Paul Bradford (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy John Perry.

I thank Fianna Fáil Senators for tabling the legislation which allows us an opportunity to have an important debate at an opportune time, particularly in the light of the debate we had yesterday on the future of the Seanad. European elections will be held in the coming months and all parties will tell voters how important these elections are, how important the European Parliament is and how a significant proportion of laws affecting every citizen of the State is generated in the European Parliament and at European level. Simultaneously, we will not try to impress on citizens that the laws, regulations and interventions from Brussels need to be debated, examined and scrutinised domestically, but we are failing to do so. If we believe in the importance of the European Parliament and that so many laws of importance to the State are made and commenced in the European Union, we have an obligation to ensure we have domestic structures to examine fully the laws and proposals made.

For a brief period I was a member of the Oireachtas Joint Sub-committee on EU Scrutiny. It was a very hard-working committee, but it simply did not have the time or resources to examine in the required detail all of the questions, submissions and queries before it. We need new structures. I am sure, like every Bill proposed by the Government and the Opposition, there are difficulties and perhaps anomalies and flaws, but it is a good benchmark from which to start. I am glad that it will not be put to a vote today, that it will stay on the agenda and that we can return to debate it in more detail.

I heard most of the Tánaiste's speech. He put some of it in the context of the Taoiseach's speech yesterday and presumed progress on Seanad reform. I wish I could buy into this idea of presumed progress, but I cannot because I am a realist. The Tánaiste quoted the Taoiseach as stating it was not easy. Of course, it is easy. The Government must simply decide whether it wants to give the Seanad an enhanced role, whether it wants to engage every citizen in Seanad elections and whether it believes the Seanad should have more powers. These are not complicated questions. They are black and white. I am not sure whether a Government which deluded and convinced itself that the House was irrelevant, useless and costly can now do a somersault and reverse its view of the House and it is worth. The public has stated it wants the Seanad to remain. We all know that it must be reformed at all levels, from an electoral position to the work it does. The question of scrutiny of European directives must be a central part of this.

We can see that the various Oireachtas committees are overburdened with work and do not have the time or resources to scrutinise EU proposals and policies. This House would be an ideal vehicle if a political decision was made. It is not difficult; it is a question of whether the Government wants to have scrutiny carried out properly. Does it want to continue with politics as they have been practised or does it want a change? Does it want to make the Seanad more relevant? It does not require reports, big summits of political leaders or public or political submissions. It requires a political decision. I hope we will achieve this political decision in the very near future.

Yesterday the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Simon Coveney, came to the House to speak about the Common Agricultural Policy, which is very much a product of the European Union working with the various national parliaments and Ministers. There is much more we could do from a scrutiny perspective with regard to the laws and regulations coming from the European Union. On behalf of citizens, we will be totally remiss in our duty as legislators if we do not put in place new structures to examine and scrutinise European laws. If the Oireachtas committees had the time, scope and staff, it could be done at this level, but they do not.

Sometimes my impatience with politics manifests itself in a negative fashion. Twelve years ago a suggestion was not just made but agreed to by all parties, the Whips, party leaders, the Dáil and the Seanad that one week in every four be a committee week in this House. That proposal rests in peace in the Oireachtas Library because an election took place some months later and a new Government began to rewrite history.

At least the legislation before us is progress.

It might not be the end product but it forces us to face up to reality and accept that the current structures do not work as well as they should. It also acknowledges that European directives, laws and regulations impact greatly on Irish citizens and we have a duty to ensure that they are examined in full. The Seanad would be a very suitable vehicle for doing so. I thank the Acting Chairman for the latitude he has shown me for this debate.