Rónán Mullen (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I support this Bill, which contains a number of different provisions. I would like to add my voice to those who have welcomed our Croatian friends, and I welcome them in advance to the European Union.

I was one of the people who took part in the sub-committee of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs which discussed Ireland's future in Europe. I was asked to join the committee after the first Lisbon referendum by the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin. It is true that during debates about the various European treaties there has been a degree of bogus argumentation on all sides. I agree with what has been said about arguments about conscription and so on. I think it was Senator Bacik who referred to that. However, I do not think we should rewrite history. There has been legitimate concern over the years about competence creep within the European Union, whereby the EU, having powers and competence in one area of national life - such powers having been given to it by virtue of treaties agreed between the member states - makes decisions that encroach on other areas in which it has no competence.

There can be interconnection between areas of competence and areas of non-competence. There were real concerns about the legal content and status of the Treaty of Lisbon that rightly led people, including myself, to seek guarantees that there would not be any inappropriate encroachment on the operation of Ireland's constitutional provisions with regard to education and the family. It is worth recalling that in Europe, abortion was at one point defined as a service. Particular credit is due to those who negotiated the original protocol to the Maastricht treaty, not deciding the merits of that particularly difficult and sensitive issue one way or the other but ensuring it would be the Irish people who would decide. That notion of subsidiarity should always be at the heart of the European Union. What was done originally in securing that protocol was a patriotic thing indeed, because it secured, in that most sensitive area, the right of the Irish people to determine the matter. There is nothing worse than unexpected court decisions unaccountably reshaping laws over the heads of people. That can happen, and that was why the protocol was sought.

For the same reason, people had concerns that in certain areas unexpected decisions might be more likely to arise under the Lisbon arrangements, particularly with the appending of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, that might encroach on the operation of the Irish constitutional provisions. It was entirely appropriate that guarantees were sought in those areas.

With regard to the stability mechanism, it seems to me that it is a no-brainer. This is something we must have, and we must facilitate it by amendment of Article 136 of the treaty. One of the great regrets I have about the European project at the moment is that it is harder than ever to love Europe now. In the same way that people rightly had concerns about encroachment on subsidiarity when these past debates were taking place about social issues in the context of various European referendums, what we see now is a European attitude that seems to regard differently the concerns and interests and even the dignity of smaller states. I am worried about that aspect of the direction in which Europe is going. If we are to achieve solidarity, it will come at a price. We get little hints of this in various ways. An example is the repeated leaking of details about our financial and economic affairs to the Bundestag, a foreign parliament, with no great concern about what that might say about the way in which smaller countries and their interests are regarded by greater and more powerful forces. This stability mechanism will hopefully be all about solidarity - for larger countries, but also for smaller countries. However, we must continue to examine the culture of the evolving European Union. I hope Croatia will be among our allies in this regard. Senator Norris referred to Bismarck earlier. We do not want to take that route in terms of the attitude to smaller states and entities. There should be an ongoing concern for the distinctive needs and cultures of smaller states.