Seanad debates

Wednesday, 14 June 2006

European Communities (Amendment) Bill 2006: Second Stage.

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Paschal MooneyPaschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State, a committed European, who comes, like myself, from a part of the country that has benefited greatly from European subsidies and which now lives under a new dispensation. It would be no harm to put in a little plug for the BMW region here. The Government is vigorously defending its record against naysayers who suggest the region is losing out, but those of us who come from the area will continue to monitor progress and ensure we get our fair share.

To present a scenario, I feel a little like a client in his dealings with a representative of the oldest profession in the world in that the substantive issue has already been agreed and the only haggle is over the price. In terms of this legislation we have essentially been presented with a fait accompli. The Government has taken a decision in line with several other member states that it will support the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, the Dáil has already approved this legislation and it is now our turn. However, this is also an opportunity for Members of this House to express their opinion.

I do not totally share the rosy picture presented, although it was tempered with realism by the Minister of State. Listening to my friend and colleague, Senator Bradford, I was beginning to think enlargement of the European Union is the greatest thing since the sliced pan, but it raises serious issues and problems that must be addressed.

The Minister of State gave a number of reasons as to why we should support the legislation. He said, "The public will have to be persuaded that any future expansion of membership will bring with it the promise of a further strengthening of the EU and of its capacity to deliver real benefits to European citizens". This statement sums up the situation because it describes exactly the deliberations taking place whenever the people of Europe discuss its future. This situation was articulated and reflected not only in the results of the Dutch and French referenda on the constitutional treaty but in the fact that member states — to respond in a limited degree to Senator Bradford's query about the period of reflection — cannot get together on the issue.

They know there is a real problem with regard to the treaty. The most recent statement to emerge from the Council of Ministers is to the effect that they want to ditch the term "constitutional treaty". It would be right to ditch it because it sold a particular perception of Europe that scared people. It scared them into thinking some Big Brother was operating in Brussels and Strasbourg who would make their decisions for them. Despite the best efforts of the political elite in Europe — Commissioners, Members of the European Parliament, national governments and Members of Parliaments in member states — the general public does not seem to be convinced the route the EU has taken and the manner in which it has done so, especially with enlargement, will bring real benefits. I will not question in any way the European Commission's statistics, which have been cited by the Minister of State. The only response I have to the statistics is "Well they would say that, wouldn't they?"

It seems to me that those who want to expand the EU for ever and a day are engaging in a big sell. That is fine from an economic perspective, as it is absolutely clear that this country is benefitting. However, it is salutary to reflect on the Taoiseach's reminder, which was reiterated by the Minister of State in this House today, that the Government has not yet taken a decision on whether it will give the same carte blanche to workers from Bulgaria and Romania, which are about to accede to the EU, as it has already given to workers from the ten countries which were involved in the 2004 enlargement.

The average percentage of the population of this country that comprises citizens of the enlargement states is higher than in any other country. Approximately 9% of the working population of Ireland is from those countries, which is an extraordinarily high figure. It is quite possible that the extent of such immigration will start to level off, like waves lapping against the coastline as the tide changes. The level of such arrivals will recede as soon as other EU member states start to change their labour policies, which is something that the Minister has strenuously and robustly demanded at meetings of the Council of Ministers. The Government's stated policy is to try to get other countries on board in this regard. I strongly supported the Government's original decision to give workers from the accession states unfettered access to our labour markets. The benefits of that decision, which was also taken by the Governments in the UK and Sweden, are there for all to see.

We are talking about an economy and about economic issues, but a social issue that is presenting real challenges has not yet been addressed. The challenges in question have to be faced by Irish society, which is changing so dramatically that we are finding it hard to take a breath and to keep pace, and also across Europe. I have not heard anything from the Commission or any other part of the EU concept that helps to address these issues. This matter does not just relate to the demographic changes which are taking place in Ireland, or to the large number of foreign nationals who are working here. It also relates to social upheaval in France, for example, which is a serious issue, and to issues which are affecting the EU, such as immigration and the threat of terrorism.

I compliment the Minister of State on his speech, which pushed all the buttons. I do not think anything was left out of his presentation, although it seemed to me that he glossed over some of the challenges and difficulties we face. He accentuated some of the more positive aspects of this matter, although it is in our nature as politicians to do so. I would like to think we could have an ongoing debate about some other issues. It is not just a question of "the economy, stupid" — it is also a question of the type of society that the people of this country want. We continue to have a sovereign right to make decisions of that nature, although it is being eroded on a daily basis.

If other EU member states rapidly adopt the labour policies which have been adopted by Ireland, the UK and Sweden, we might be able to have a better period of adjustment. Polish people living in Warsaw, Krakow or Poznan will not want to travel halfway across Europe to Ireland if they can get jobs on their doorstep in Germany. The Germans understand that, which is why they have closed their borders for seven years. There may be a levelling out in the future.

I accept that the arrival of workers from the accession states has been good for this country. The most recent report on the alleged displacement of Irish workers, to which the Minister of State referred, claimed that the level of such displacement has been minimal. However, my anecdotal experience, which is shared by many people from other parts of the country, is that some displacement of Irish workers has taken place. I know of qualified Irish professionals in the various crafts who have left this country to go to work in England. While there is anecdotal evidence of that nature, the statistics indicate that everything is hunky-dory, everything is fine, the country is booming and there are no problems with our rate of economic growth.

I do not want to sound like a prophet of doom. I reiterate my earlier comment that I recognise and acknowledge the immense benefits which were brought to this country by the most recent enlargement of the EU. However, I am seriously concerned about Bulgaria and Romania. This matter has been discussed by the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, and Senator Bradford. I am sure other speakers will do the same. There is a growing gap between the opinions of the ruling EU elite — the European Commission and the European Parliament — and everybody else in this regard. Those who are in favour of further enlargement argue that everything is fine and everything will be wonderful. There is concern across Europe about the accelerated rate of EU enlargement.

There is political instability in Bulgaria, whether we like it or not. Not only have there been inconclusive election results, but the Government that is currently in place could fall at any time. That instability has allowed criminal elements to influence the commercial and political life of Bulgaria. Irish investors who are buying property in Bulgaria off the plans should take note of my comments in this regard.

Much greater progress has been made in Romania. I have been one of the most bitter critics of Romania, which I have had the pleasure of visiting on four or five occasions as a member of the Council of Europe. I have observed the quite traumatic changes which have taken place there. Senator Bradford rightly said that Romania was a totalitarian and authoritarian dictatorship that was ruled with an iron fist by Ceaucescu. When he was done away with by his own political elite in 1989, clones of him ran the country for the next ten or 12 years. There was very little fundamental change.

My experience of Romania in the early part of this century was that nothing had changed in rural areas, whatever about Bucharest. A new President has taken power in recent years, following a change of Government and political dynamic, which has focused the minds of the Romanian political elite, especially in its relationship with the EU and the enlargement commission. Romania is going a long way towards addressing many of the fundamental issues. It has yet to deal with the fundamental question of how it intends to put in place structures to distribute agricultural subsidies. Those of us who know about the importance of such subsidies to the Irish economy over many decades consider that the fact that the great bulk of the Romanian economy continues to be based on agriculture is a fundamental problem that has not been satisfactorily addressed.

I spoke earlier about society. I do not want to give the impression that I am somehow being parochial in my views. People who say that nationalism is "the last refuge of a scoundrel" should try telling that to those attending the World Cup who are flying their flags and supporting their countries. If football fans are allowed to demonstrate a sense of patriotism and nationalism and be proud of who they are, I do not see why we should apologise for doing likewise. Of course we should embrace our multicultural society, but I would not like this country's Irishness to be somehow diluted in a mad rush towards the Holy Grail of economic success. Everything should not be about money.

I understand why we are scared that we will go back to what we were less than a generation ago. We want to ensure that what we have, we hold, and that we progress further, but there is a price to be paid. I would like the Government to consider the manner in which we manage our economy and our society as a whole in light of the new environment in which we find ourselves. It is not just an issue for the Government — society in general should see it as a challenge rather than as a disadvantage. We are still trying to grapple with the dramatic changes which have taken place over the last seven or eight years.

I will conclude by speaking about my recent visit to the Hague. A Dutch historian told me that in the 16th century, when approximately 175,000 people were living in Amsterdam, over 300 artists with patrons were flourishing there. Holland, which is one of the regions of the present-day Netherlands, was one of the most affluent parts of Europe at the time. It had a developed infrastructure, including a water and sewerage scheme and a built environment, more than 300 years ago. We are trying to achieve within ten years what it has taken the Netherlands 300 years to achieve. That puts the challenge faced by society, as it tries to come to terms with all these realities, into perspective for me.

I do not suggest that we should not continue the enlargement process by embracing and welcoming countries which want to gain membership of the European Union. I am totally supportive of that process, in principle, but I do not want us to lose sight of the fact that society is changing rapidly. It is not just about increasing growth rates and keeping unemployment levels down. It is about the wider question of what kind of society we want within the European Union family.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.