John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)

If we have learned anything from our European colleagues, it is to speak to an issue within six minutes. The Members of this House are not proficient at doing so. I welcome our visitors and I am particularly pleased to see former Members of this House.

I join the Minister in congratulating the Irish people who made an input into the constitution, including Mr. John Bruton, who was a member of the praesidium. The constitution brings together a series of earlier documents. It was extremely difficult, when campaigning on matters such as Maastricht or Amsterdam, to be required to refer constantly to earlier treaties. A roadmap was needed. These matters are now codified in one document. The attachment of the charter of fundamental rights is welcome and will allay concerns on social aspects of the treaty. Broader human rights and social aspects are cemented into the charter. I am glad that a White Paper will be published in June. This will result in wider debate.

We need to nail several issues. There is a belief that the treaty involves creeping federalism and will create a federal state. The characteristics of a federal state are not present. Even if the EU was minded to introduce such a state, I do not know how a federal state could survive on 1% of GNP. I do not see any threat from a potential federal state.

It was a matter of satisfaction that the COSAC meeting in Luxembourg urged national parliaments to spend a week in consideration of the work programme of the Commission and in examination of the annual legislative programme. This was echoed at the recent Speakers' conference in Budapest where the Ceann Comhairle was instrumental in having the same approach adopted. It is welcome that this was incorporated into the conclusion of the COSAC meeting. I hope that further meetings of this nature will ensue. All the delegations were impressed that the Seanad is holding this debate.

We must ask the purpose of a constitution. Our experience is that a constitution limits power and the executive is not given unfettered powers. A constitution proclaims and defends the rights of citizens. Regardless of the left or right wing nature of an administration, it is restricted by a constitution.

The EU constitution is needed to bring coherence and clarity to former treaties. It was difficult for citizens to approach the earlier treaties. The proposed constitution makes it easier to understand the EU. It will not provide for a Union capable of transforming our administration into a liberal or conservative form. That is a matter for national governments and arises from interactions between people and their administrations, among other factors. The constitution confirms the status quo, which is that the EU is only allowed to legislate in those areas where it has been given competence to do so. We pooled our sovereignty in some but not all areas. This is an important issue because confusion existed at the recent hearings of the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. It was assumed, in matters such as Senator Norris's Civil Partnership Bill, that the EU would instruct us on what to do.