Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)

D'éist mé leis an chuid is mó den díospóireacht anocht agus caithfidh mé a rá go raibh sé an-chabhrach, mar bhí tuairimí á nochtadh ar an dá thaobh. Is trua nach bhfuil an díospóireacht á chraoladh ar an teilifís agus ar an raidió. Sin easpa mór a bhí ann le linn an reifrinn deireanach, nach ndearna na meáin cumarsáide iarracht níos mó míniú a thabhairt ar cad a bhí i gceist i gConradh Liospóin. In ionad sin bhíodar ag caint faoi rudaí imeallacha agus uaireanta rudaí suaracha. Tá freagracht ar ghach éinne a bhfuil baint acu leis na meáin cumarsáide as bheith faireáilte agus oscailte agus as iarracht a dhéanamh an t-eolas iomlán a thabhairt i dtaobh an reifrinn agus na díospóireachta seo. Ceapaim go ndearnadh sár jab anseo anocht, ach táim lán cinnte gur beag den díospóireacht seo a bheidh le clos amuigh i measc an phobail.

It is a pity that the great debate we have had on this legislation has not been heard by the wider public. People have made a great effort to research what issues will be involved in the forthcoming referendum. They have listened to the people. Many Members present would have canvassed during the previous referendum and would have spoken one to one basis people about the issues. One of the reasons we did not succeed in passing the treaty in the previous referendum was owing to a lack of knowledge among the people. It was not that the knowledge did not exist but that it was not discernible or accessible to people. I am convinced that remains one the great challenges that faces us next autumn.

We have to start from the premise that the Irish people passionately value their sovereignty, of which there is no doubt. One can understand why they would because it was so hard won. That value is almost inherent in our genes. People may not express it in the context of a title such as sovereignty but they have a sense that they do not want to give away control of their destiny. There is unrest that much of the bureaucracy that has come from Europe is unnecessary, or perhaps it is so as a consequence of the way we have implemented some European directives. It is difficult to tell the person who keeps hens and is required to register them or the person who supplies apples tarts and scones to the local shops that he or she cannot continue to so unless he or she installs a stainless steel kitchen that they are not losing control when they are in those respects. Perhaps such loss of control goes with membership of the EU or perhaps the EU has to examine more closely whether a regulation requiring the production of a straight banana is what people need. Such bureaucracy is a nonsense in many ways. The requirement for regulations based on hygiene or traceable diseases I can understand, but people cannot understand the logic of many other EU requirements.

It is not only the Irish people who want to see their sovereignty protected. I cannot remember anyone who was more vocal on this issue than the former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. She was particularly focused on ensuring Britain's independent status would not be diluted in any way. If we studied other countries, perhaps we would find the same is the case. Sovereignty is a factor we must understand in this context.

When people raise issues we must be careful not to sideline the issues because we believe we have all the information and knowledge. People's emotions come into play in the issues involved and not all concern knowledge. We saw that specifically with the shopping list of objections people had on the previous occasion. We knew the arguments being made were not correct but that did not matter. When I canvassed on the previous occasion with the local doctor who was also involved in politics in a small town where I would be reasonably well known, I was taken aback by the reactions of the people I met. I started out very sure of myself but discovered it was not always a matter of dealing with the issues people raised with me intellectually. I had to deal with them emotionally and that was difficult.

We carried out surveys to find out why people voted a certain way. I believe Senator O'Malley was wrong in what she said. The abortion issue was high on people's list of issues, as was the question of family life, right to life and so on. They were high on people's list of issues and the surveys showed that. It was also evident on the doorstop. The viewpoint of the people was that whatever decision we might make on these issues, they did not want someone else making that decision and imposing it on them. That is fair viewpoint. If we want to make a decision on pro-life issues, that is a matter for us as a sovereign State and nation. It is not a matter for another body to tell us how we should handle such issues.

The military issue was also a major one for people. Young mothers in particular were strong and definite in their view that they did not want to commit their sons and daughters to a future war. That issue was raised in previous referenda on treaties. It was a definite issue of concern for young couples with children. It was easy to say that cannot happen for reasons A, B and C. We still have a major job to show we are committed to neutrality and that there is not some dallamullóg operating behind the scenes organising some movement gradually into a military alliance that will put responsibilities back on ourselves. That is still an issue and we have to convince the people in that regard.

Most of the people who opposed the Lisbon treaty did it with good will. I am certain there were others who had hidden agendas. I am not sure we succeeded in outing or identifying those agendas. It would not have been ruthless to do that but it would have been the right thing to do. In the case of those who were genuine in opposing the treaty, it was left to us to know how to communicate with those people. There was an opportunity to communicate and we lost out in that respect. One of the reasons for that is we did not get the support of the media. They did not make the type of effort necessary to explain precisely what was in the Lisbon treaty.

We must acknowledge what the Government has achieved. It sincerely set out to identity the concerns. When the Taoiseach, Minister and officials went to debate this issue with the other 26 member states, most people would not have given them a 100% chance that they would be successful. There was a fair amount of wrong sniping from the media. The Government had hardly put down what precisely it wanted to address in Europe when people in the media were sniping at it. On the other hand, the Government kept a cool head, did not panic and worked away quietly. Up to the very end of the process, it was covered in two newspaper reports, one on the front page of the Irish Independent and the other on the front page of The Irish Times. The heading of the article in the Irish Independent was Brown-Cowen rift endangers Lisbon treaty. The heading of the article in The Irish Times was positive on that occasion to the effect that a breakthrough was likely. When the breakthrough came 24 hours later, the Irish Independent carried a tiny article in the right-hand corner of a page stating that a solution had been achieved and the process had been a success. Such coverage is not right. When the good of the country is at stake, we must all pull together. That must be done in regard the Lisbon treaty.

I do not care what surveys are being done or what figures have been thrown up. We should not be complacent about the passing of this treaty. Second, we must respect everybody's opinion and we must try to communicate with people on the basis that they have a sincere position. Many speakers have made that point. If we do not pass the Lisbon treaty next autumn this country will be in a very serious situation. That is not just because of the state of the economy, it is because of the network and goodwill we have developed with other nations.

When I refer to people passionately defending our sovereignty, I do not think those who set about to achieve the independence of this country, at great sacrifice on that occasion, could in their wildest dreams have seen us holding the Presidency of Europe and then to be complimented on delivering it with panache and effectiveness. That surely shows our status and our standing. If we are prepared to endanger that then there is no doubt that we will become non-competitive in the future.