Ms Mairead McGuinness, MEP:

Let me try to address some of them. On the DNA, we are doing that. I did not get to write down the full quote from Chancellor Merkel. Even in our 40 years in the European Union, I regard it as a work in progress as opposed to an end game. It depends on how one looks at it and how one engages with it. On deeper integration or whatever term the Senator used - a federal Europe - it is a very simple fact of whether people can work together. Can countries work together effectively? In that same breath, this question of the UK's decision has had its desired effect. I gather the British Conservative Party has increased its poll rating somewhat. Very often in politics, things happen for other reasons. Because I have listened to so much to this debate in the UK, I believe we have to allow the UK to make up its own mind. However, it would be a strange European Union that every so often had a member state that had committed to doing certain things in free association with other colleagues and then afterwards decided it did not really mean that and wanted out. It is a very hard way to do business.

The most difficult words in Europe are compromise and solidarity. Nobody likes to compromise but the only way to make progress anywhere, especially in the European Union, is through compromise. I found that difficult in the beginning because everybody thinks his or her ideas are the best. However, if one goes in with that attitude, one comes out with absolutely no progress. I believe Chancellor Merkel's comments are in that frame and I do not see them as a threat. I believe that Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, mentioned last week that Ireland is much freer and independent now as part of the European Union than we were before we joined. I am not convinced that the UK will leave. I believe wiser counsel will prevail if and when there is a referendum and it will be an interesting one to follow.

In terms of crisis, there is a tendency for people and countries to go inwards and have this idea of being independent without ever thinking what difference it would make. Would it make any difference and would life be any better? That is always the question to ask. Very often it would not be better. There is a sense of insecurity that politics needs to address because that is why these things are happening. The same applies to the question on Iceland the Senator raised.

I mentioned my concern about EU legislation because people complain about it, but it is in its implementation. I have never understood why it is not possible for us to say that certain legislation does not work effectively or that we are implementing it with gold labelling on it and that we need to look at that and change it. We should be able to do it because we have the skills and knowledge to do it. I support the Senator's idea of having an audit, but it must be remembered that when we pass directives, the national parliaments legislate after that. A directive gives the general pointers and member states then introduce the legislation. Many countries have a light touch approach, which I do not favour, and others gold plate. Let us consider how forensic we had to be on the hamburgers. Let us consider the issues surrounding BSE. The amount of traceability and rules that needed to be introduced caused horror across the industry but the result was excellent. We all need effective regulation - not more or less, but effective regulation. We should try to rule out the ineffective and burdensome. However, in the food industry there is no room for anything but perfection, which is the bottom line.