Seanad debates

Wednesday, 4 October 2006

Europol (Amendment) Bill 2006: Second Stage

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

I am grateful to Members for their contributions and agree with Senator Quinn that the inordinate delay in bringing forward this Bill cannot be defended. The Irish Parliament should perhaps simplify this process although the law officers advise that primary legislation is responsible for every change in the protocols to the Europol Convention. Perhaps we could deal with future changes by a resolution, instead of presenting the memorandum for Government, going to the Parliamentary Draftsman's Office, then to the Houses and committees, in order to make relatively insignificant changes. As Senator Quinn said, there is no implication for our sovereignty in co-operation of this kind. It mystifies me that these matters gather dust for so long unratified. We and one other member state are holding up the ratification process.

We are not the only people in Europe who are open to criticism. When I took on the presidency of the Justice and Home Affairs Council in 1994 I tried to resolve a wrangle about who should be appointed head of Europol. That agency had no head for more than 18 months while France, Germany and Italy were deadlocked on which of three candidates should be appointed. The other member states were clear that they would decide this by whatever means were possible but it required unanimity. These three founding member states of what was then the European Economic Council, and subsequently the European Union wrangled long over which of their candidates would be appointed. My efforts to arrive at a consensus by agreeing that we would take a vote to determine the majority opinion was frustrated for more than a year because people thought it better to hold out and gain more leverage on the issue through other events in other places.

This does not have earth-shattering consequences but co-operation is important. We must ask ourselves whether, if there is to be another amendment to the Europol convention by way of protocol, it is necessary to have primary legislation. Could we instead provide for some system of delegated authority to each House by simple resolution to approve future amendments to the convention within certain limits? We do not want Europol to become a police force in Ireland without the approval of these Houses. Subject to that caveat this is a somewhat cumbersome procedure for making relatively small changes to the Europol Convention.

I take the criticisms offered and do them the justice of offering no defence, spurious or otherwise. That something has not been addressed since 2000 is not the right way to do business. I thank the Members for their Second Stage contributions and ask the House to agree that the Bill be read a second time.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.