I want to thank you most sincerely for the opportunity to address the National Forum on Europe today. Since its inception, the Forum has played a vital role in informing the public and fostering debate on European issues. The Forum can be rightly proud of its work – it plays a unique role in Irish public life which has earned it the admiration of other Member States.
2008 will be an important year for the Forum. It will likewise be an important year for Ireland and for Europe. There are major challenges on the horizon, many of which, if handled sensibly, can become big opportunities. Pursuing a sustainable path on climate change, responding to tightening economic conditions and the pressures on financial markets and ensuring continued creation of employment opportunities will all feature prominently on the EU agenda this year.
2008 also brings us to ratification of the European Reform Treaty. Here in Ireland, this will be by way of a referendum. Over the coming months, the pros and cons of the Treaty will be debated extensively. Inevitably, arguments in support of or against the Treaty will become intermingled with more general arguments about the consequences of Ireland’s membership of the EU.
Informing the public.
The Forum will play a critical role in ensuring that the Reform Treaty receives a fair hearing. I am pleased that the Forum will be holding a series of events around the country in the coming months. This will broaden the debate about Ireland’s position in Europe and the aims of the Reform Treaty. I am also pleased that we were able to make significant additional funding available to the Forum this year, to assist it in its important work.
The Government also has an obligation to inform the public on the contents of the Treaty. We have initiated an information campaign that seeks to explain the Treaty and what it means for Ireland in clear, accessible terms. International Treaties, by their very nature, are usually complex and technical legal documents that can make for difficult reading. In this respect, the Reform Treaty, with its lengthy series of amendments to the existing EU treaties, is no different. This makes the Government’s job, as well as that of independent bodies such as the Forum, all the more vital.
The Government’s information campaign includes a basic information pamphlet which is already available, and a new website reformtreaty.ie which provides extensive information about the Treaty. Next month, a more detailed guide to the contents of the Treaty text will be published. And a White Paper is being prepared which will set out, in detail, the Government’s position on the Reform Treaty.
After publication of the Referendum Bill, and in good time ahead of any referendum, we will proceed with the establishment of the Referendum Commission, which will also be engaged in public information activities and which will be seeking to maximise voter participation.
I personally believe that the Reform Treaty is good for Ireland and good for Europe. But I recognise that many people are still unclear about what the Treaty does and does not contain, and how it will be of benefit.
Let me stress at the outset, however, that the Reform Treaty is not a revolutionary document. It contains no great innovation of the stature of the Single Market that was introduced by the Single European Act, or the Euro provided for by the Maastricht Treaty. The absence of such a major feature might well hinder efforts to convince the public of the Treaty’s merits. This makes it all the more important for us to spell out the details of the Treaty, in a fair, accurate and balanced way.
Need for Clarity
Even at this early stage of our national debate, I have heard many misleading and incorrect arguments about the Treaty; from the creation of a sprawling European super-state and the end of democracy as we know it, to the certain loss of Ireland’s traditional policy of military neutrality.
These arguments are simply not correct, and one can only wonder at the motive behind such alarmist and dramatic rhetoric. These arguments turn the Treaty on its head, and wrongly imply that it will undermine the very values and interests it is designed to protect.
I would, therefore, like to spend some time here today explaining what the Treaty is really about, and how I believe it should be viewed in Ireland.
Democracy
The Treaty is fundamentally about modernising the EU bodies, so that they can work better in the interests of European citizens. The institutional reforms it provides for aim to enhance the Union’s democratic controls. It gives National Parliaments increased supervisory powers over the EU’s legislative process. It gives greater powers to the European Parliament by strengthening its lawmaking powers and its budgetary role.
It also provides for a new “Citizens Initiative” which will give EU citizens an additional and very direct say on European matters. Under this initiative, a petition with a million signatures from people across the Union – that is a fraction of 1% of the overall population of the EU – can request the European Commission to bring forward proposals for new laws.
Speaking of democratic concerns, I have recently heard suggestions that the Irish people should reject the Treaty because no other Member State plans to hold a referendum. I can think of no more perverse way to exercise a democratic franchise. Regardless of how other Member States go about the ratification process, I would strongly urge the Irish people to make up their mind on the Reform Treaty based on how they perceive it to be of benefit to Ireland.
The Government certainly had Ireland’s best interests in mind during the Treaty negotiations. For example, we were happy to go along unreservedly with the Charter on Fundamental Rights, which is given full legal effect in the Treaty, even though Britain sought and secured differential treatment here.
In contrast, when Britain sought an opt-out of the Justice and Home Affairs provisions, we felt that, on balance, some caution was justified here. Given that Britain and Ireland share a common law system, we decided that we would reserve the right to opt-out in this area, but made a declaration that we would opt-in to the greatest extent possible, particularly in the area of police co-operation.
Equality of Member States
These negotiations demonstrate the capacity of the EU to simultaneously forge consensus whilst taking account of particular national sensitivities. Critically, this Treaty underlines the role and equality of each individual Member State. I sometimes hear argument that the Reform Treaty will mean a loss of Ireland’s voice in the Union, and the creation of an uncontrollable EU super state. This is simply not true, and I would have no part in such a development.
The Treaty is very specific in acknowledging that the Union does not have power in its own right. It derives its powers from the Member States. The Treaty also provides that the Union must act solely within the limits of powers expressly given to it by the Member States. Other powers remain with Member States. This is stated explicitly, indeed quite bluntly, in the Treaty.
The Treaty expressly recognises the equality of the 27 Member States, and their distinct national identities. This principle is reflected, for example, in the new arrangements for appointments to the European Commission. Under the Treaty, membership of the Commission will rotate between nationals of the Member States on a strictly equal basis, for two out of every three terms.
This will apply absolutely equally for all Member States, large or small, new or old. Ireland will be treated exactly the same way as, for example, the UK, Germany or Poland.
During the Treaty negotiations, the Member States agreed that the Commission, which now has 27 Commissioners, has become too large and unwieldy. Its membership needs to be reduced so that it can become stronger, more focussed. This will also ensure the Commission acts in the balance of interests of all Member States, large and small. This is something which Ireland has always championed.
Effective Voting Measures
Equally importantly, the new voting arrangements in the Council of Ministers will allow more efficient decision-making but balanced with Member States’ needs to represent their own interests. Only measures commanding widespread support will be passed.
Under the new rules, a “Double Lock” system will apply, requiring agreement of at least 55% of the Member States and representing at least 65% of the Union’s population. This “Double Lock” is particularly important for smaller Member States, as it ensures that measures must have a broadly based level of support if they are to be pursued.
Much has been made of supposed transfers of sovereignty from the Member States to the EU. The reality is that relatively few new areas of policy have been transferred. And, crucially, there is no significant change in policy areas of particular importance for Ireland such as taxation and defence, which also remain subject to unanimity. In short, Ireland, like any other Member State, will continue to have a veto in these areas.
There is no question that an Irish Government, for whom corporate taxation policy has been a central plank of national economic progress, would sign up to a text that would weaken our right to decide on tax issues for ourselves. And, while the Reform Treaty does not have any bearing on the matter, let me repeat once again for the record that I am, and will remain, absolutely opposed to any attempt to move to a common EU corporation tax base or rates.
Future Treaty Change
I now want to comment on the bogus argument that this Treaty is somehow “self-amending”. Some have suggested that, by ratifying the Treaty, Ireland has no idea what it would be signing up to down the road. This is based on misunderstanding in some quarters, and misrepresentation coming from others. So let me spell the situation out clearly.
The Reform Treaty clearly sets out a number of ways in which future changes can be made to the EU Treaties.
The so-called “ordinary procedure” involves the holding of an inter-Governmental Conference to agree the form and wording of proposed Treaty changes.
There is also a “simplified procedure”, for proposed Treaty changes that do not alter the Union’s powers. This procedure requires a unanimous decision by the European Council, and cannot be used to confer any new powers on the Union.
However, I have to stress that the Treaty makes it absolutely clear that, whichever procedure is used - ordinary or simplified - any proposed change to the Treaties would have to be ratified in accordance with the constitutional requirements of each Member State.
In other words, the current arrangements will continue to apply, and the notion that any future changes in the Treaties can be brought in on the blind side or through the back door is just wrong. If a proposed change is such that it requires either the approval of the Oireachtas or a referendum, the change cannot be made unless and until that happens.
Finally, the Treaty does provide scope for moving some existing policy areas from unanimity to majority voting in the Council or European Council or for extending the powers of the European Parliament to “co-decide” matters with the Council.
However, this provision too has been misrepresented as a “self-amending” feature which can somehow be slipped past unsuspecting eyes. It is important, therefore, that we understand how this will work in practice.
First, any national parliament could block such a move if it so wished. Second, the consent of the European Parliament would be needed as well as a unanimous decision of the European Council. This means that each national Government, including, of course, Ireland, has a veto. This provides another very effective “double lock”. Furthermore, the Treaty specifically states that this provision cannot be used for matters with military or defence implications.
When these safeguards are recognised, it should be clear that this provision is intended to cover cases, where all 27 Member States and all 27 National Parliaments are in agreement. In these cases, it would be excessive to insist on invoking the cumbersome procedure of convening an inter-governmental conference and going through 27 national ratifications.
The move to increased use of qualified majority voting – or QMV – has also been presented by some as a backward step. I believe that the extent of this move is being deliberately overstated. In any event, the process of moving from unanimity to QMV is well established, as a means whereby the Union can respond more rapidly and efficiently to the needs of its citizens.
Indeed, while there is a place for the veto in decision making, we must also acknowledge the benefit of the QMV system. For example, many would argue that the Single Market, which has been of enormous benefit to Ireland’s economic success, would not have come about without QMV. In a Union of 27 Member States, it is neither practical nor sensible to expect that every decision should be taken unanimously.
However, I want to stress again that on issues that are of particular significance for Ireland – such as tax, security and defence policies – we have retained our national veto. In fact, many of the areas to which QMV will be extended are minor in nature, and deal more with procedure than policy.
Sovereignty.
There has been much comment on the possible impact of the Reform Treaty on our national sovereignty. The right of the Irish people to decide our own affairs on our own behalf goes to our core. Our history makes this clear.
But this does not mean that we should do everything on our own. In today’s globalised world, our capacity to act effectively depends on our links with other States. That principle has guided our approach to the EU and it has stood us well in the thirty-five years of our membership. Can anyone seriously suggest that we are better off going our own way, rather than choosing to work with our EU partners in this shared European endeavour?
The Reform Treaty is designed to modernise the Union’s institutions so that it can be more effective in those areas where the Member States have agreed to share sovereignty, particularly in the global world of the 21st century. It will equip the EU to respond to challenges such as climate change, energy security, sustainable development, migration and reducing poverty in the developing world. These external challenges have major implications. They affect us all. And none of us – not even the biggest and most powerful States – can address them alone.
Defence & Neutrality
I now want to say a few words on the important subject of defence. Ireland’s traditional policy of military neutrality is something which many of us, including the Government, hold dear. It is an important statement of who we are.
Nothing in the Reform Treaty changes our policy on neutrality. We retain the sovereign right to decide on participation in any EU crisis management mission, in accordance with our national “triple lock” arrangements, which require a UN mandate to be in place.
Ireland ’s position on the question of an EU common defence is clear. Quite simply, under our Constitution, Ireland cannot participate in a common defence without the prior consent of the people in a referendum. That is unchanged.
The Treaty states that if a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall provide aid and assistance by all means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter.
However, the Treaty goes on to state that this “shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States”. Ireland would therefore have the right to decide on whether, and how, to provide any such assistance.
The security and defence policy area is, understandably, always a sensitive one. But quite frankly, that does not justify the misrepresentation of the facts, either in past debate on Treaties or on this occasion. I regularly hear references to the supposed “militarisation” of the EU. This is not an EU that I recognise.
Rather, the EU has enhanced its capacity to respond to crisis situations either near to home or further afield. The Union has engaged in over 20 crisis management missions since the first ESDP mission in 2003. The great majority of these are civilian rule of law missions, such as the ongoing police mission in Bosnia Herzegovina, which assists in developing local institutions and tackling the problems of organised crime. I am proud that members of An Garda Síochána have been continuously engaged in that mission.
The Union has also been requested on a regular basis to undertake the role of “honest broker” in resolving particular difficulties, such as assisting with the peace agreement in Indonesia or providing police training assistance to the Palestinian authorities.
Similarly there have been EU-led military missions, reflecting the growing role envisaged by the United Nations for regional organisations in international peace-keeping. Does anyone here seriously object to the EU’s ongoing contribution to a safe and secure environment in Bosnia? Can there be any credible objection to the EU’s military mission in support of the UN during last year’s elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo?
Or, to take the most recent example, does anyone here oppose the EU and the Irish Defence Forces planned role to assist in providing humanitarian relief to hundreds of thousands of refugees and displaced persons in Chad? This is the reality of the European Security and Defence Policy. And it is one which is absolutely in line with our best national traditions.
The Reform Treaty makes no fundamental change in this area. Any EU crisis management mission will continue to require the support of all Member States. We will retain the sovereign right to decide on participation in any crisis management mission, just as at present. Our own constitutional and legislative requirements will remain, including of course the triple lock which, in addition to Government decision, requires Dáil approval and UN authorisation for any deployment of our troops overseas.
The Economy
Let me now turn to some broader aspects of the EU. Our experience shows us that our economic interests are best served by being part of a dynamic, competitive European economy. There can be no denying that EU membership has been crucial to the development of our economy.
The figures speak for themselves. In 1973, our wealth was barely 60% of the EU average. Now we are well above that average. In 1973, employment stood at a little over one million. Now, we have more than two million people in work. In 1973, foreign direct investment amounted to €16 million. Today, it is a huge multiple of this.
Many factors have contributed to this important turnaround. Direct financial and technical assistance from the EU played an important part. But, more than that, the EU provides a favourable economic environment. The Single Market has given us certain access to a massive market for goods and services. This, in turn, has helped to make Ireland an attractive location for foreign direct investment. We have, rightly, made the most of this opportunity. It is no coincidence that our economy has flourished since the Single Market came into effect in 1993.
I am convinced that our future prosperity is best served by membership of a Union which functions even more efficiently and effectively – this is the Union envisaged by the Reform Treaty.
Northern Ireland
The EU has also played a strong supporting role throughout the search for peace in Northern Ireland. It has provided generous financial and moral support to Northern Ireland and to the border counties over the past two decades.
It has also provided an unrivalled context for reconciliation. Through our shared membership of the EU, relations between Ireland and Britain have developed and strengthened. Shared interests on the European agenda have led to greater cooperation between the two countries.
The EU has provided a forum for politicians from both traditions in Northern Ireland to work together for the benefit of the entire region. Indeed, the European contribution to the peace process was explicitly acknowledged earlier this month during the visit of First Minister Ian Paisley and Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness to Brussels. The European Commission’s Task Force on Northern Ireland marks a welcome new phase of continued engagement in light of the positive political developments.
Broader Benefits
These are just some of the benefits of the EU for Ireland. There are many others. For example, air travel across Europe is now much more accessible and affordable.
Thanks to the Euro, it is possible to travel to 15 EU countries without having to change currency, not to mention the certainty which the Euro brings to Irish businesses that trade internationally.
Irish travellers enjoy health cover in all EU Member States, thanks to the European Health Insurance Card scheme.
And Irish students can access third level education right across Europe.
These are just a few examples of the progress brought about by the sensible and pragmatic workings of the EU.
Sensible and Pragmatic
In the period ahead, we will witness a lively debate on the Reform Treaty. This is something I welcome. I hope it will be an informed debate. I will participate in the debate in that spirit.
For those who might consider opposing the Treaty, I believe saying no is not enough. They must spell out the benefits that they see accruing to Ireland in saying no. For my part, I am sure that when the Irish public are fully and fairly informed, they will be hard pressed to see what advantage can possibly arise for Ireland by opposing the Reform Treaty.
My approach to the European Union has always been a pragmatic one. It has always been to weigh up the overall costs and benefits for Ireland of a particular policy or decision. My approach to the Reform Treaty is no different. On any issue, we have to ask ourselves about the consequences – we have to weigh up the costs and the benefits.
Ireland has a vested interest in Europe’s success. The Government strongly believes that the Reform Treaty is a balanced document which provides a sensible and pragmatic recipe for a more efficient and effective EU. This is in Ireland’s best interests, which is why we ought to wholeheartedly endorse this Treaty.
I am convinced that when the Irish people reflect on the issues raised, they too will be sensible and pragmatic. They will be guided by the positive impact of EU membership on Ireland. They will, I believe, want full Irish engagement in a Europe that will be improved and reinvigorated by the Reform Treaty, that will continue to support social and economic development and job creation, and that will play a lead role in rising to the global challenges of the 21st century.
I also believe strongly that Ireland is now presented with an opportunity to affirm our commitment to the European project in these times of global economic turbulence.
I am confident in saying that the Irish people in general share my view that our membership of the EU has played a pivotal role in our success of the past 15 years, particularly in the area of job creation. I believe that they will best safeguard our future economic stability and growth by strongly supporting the Treaty.
That message of support will send a positive signal of Ireland’s ability and willingness to embrace change and maintain a leadership role in the new global economy.
Thank you.
ENDS