Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

Senator Ross's final comment says it all. I have heard many opponents of the treaty, and even some who support it, make the point that we must go back to Europe. What do they mean by this? This is Europe. We are part of Europe; it is not something separate. That type of mentality is entirely alien to the vision of Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet, who recognised in the early 1950s, in the wake of the events of the first half of the last century, that there must be a better way, a way which would allow European states and their citizens to live in peaceful coexistence. Ireland played its part in the realisation of that vision. Hundreds of thousands of Irish people died in the early part of the last century in wars initiated, generated and fought on the battlefields on Europe. There had to be a better way. The vision of Schuman and Monnet, which they brought to fruition in the first instance via the establishment of a coal and steel trade agreement, has developed to the extent evident in the benefits we now enjoy from our membership of the Union.

The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, alluded to a possible disconnection between the peoples of Europe and the institutions of the European Union. The development of the Union represents probably the most successful political adventure in international history, with member states coming together in a spirit of common interest to pool their sovereignty for the mutual benefit and advancement of the peoples they represent. In the pursuit of that objective, we must ensure the connectivity with citizens is as strong as possible. There is no doubt that we face challenges in this regard. These are illustrated not only by the result of last week's referendum but also by the results of the referenda on the constitutional treaty in France and the Netherlands.

We must take a positive approach. This referendum result affords an opportunity to reassess this great adventure to which the majority of citizens throughout Europe subscribe. Ireland represents a small percentage of that total population. It is encouraging to see that a poll in The Irish Times indicates that some 80% of those who voted "No" in the referendum have a positive view of Europe. In the course of canvassing for the referendum, I made the point on more than one occasion that a referendum is not the ideal means by which to ratify a treaty. Treaties are complex by nature and the issues involved can become even more convoluted as they are discussed by advocates of either side. That is what happened in this case.

Many issues emerged in the course of the campaign. The objective now must be to identify the main components of the opposition to the treaty and to consider how they can be addressed in a manner that will allow the EU to move forward. I join my colleague in complimenting the Minister of State on his efforts in the campaign. He has made an intellectual and energetic contribution not only to this debate but on an ongoing basis for several years. We must take on board the views that have been expressed. The Minister of State referred to the global challenge facing Europe. We have evolved in the past decade into an entirely new era of globalisation. In the past, the main economic power was the United States. It retains its might but we have seen also the emergence of China, with a population of 1.3 billion, which is some two and a half times that of the EU. India's population is more than twice that of the EU, while Russia, an emerging powerhouse, potentially could evolve into the richest country in the world by virtue of its tremendous reserves of natural resources. It is important that the EU operates co-operatively and cohesively. To do so, we must have institutions which are efficient and focused on meeting the emerging challenges.

None of the opponents of the treaty has offered a convincing argument for how the rejection of the Lisbon proposals will help us to achieve those objectives. I acknowledge that Sinn Féin, as the "ourselves alone" party, has an ideological objection to the treaty. I spoke to some of its members at the count centre and heard their view that we should return to depending on our own natural resources.