Rónán Mullen (Independent)

I thank Senator Ross for sharing his time with me. I find myself in a similar position, with questions and concerns as regards the Lisbon treaty. I want to stress, however, how important it is that the people of Ireland should engage and give concentrated attention to the decision they have to make on the Lisbon treaty. We all know how difficult it is, sometimes, to pay attention to referendums such as these, where net issues do not appear to be at stake. There is much about this treaty that appears to be administrative in essence, and as such perhaps people will tend to throw their hands in the air and not engage properly with the issues involved. It is the duty of all of us as citizens to engage as much as possible and try to understand the issues. Admittedly, there are complexities, but I agree with the view that the treaty can be boiled down to certain recommendations in terms of institutional change, the composition of the Commission, the new President of the European Council and so on.

Like Senator Ross, I have noticed the tendency of the institutions to row in behind a particular point of view. Despite telling us that it is the people's decision, there has been a clear imbalance. I was very glad that Herr Pöttering was invited to the Seanad, but by the same token I should have liked, perhaps, if similar respect had been shown to those with a different viewpoint. That has not happened and I have been wrestling with the question as to at what stage it is desirable that institutions such as the European Commission should weigh in on one side or other of an argument. I accept the point, however, that there is such a thing as representative democracy.

While I know some are concerned at the fact that Ireland is the only member state to hold a referendum on the treaty, and empathise to some extent, I understand that ultimately, people elect their public representatives. If they do not like the direction in which public representatives are taking them, in terms of increased integration or the move towards a more federalised Europe — let us be honest, that is what is on the cards — ultimately, people in each of the member states have a choice in terms of deciding whether they are satisfied when they elect their own governments.

I agree that certain issues should be kept separate from the Lisbon treaty. Politicians on the Government side have been at great pains to emphasise that some of the more unwelcome interventions from European bodies have nothing to do with the treaty — such as the one we discussed this morning on the report from the Council of Ministers calling into question Irish legislation on abortion. I accept a protocol was introduced into the Maastricht treaty which has been extended to this treaty and which in theory at least should preserve for Ireland the right to determine all its own issues regarding abortion and specifically regarding Article 40.3.3° of the Constitution. That said, I am not entirely happy and would welcome clarification about the Government's assurances on the Charter of Fundamental Rights included with the Lisbon treaty. We are told this will relate to only existing areas of EU competence or the implementation within member states of areas covered by existing European law. While that sounds fine in principle, people as eminent as Professor Gerard Hogan SC of Trinity College Dublin are concerned that this charter could eclipse the Supreme Court in its deliberations on sensitive social issues. If my memory is correct, he has also pointed out that there are areas covered by this charter, such as the right to marry etc., which in principle should not be covered by European law.

The concern would be that areas we believe not to be covered by European law could turn out to be covered by such law. A good example is the intervention by Commissioner Vladimír Spidla over section 37 of our employment equality legislation concerning the right of institutes run by religious to discriminate positively in order to preserve their ethos. At one level we would have thought that education was an area in which the member states had sovereignty and not an area for intervention by the European Union. However, it comes in under the heading of employment equality. Sometimes the areas we believe to be outside the purview of European institutions come rapidly within.

I do not know how the referendum will go. The opinion polls suggest it could be tight and possibly defeated, such is the momentum against it. It is up to our politicians, particularly those in Government, to tell us the implications of a "No" vote. Is there a plan B? Will there be the possibility of renegotiating? Will there be the possibility that Ireland could seek greater opt-outs, for example regarding Articles 40 to 44 of the Constitution, of the kind we have with the protocol on abortion that would allow us to ensure sensitive social issues remain maters for us to decide? However we decide them may not agree with my preferences, but they should remain matters for Ireland to decide. That margin of appreciation should continue to be respected at European level in a way that is not happening lately with other European institutions, such as the Council of Ministers and the European Commission as evidenced by the intervention on the employment equality legislation I mentioned.