Feargal Quinn (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste is welcome and we are delighted to have him here. I was chairman and vice chairman of EuroCommerce, which is based in Brussels, for six years, and it represents a very large number of retail, wholesale and other trading businesses. What impressed me was the amount of information that other countries had compared to ourselves with regard to European legislation. I have checked the figures and approximately 80% of all legislation in this country originates in European institutions but Ireland has one of the poorest records, as far as I can see, in debating, scrutinising and influencing the law-making process in Europe. We must do something about that.

There is general agreement that there must be more scrutiny of European legislation, and this task would be well suited to the Upper House. Senator MacSharry has been very open in saying that although the Bill may not be perfect, we should ensure it is a basis for discussion. A reformed Seanad could play a vital role in this area, and I am glad this Bill seek to push that idea. As has been mentioned, Senator Zappone and I have put forward a Seanad reform Bill that would confer a range of additional powers on the Seanad in areas like scrutiny of EU legislation. As has been noted, the current Government Chief Whip, the Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, has conceded that "scrutiny of EU legislation is not adequate" and there is only one committee charged with examining a large volume of proposals. That is failing.

There is much to do and Ireland's ratification of the Lisbon treaty led to each House of the Oireachtas being conferred with significant additional powers in matters specifically concerning EU affairs. For example, under Article 5 of the treaty, national parliaments have been given the express power to ensure that EU institutions comply with the principle of subsidiarity and only act in areas where the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved at national or local level. A provision envisages that national parliaments can receive and consider draft legislation on that basis. We would have a big task ahead of us to scrutinise EU legislation.

Many other countries have taken up the new powers in the Lisbon treaty. We can consider what is happening across the water in the UK, where the House of Lords European Union Select Committee has been specifically empowered to examine EU documents and other EU-related matters in advance of decisions.

There is also the rapporteur system used in the Scottish Parliament, whereby select committees are supported by rapporteurs. Experts believe there has been a significant spillover effect in raising awareness of, and interest in, European affairs by MSPs, and perhaps we need to examine this system further. The Senate of the Czech Republic is a second example of what can be done with regard to EU scrutiny. It is involved in the process of shaping EU policies that affect the country. It debates and delivers opinion on European legislative proposals before they have been approved by the EU Council. The Czech Senate also deals with other strategic documents submitted by European institutions and, therefore, is involved in the European legislative process via its relationship with the government or through direct communications with the Commission. I would like the House to follow that example. Moreover, the Czech Senate participates in an exchange of information between national parliaments and the European Parliament. Our House does not have a similar direct communication channel to the Commission. A great deal, therefore, can be done in this area. Too often politicians think in local terms, but the Seanad's role is to examine national and international issues. Perhaps the Leader could look into the issue of better informing Senators in a similar way to the Czech Senate, which has systems to keep its members up to date in this area. They are briefed weekly on events in EU institutions. Perhaps we have something like that, but it does not appear to get the attention I would like.

In a reformed House, Senators should scrutinise EU legislation both at the development stage and when it is being transposed into domestic law. The House should also review previous legislation to remove red tape and bureaucracy, which is a barrier to business. All of these measures would help the Seanad to scrutinise EU legislation to the benefit of the consumer, which in this case is the Irish citizen. If 80% of legislation originates in Europe and we have not developed a system to scrutinise, examine and influence it, we must do so in some form or other. This is an ideal task for a reformed Seanad to undertake.

I welcome the Bill. As Senator MacSharry said, it may not be perfect and it may need adjustments but there is a great deal of value in it and it is worth considering.