the House because it will widen the public view of the way the European Union has undermined this State's sovereignty. It might also make people more aware of this if a treaty ever comes before us again, because it seems the European Union will be working very hard to make sure that a democratic vote will not have to be taken on any future treaty changes. I am sure our Government and the establishment parties in this House will work to ensure that there is no risk that the people will be asked to make a decision on a treaty again. It is important in that it shows the undemocratic nature of the European Union and the unaccountable nature of the ECB.

It is something we are legally obliged to do but I do not believe we should do it willingly. More debate is needed on the implications and workings of European treaties and to bring that knowledge to the people so they can understand the true nature of the European Union when the time comes to make decisions in the future.

See this speech in context