Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and thank him for what was probably the lengthiest and most comprehensive contribution on a Bill heard in this House for some time. I had intended to go into some technical areas of the Bill but if I were to do so at this stage I would probably get a red card from the Leas-Chathaoirleach. I compliment the Minister of State on the role he played in securing a positive vote on the Lisbon treaty.

It is with considerable relief that Senators consider the European Union Bill today. One of its many aspects is that it gives effect to the Lisbon treaty. For those of us who believe that the passage of that treaty is of fundamental importance to the future of Ireland, the referendum result and, in particular, the large majority achieved is a very welcome development.

In the campaign my party focused heavily on the economic aspects of the Lisbon treaty. In the real world the importance of the treaty lies not alone in its contents but in the message its passage represents. It tells Europe that Ireland is at the heart of and committed to the European project. A "No" vote would have sent a disastrous message. The reality is that the treaty could not come into force without a "Yes" vote in Ireland. There is nothing in the treaty for Ireland to fear. However, key for us was the message the "Yes" vote sent out, not only to Europe but all around the world. The real danger was that a "No" vote would have been seen as a sign of disengagement, that Europe and Ireland were separating. A "No" vote would not have terminated our relationship but would have created all sorts of negative impressions worldwide. Anything that cast question over that relationship or created the impression the relationship was under threat or was being reviewed would have been an absolute disaster for Ireland. Jobs would have been put on the line. Both existing and new jobs might have been moved elsewhere. It was vital for us, our economy and our recovery that the message of Ireland's commitment to Europe was sent out, as it was by the people, loud and clear.

I pay particular praise to Mr. Justice Frank Clarke of the Referendum Commission who conveyed clearly and effectively the truth about the Lisbon treaty to voters. He exposed the lies and told the truth. If that truth hurt the "No" side, it tells its own message, namely, that its people were the ones telling whoppers about the treaty, claiming it would do things it could not and would not do things it clearly could. In the first Lisbon treaty referendum the "No" side's falsehoods set the agenda. Myths were stated and believed as fact. Untruths - I could use stronger language but will not - were peddled that were, to those of us who knew and had studied the topic in detail, mind-boggling in their absurdity. The "No" side in the first Lisbon treaty referendum tapped into that old Lyndon Johnson adage about telling lies to force one's opponent to deny a ludicrous claim. That way they planted doubts in people's minds about what the treaty really contained. These were genuine doubts among voters but they were baseless.

Twenty-six of the EU states have ratified the treaty. It has been ratified by the Czech Parliament and simply awaits the Czech President's signature. He is waiting now for the outcome of yet another court challenge. I note that CTK, the Czech news agency, reported that those senators who initiated the challenge against the Lisbon treaty have launched further challenges against the constitutionality of the Treaty of Rome which are also before the Czech constitutional court. It seems to many of us that what we are witnessing is an increasingly frantic grasping at straws to find any means to stop the Lisbon treaty. I hope that, if the courts in the Czech Republic rule the treaty is constitutional, President Klaus will sign the document and allow ratification to proceed. Any more cynical game-playing would be unhelpful to everyone. Some 27 parliaments in 27 countries have spoken, as have millions of voters. I trust that, as a democrat, the President will respect these democratic decisions.

The Bill is not simply concerned with implementation of the Lisbon treaty, it also improves the oversight mechanisms of the Oireachtas in respect of the European institutions. Many of us are concerned that the Oireachtas has not been as thorough in its oversight role as it could be. I welcome the contents of the Bill on this matter, but further developments may be required. Fine Gael is committed to radical reform of the Oireachtas, reforms that would impact directly on the future of this House. We will be aiming to ensure a reformed Oireachtas would be active in its oversight role.

It is important that the Government outline for the Oireachtas how it intends to ensure this Parliament can exercise its new rights to call for draft EU legislation to be changed. The Lisbon treaty contains specific time-limited procedures, but the Houses only sit for approximately 90 days a year and have long recesses. How does the Government propose to reform the sitting arrangements of both Houses to ensure that, when needed, they can comment on proposals within the limited timeframe laid down in the treaty? It would be unacceptable for us to find that, at a key moment, the Oireachtas could not discuss draft legislation within the timeframe because the Houses were in recess. We will need to co-ordinate with European institutions on the timing of recesses to ensure we will be available to exercise the new powers and rights we have gained under the treaty.

I join the Minister of State in complimenting my colleague, Senator Donohoe, who chaired the sub-committee of the Joint Committee on European Affairs so ably. The sub-committee's work was excellent and helpful.

I welcome the Bill's introduction, which marks the beginning of a new phase in the relationship between Ireland and the European Union. We will certainly support the Bill.