Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I am glad to have the opportunity to reflect on the outcome of the vote that took place a fortnight ago. This is a useful debate and we need to revisit the issue in a more substantial fashion. There was a major parliamentary and civic society debate following the first Nice treaty referendum. Now that people have voted "Yes", perhaps we do not see the need for such a debate, but it is important that we look at the circumstances surrounding the referendum and figure out the lessons we can learn.

The first point we must acknowledge is that a fortnight ago about 30% of the people voted "Yes" in favour of the fiscal compact treaty, about 20% voted "No" and almost 50% said they did not know or care enough to vote. The fact is that 30% decided to chart our course in a certain direction. While I am happy with the direction chosen, I would be much happier if the turnout and the mandate were greater. I have said previously from both sides of the House that in any vote - in a referendum, local, general or European elections - we must ensure everybody is facilitated to the maximum extent possible to cast his or her vote and exercise his or her franchise. We have to live up to the commitments we have all made individually and collectively to allow weekend voting, either on a Friday or a Saturday, which would facilitate a larger number of people, especially young people, to vote. When we ask the people to exercise their right to vote, we deem this to be a significant step. We should, therefore, facilitate them by allowing the vote to take place over a day and a half - for half a day on Friday and all day Saturday. I look forward to the day when we can have a referendum turnout of 75%. If the trends continue and less than 50% of the people vote in a referendum, we will have to consider compulsory voting, as happens across much of the globe. Compulsory voting is not necessary or desirable, but we certainly have to try to increase the turnout by facilitating people through weekend voting. Having said this, the votes have been cast and we must move on.

Senator Byrne mentioned the campaign and the constitutional requirement for balanced coverage. I agree with the Senator in one sense, but subjects could come down the line to be decided by way of referendum, whether it be the children's Bill or other legislation. In the late 1970s and early 1980s there were referendums on such issues as changing the adoption laws in which there was probably a 95% "Yes" vote. We have to provide for balance and regardless of how substantial the political argument is on one side of the equation, the level of coverage is supposed to be 50-50. We will have to look at a methodology to ensure that balance and fairness but not necessarily in the ways we have seen in recent referendums. There is much merit in the Senator's suggestion that the people who take the liberty to support one side of the argument in order to increase their personal or party profile should be moderated in terms of political coverage over a 12 month period. That is a very interesting suggestion which needs to be taken on board.

The next fortnight will be a defining period for the peoples of Europe. The people of Greece will vote on Sunday. It is difficult to know how things will turn out because, happily, opinion polls are banned in Greece in the two week period before an election. Apart from the Greek elections, the difficulties in Spain and throughout the eurozone and the European Union, there are major challenges facing the European political establishment. We really are all in this together. There is so much debate about the euro as a currency - we just look at the economics of it - but we are probably not focusing enough on the politics of Europe, as we did in the 1970s and the 1980s. If we think back to those years and even to the European political institutions of the 1960s, there was a different approach because there was a bigger political picture on display. In the late 1960s and early 1970s the picture being worked upon was the building of the European Economic Community. In the late 1970s and early 1980s Europe was trying to survive and develop in the middle of the Cold War between the East and the West. Then we had the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of communism, followed by the rebuilding of Germany and the continent of Europe. That was a massive political prize and it brought out the best in the outstanding European leaders of the time, including Helmut Kohl, Jacques Delors and François Mitterand. People of different persuasions worked to create a bigger political prize. We are lacking that political leadership in Europe now. It is more about management of the current crisis, which is obviously necessary, but we do not seem to see that there is a bigger picture or even want to create one. If we travel back 30 or 40 years, we can see what that picture was: getting the countries of Europe to work together, building the original EEC and then the bigger European Union, moving on to the Maastricht treaty, uniting the continent of Europe and developing a currency. People were working towards that political space simultaneously with economic development. Now we do not seem to see a bigger political picture, but we need to work towards one. Every European citizen needs to be part of one political project. We have brought the peoples of Europe more or less together with one European currency, but we have not brought them together politically, which is necessary. Perhaps there was a view that having a single currency would somehow unite the countries of Europe and result in a certain level of balanced economic development all over the continent. That has not worked and I do not think it can work without political leadership and direction. Some will say the only answer to my question is finding some type of federal solution such as a united states of Europe. That is a step that can only be considered down the line. However, there must be increased closeness among the European family of nations. That is what we must reflect on.

Europe's proudest achievements will stand and we must continue to acclaim the bringing together of a continent that had been at war - a continent in which countries spilled each other's blood and millions of citizens died. We brought an end to war and brought people together. The next phase must be ongoing political integration to a higher but acceptable level. Considering from where we have travelled over 30 or 40 years, it is obvious that this must be the project for the next 15 or 20 years. However, it must be driven by sound, dynamic, visionary political leadership which is lacking throughout the European Union. This is urgently required, starting in the next number of years because massive challenges lie ahead.

I welcome the result of the referendum, although I am disappointed about the turnout. I do not think the political establishment sought to engage people sufficiently. The choice of date for the referendum was not helpful either. There are lessons to be learned in this regard. If we want to bring people together on a difficult and rocky political journey, we must engage with them and persuade them to join us. I commend all those involved in the campaign on all sides. They worked hard. It is disappointing, however, that barely half of those eligible decided to vote.