Martin McAleese (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House today. The European monetary crisis is having an impact on homes across the world, from Dublin to Delhi. It is increasingly evident that the problems of Europe have a local and a global impact. It is to Ireland's credit that since the beginning of this crisis, it has led the way by courageously facing tough realities. Ireland joined the European Economic Community - as it was - in 1973 and subsequently joined the eurozone. These decisions were evidence of its serious and permanent commitment to the European project. Despite its twists and turns, European co-operation remains possibly the most exciting project in the history of inter-state relationships. It represents a bastion of peace in a complex and capricious world. It serves as a table around which to build on common interests and thrash out the possible or potential disputes of 27 different and diverse states. The EU fiscal compact treaty is a direct response to the current crisis.

The causes of this crisis are not simple, nor are the possible solutions. There is a myriad of financial complexities and political sensitivities woven into the treaty and its context. The position may become yet more complex in light of the news today from France and the Netherlands. As we move into this critical phase of consideration of the treaty, it is important we have a robust, informed and honest debate to allow people to evaluate its merits, an issue to which the Minister of State referred. This debate should be free of rancour, myths, scare tactics and duress as these could steer the outcome in either direction through fear alone. While the Referendum Commission has an important role to play this regard, so too have all public representatives.

The press recently carried accounts of an unpublished report from the previous Referendum Commission which is reputed to state that the time allowed to perform its functions was "grossly inadequate" and to recommend the Minister review the referendum process as a matter of urgency and allow three months for debate on future referenda. Although it is too late to address these matters before 31 May, the report should be published to clarify whether the leaks are accurate and inform decisions for future referenda.

As part of the context of the debate on the upcoming referendum, it is important to recognise that membership of the European Union is a two way process. Europe has been good for Ireland. For example, among many benefits, access to EU Structural and Cohesion Funding was crucial in developing our infrastructure and retraining workers. Open access to the vast European market was particularly advantageous to us as a small, open economy, and we have also gained with our trading partners outside the EU from our position as the only English speaking country in the eurozone. Let us not forget or underestimate the critical impact of the moral and financial support of the EU in the development of the peace process.

Ireland has also been good for Europe. We opened up our markets and on accession allowed other member states generous access to our fish stocks. This was a concession of significant financial value. It is interesting that traditionally protection of fisheries was one of the main reasons neither Norway nor, until two years ago, Iceland sought EU membership. Ireland has also been among the strongest supporters of EU enlargement. We were among a small minority of member states not to place even a transitional bar on labour migration from the former eastern states upon their accession. This demonstrated Ireland was never afraid of converting our principled support for European co-operation into practical measures. This mutually beneficial relationship between Ireland and the European Union is one part of the background context to our current decision.

Another factor which deserves recognition is Irish people have accepted all necessary austerity measures to save our banking system. It is perhaps a sign of our interconnectedness that this system was so fundamentally damaged by a combination of flawed regulation and lending practices at home, which were fuelled by cheap loans from the banks of EU partners and underpinned by the European Central Bank's low interest regime.

Given the leap of faith demanded by the treaty and the many disappointments with leadership in recent years, the Government must set out clearly how it is projected the treaty will vindicate our people's sacrifices while restoring fiscal stability and ensuring economic growth. It must convince us the treaty is not alone about saving the euro but is just as much about Irish economic recovery and securing jobs. While these two issues are linked, people are worried and need evidence there is a real prospect of the creation of sustainable employment opportunities following ratification of the treaty.

The Government must also clarify the manner in which the treaty interacts with existing law, including by addressing concerns about applicable voting rules. What are the implications for the reverse qualified majority rules in the treaty after the changes to the voting threshold requirements in the Lisbon treaty come into force in 2014?

Can the Government demonstrate that larger member states cannot dominate to their advantage at the expense of smaller states like Ireland, the so-called "big state" directoire?

The challenge to explain this treaty and its implications is clear. The most recent Behaviour & Attitudes opinion poll indicated that more than half of voters say they do not understand the treaty and that 31% of voters polled say they do not know how they will vote. In the run-up to the referendum and in order to allow all voters to make an informed choice, every effort must be made to ensure that the arguments on both sides and the reasoning underpinning them are clearly and effectively communicated. If this is done, and if we have mature and responsible debate on the issues relevant only to this referendum - I urge we ensure this - we can trust the Irish people to judge what is best for Ireland and to vote accordingly.