Mr. Mitchell, MEP:

I thank the House for this invitation. It is a privilege to be here today. The constitutional document contains four parts. Part I deals with the provisions which define the Union. Significantly, Part II deals with the charter of fundamental rights while Part IV contains the final clauses, which deal with procedures for adopting and revising the constitution. Part III contains something like 321 articles, or approximately three quarters of the total and deals with the policies and operation of the Union. In the main, it reproduces articles from previous treaties which set out the provisions governing the Union's policies in a re-numbered and more logical format. This part includes policies like the free movement of goods, services, persons and capital as well as the common agricultural and fisheries policies and other issues of that nature. We arrived at this point through a unique process.

Mr. Mitchell, MEP:

The biggest group in the Convention, some 55 of the 105 main members, were also members of national parliaments. I was Chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs and we met members of our delegation before they went out and after they returned. The process involved both Government and Parliament and never before has such an effort been made to include people.

Mr. Mitchell, MEP:

Senator Ross asked what this will do for Ireland. Some 60 million people died in the first half of the last century and the Union has grown to include 25 member states. The constitution does for Ireland what it does for the other 24 member states. It helps us to continue providing the prerequisite for prosperity, namely, the stability and peaceful evolution of Europe. It does this and no more. If we forget that the primary objective of the European Union is to keep peace and stability in Europe, we will have lost our way. The constitution sets down the rules agreed by the 25 member states as to how that will be achieved, to be ratified by their parliaments or public.

Mr. Mitchell, MEP:

In the few minutes available to me, I will state something with which not everyone in this House or the Dáil will agree. It is time we stopped eulogising Irish neutrality. I can only find two definitions for it, but thankfully people like Patrick Keating have written extensively about the issue. The first was set down by Seán MacBride in 1949 when, as Minister for External Affairs, he stated that we would become full charter members of NATO the day after partition ends. The second definition by the then Taoiseach, Charles Haughey, pledged that Ireland would take on common defence responsibilities when our GDP exceeded 80% of the European Union average. Although I am unsure what the present incumbent has stated on the issue, every other Taoiseach since Seán Lemass has stated that if common defence becomes a requirement of our membership of the European Union, we would take it on.

Mr. Mitchell, MEP:

It is not a requirement under this treaty, but we should seek to make it so. We are losing a golden opportunity to shape the common defence of Europe in a way that best suits our interests. If memory serves, Article III-41 sets out the defence commitment and Protocol 24 also deals with it. Unlike the treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam or Nice, these articles do not state that there may be a common defence, they state there will be a common defence and that those members who wish to join can do so. That will not include Ireland, because the Seville declaration excludes us and the second Nice treaty amendment specifically excludes a common defence without a referendum here.

Mr. Mitchell, MEP:

We can join a common defence policy with the inclusion of appropriate wording in the Bill to be announced by the Minister. We should do so now. We should empower the Dáil — this matter falls to the Dáil rather than to the Oireachtas — to join a common defence policy if the circumstances are right for Ireland.

Mr. Mitchell, MEP:

What should those circumstances be? For years we kept our heads down and told people what they wanted to hear. If we avoid doing so now and negotiate, we could negotiate a protocol which allows the four neutral states to opt in on a case-by-case basis. The Dáil has the right to declare war. Why should it not have the right to declare, on a case-by-case basis, that we will participate in the defence of Europe? What is wrong with us as a people that we cannot debate this issue in either House of the Oireachtas or in public?

Mr. Mitchell, MEP:

We never have a proper debate on this issue. It is assumed that we all have the same opinion and that we are required to eulogise neutrality. We are missing a golden opportunity to join a common EU defence and provide for the security of our children into the future by playing party politics and putting our own selfish interests first. This course of action is wrong and is something about which we, as parliamentarians, should be concerned.