Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)

I second the motion. I re-echo all my friend and colleague, Senator Ormonde, said about the outstanding success of the Irish Presidency and pay tribute to the efforts of those involved. The political leaders — the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, the Minister, Deputy Cowen, and the Minister of State, Deputy Roche — carried the flag for Ireland publicly but, as they readily acknowledged in other fora, they were assisted by an impressive array of Civil Service expertise available to them throughout the Presidency. When one considers the limited resources this country has in comparison to other countries, even those of like size, our Presidency was a remarkable achievement.

Given that the EU will move to a new form of Presidency, with the result that Ireland may never again have the opportunity to head one, this time will be looked on as an historic moment in the development of this country. Although we always use it as a cliché, we are moving closer to Emmet's aspiration about his epitaph being written when we take our place among the nations of the earth. In the context of Emmet's noble aspirations we have not got there yet because of the national question but we are moving towards it internationally.

I am sure the Minister of State has many images of the Presidency. In fact, I look forward to his book. As someone with a great interest in historical record, I hope somebody writes the book and the Minister would be well placed to do so. My enduring image of the Presidency was of the G8 Summit in Georgia where the Taoiseach walked alongside the biggest, strongest, most economically powerful leaders in the free world. While some, full of begrudgery, focused on the Taoiseach's sartorial style, I focused on the people with whom he walked on the strand such as the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Japan, people who are shaping our lives as we speak. The Taoiseach was there with them as an equal, as somebody whose reputation has been enhanced as a result of the various world leadership fora in which he was involved during the Presidency.

I also pay tribute to the Minister of State, Deputy Roche. Members of this House have known him as a Senator and as a colleague for many years. Knowing his voracious appetite for hard work, none of us was surprised at the manner in which he adapted to his role as Minister with responsibility for European Affairs. However, I wish to put on record the significant role he played in the early stages of discussions relating to the problems surrounding the Presidency, specifically those relating to the treaty. He was able to quickly bring together like-minded countries, those with similar interests to Ireland but many of which were outside the EU at that time and looking for leadership. The Minister of State was able to go to the nub of the problem and meet them on firm ground, coming from a country viewed by many of the accession countries as a model. As a result of that correct perception, he was able to use our credibility to great effect and we owe him a great debt for ensuring that we brought these countries on side. I have limited personal knowledge of his efforts having been on the same aeroplane as him as he made telephone calls in an effort to bring people together. He went straight from the aeroplane to a meeting with some of the leaders of like-minded countries.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen's international visits also considerably enhanced this country's role as an arbiter of peace and reconciliation. He visited the Middle East and many other trouble spots as part of the Troika. He went to Kosovo, which is a real problem for us, an issue to which I hope this House will return. The Minister was able to considerably enhance our international image.

My time is limited although I wish I could say more. I will briefly mention the treaty provisions. I am deeply saddened that there is no reference to God in the constitution. I know the Taoiseach, the Minister, Deputy Cowen, the Minister of State, Deputy Roche and the entire Irish delegation did all they could to advance that particular agenda as it reflected the overwhelming view of the people of this country. I am saddened that it has not happened and I cannot understand why.

Foreign policy and defence issues will form a major plank of the debate relating to the constitutional treaty. These issues arose at the Forum on Europe last week. When they come up again in the public arena and are reported on, the manner of the response given at the forum by the Minister, Deputy Cowen, and the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, should eliminate any fears the electorate might have regarding Ireland's continuing role. Our neutrality is confirmed, acknowledged and respected by the member states. I have no doubt the Minister of State will amplify this in his contribution.

I welcome the Charter of Fundamental Rights. I was privileged to be associated with it as a representative of this Parliament during the debate thereon and, therefore, probably have a greater insight than I would normally have. Apart from welcoming it, I also think the charter presents us with a challenge as it concerns the rights of citizens under EU laws. Directives from Europe that are incorporated into Irish law will also be subject to the charter's obligations. There are challenges, certainly with regard to the question of resources. This will be an issue for debate in the coming referendum.

On the referendum strategy, I echo Senator Ormonde's comments that we should harness the wonderful work the forum is doing under the chairmanship of our distinguished friend and colleague, Senator Maurice Hayes. The forum demonstrated during the first and second Nice referenda the valuable role it played in ensuring that proper information was conveyed to the Irish electorate. I know the Taoiseach and the Government are supportive of the forum's continuing role but it should be considerably enhanced because of the importance of this treaty for the future of our country and of Europe.

I hope the Lisbon Agenda will be pursued. We have lost the plot at European Union level regarding the aspirations put forward at Lisbon. We have not achieved as much as was set out at the time. This is an issue in which the Government should have a role. It was, in fact, involved in those discussions over the past number of months. US criticism of Europe is centred around what the US perceives as a regulatory culture endemic in many European countries. Ireland has deregulated to a large extent, but we are alone in that regard. If one considers the manner in which the trade unions and state sector in France, Germany and various other large EU countries operate, there is a real problem regarding competitiveness and the European Union's ability to provide greater prosperity for its citizens.

Due to our strong cultural links with the United States, I suggest Ireland draws its inspiration from Boston. However, we also draw our economic strength from Berlin and other EU countries. That is the pivotal position we are in.

I compliment the Government, the Taoiseach and all associated with the Presidency on the manner in which they were able to restore the EU-US relationship which was effectively in tatters in the aftermath of the Iraq war. What a wonderful day it was in Shannon, irrespective of the begrudgers and those who legitimately held an anti-war position. That day in Shannon brought about a stronger relationship between Ireland and the United States. It also restored the accurate perception of this country as welcoming, especially towards the President of the United States of America with whom we have a strong historical and cultural link. I commend the Government for the manner in which it handled the Shannon visit, notwithstanding the valid rights of those who demonstrated against the war.