Some Contributions from the Fifth Day of Debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill

Yesterday, the Dáil had its fifth day of debate on the Second reading of the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008. Some selected contributions.

Deputy Jimmy Deenihan (Fine Gael):

The Lisbon treaty is the outcome of an extensive and open process that has gone on since December 2001. The process included a convention on the future of Europe that included not only national governments from member states but also representatives from national parliaments. There was real participation in this process by the European Parliament and the social partners. The convention was held in public and was accessible to the media and the public and it produced the proposals for the constitutional treaty.

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Mary Coughlan (Fianna Fail):

Looking to the future, in the period 2007-13, Ireland can expect to receive approximately €12 billion from the CAP, with €2.3 billion coming from the European agricultural fund for rural development, EAFRD, to fund REPS, ERS, farm investment programmes, installation aid schemes and Leader programmes. An estimated €10 billion will come from the European agricultural guarantee fund and will be used to fund the single payment scheme and market support measures, export refunds, intervention etc.This is the background against which we need to look at the Lisbon treaty. This treaty provides for Ireland’s voice to continue to be heard in the EU in an effective and efficient manner. A positive vote in the referendum on the treaty will send a clear signal that Ireland is determined to maintain its place at the centre of EU decision making. I have been asked on a number of occasions to state what practical differences will arise for agriculture with the adoption of the reform treaty. In practical terms, the reform treaty will not alter the arrangements that currently apply in the agriculture and fisheries sectors to any great extent. The reform treaty introduces the principle of qualified majority voting to certain new areas but the principle has been enshrined in the agriculture and fisheries sectors for some considerable time. While there will be some alterations to the thresholds for reaching a qualified majority under the new arrangements, these alterations will not have significant implications for decision-making. The reality is that most decisions on agriculture and fisheries are arrived at by consensus. It is highly unusual for matters to come to a vote on agriculture and fisheries issues and when they do, close voting margins are unusual.

Deputy Liz McManus (Labour):

I have been involved in a number of referendums, some of which have been extremely contentious, and I welcome the peace that has been achieved, although we must debate the issues in an open fashion and deal with questions and concerns.

This seems a simple matter at heart, even though it is a long, complicated treaty. It is essentially about ensuring we have a framework for 27 countries. At present we are operating under rules that apply to 15 country membership. With the considerable growth in the EU we must ensure it can operate as efficiently as possible. We are conscious that an element of bureaucracy surrounds the EU. To an extent this is inevitable but it must be streamlined. More importantly, the EU must be democratised further than has been the practice in the past.

One of my concerns is about meetings of the Council of Ministers, which have always been held in private. The fact that co-decision is provided for between the Parliament and the Council is an important step forward. The greater openness in respect of coverage of meetings is a step forward although there are always means to circumvent this when difficult decisions must be made. Human ingenuity will ensure this pertains into the future.

The European Union often seems to be a distant body which does things that create difficulties, such as straightening bananas and so on, that are at a great remove from people’s lives. However, one should look back and consider the longer term. The European Union has been an enormously benign influence in respect of inequality and at times has been a persuader in ensuring that we dealt with such issues. As someone who has been involved in the women’s movement for far too long, I recall times when we depended completely on the European Union to protect and promote our rights. When we were obliged to fight tooth and nail against reactionary Government policies that excluded, denied and neglected women, we were able to reach beyond the national Government and obtain support from the European Union in a manner that was transformative for our lives and for women of my generation. This was not limited to women as it also applied to workers’ rights and to Northern Ireland.

Deputy Rory O’Hanlon (Fianna Fail):

Why should we ratify the Lisbon treaty? First, the Lisbon treaty contains little when compared to, for example, the previous treaties such as the Single European Act or the Maastricht, Amsterdam or Nice treaties. Its main purpose is to make the European Union more manageable. The same structures manage the European Union today as obtained in 1953, when there were only six member states, as opposed to the present total of 27. The three institutions that drive the European Union are the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council of Ministers. The role of the European Parliament will be enhanced in respect of input into legislation and policy for the member states and citizens of Europe. Membership of the Commission has been reduced from 27 to 18 and it is important to remember this measure is not new to this treaty, because we already agreed in the Nice treaty to reduce the number of Commissioners.

An important point for the Irish people is that we will have equality with all other member states. Although our population is only 4 million people, we will have a Commissioner on exactly the same terms as does Germany, with a population of 80 million people, and all the other member states of the European Union. Moreover, the five bigger states, namely, Germany, France, Italy, Britain and Spain, had two Commissioners until 2004. However, they will only have one Commissioner, in exactly the same way as Ireland, that is, in every 15-year cycle there will be a period during which member states will not have a Commissioner.

Deputy Peter Power (Fianna Fail):

Those who invite us to oppose the treaty would ask us to agree that the referendum will not be about Europe or the European project but about the merits or otherwise of the detailed text of the treaty. I fundamentally disagree. This is a referendum on the European Union and it presents Ireland with an opportunity to pass judgment on where we stand in Europe. This vote is as much a referendum on the European Union as it is about the arguments and complexities of qualified majority voting or the rotation of commissioners. The destiny and ambitions of this country are intricately tied to the European project so we cannot consider the treaty in isolation. Weighing up its pros and cons without having regard for the wider issues would be a fundamental misunderstanding of what is at stake.

Deputy Brian Hayes (Fine Gael):

The problem with the Nice treaty was that the political establishment, including my party and others, took people for granted. That is why it is crucial in the weeks ahead that effort is made on the ground, public meetings are held, arguments in local media and on radio are put to the “no” side, and, ultimately, people are not taken for granted. Name-calling and calling people loolahs will not help. We need a mature debate on the issues of Europe.

It is also important that those who argue for a “no” vote in this referendum tell us their vision for Europe. If, for example, the rules were changed on QMV or the position of the Commission, would they argue for a “yes” vote? Of course they would not. This issue has been used by certain groups in this country for the same cynical reasons of getting 50% of the publicity or trying to push other political agendas. If the Green Party was on this side of the House today, it would argue against the treaty for its own narrow, pathetic little interest, and everybody in the House knows that. The Green Party has used in the most cynical fashion every EU treaty debate for its own political ends and the people realise that.

Irish citizens like the idea of having a second layer of rights through the European Union. We have primary rights through Bunreacht na hÉireann but we have EU-wide rights also, for example, for workers and women. One can ask whether the advance of women in this country would have been possible two decades ago were it not for the European Union. At that time this country was still in a very conservative mode in terms of the position of women. It was the European Union that led the way. Irish citizens know this and they have a multifaceted view of their rights being domestic but also Europe-wide and international.

Deputy Michael Moynihan (Fianna Fail):

Many opponents of the treaty are making much noise about rejecting it. We must accept the treaty. Ireland is the only member state to have a referendum on it. This opportunity to exercise our democratic right on the treaty is a lasting testament to de Valera’s 1937 Constitution.

Deputy Chris Andrews (Fianna Fail):

Ireland’s relationship with the EU has been a very positive one. The “No” campaign, on the other hand, is pulling up the drawbridge before less fortunate member states can get on board. Theirs is a selfish and thoughtless position to keep what we have achieved for ourselves. Being part of a wider regional political and economic entity enabled us to modernise in many ways. We are a small open economy. It would never make sense for us to go it alone.

I ask voters, when making up their minds, to do so on the basis of two questions. These are what the treaty will do for Ireland and what it will do for the individual. When voters reflect on those questions, they will realise this treaty is good for Ireland, other smaller nations and Europe as a whole.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan (Fine Gael):

People regularly assign blame to the European Union in this country when something goes wrong. It is an easy target and a whipping boy for when something goes wrong. We can blame the bureaucrats in the European Union. Nevertheless, I was told confidentially some years ago that we have a fair amount of bureaucrats ourselves and we did not need to go over there for them. We could supply them with a full market if there was a need.

The debate was adjourned at 13:00 and will continue next week it seams.

--
Source:
Parliamentary Debates (Offical Report) Dáil Debate Vol. 651 No.4, Thursday, 10 April 2008

Previous Posts:
Some Contributions from the Fourth Day of Debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill
Some Contributions from the Third Day of Debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill
Some Contributions from the Second Day of Debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill
Some Contributions from the First Day of Debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill

Upcoming EU Business in the Oireachtas

Seanad Éireann to be addressed by Habs Gert Pottering

Seanad Éireann resumes after its recess tomorrow and according to the Order of Business Hans Gert Pottering is to address Seanad Éireann at 10.30am. Mr Pottering is the former leader of the European Peoples Party in the European Parliament and is currently President of the European Parliament. I will attempt to live blog his speech which will be availible on Oirechtas Live. I assume there will be a question and answer session or a sos (break for non Irish speakers), but it is not scheduled before the start of ordinary business. If I do not live blog it, I will post highlights from it.

Seanad Éireann will also see statements on the Reform Treaty after the Order of Business.

Dáil to resume debating the Reform Treaty

Meanwhile the Dáil will resume its second stage debate on the Reform Treaty tomorrow evening after Leaders Questions. The debate is scheduled to last until thursday at 13:00. I will of course try to keep up my posting of snippets of contributions of the debate. Wednesday will see the debate resume after Leaders Questions and Questions to the Taoiseach. Wednesday will also see a statement from Department of the Taoiseach on the European Council. On Thursday the final day of debate will start first thing after the Order of Business. The bill will then move onto Committee stage, where both Labour and Fine Gael have mentioned the prospect of amendments.

EU Business at Committee Level

This week sees the, Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and the Joint Committee on European Affairs meeting in Public on Tuesday and Thursday. On Tuesday the Joint Committee on European Affairs will hear submissions on the The Lisbon Reform Treaty from VoteNo.ie, Peace and Neutrality Alliance and the People's Movement. They will meet at 14:00 in Committee Room 1, Leinster House 2000. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny will meet in Committee Room 4, Leinster House 2000 to discuss Scrutiny of EU Legislative Proposals.

On Thursday both Committees will be meeting again. The Joint Committee on European Affairs will hold Public Deliberations on The Lisbon Reform Treaty at 20:00 in Room QG 13, Business School, Dublin City University. Members of the public are invited to attend and contribute to the Committee's deliberations. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny will be scrutinising EU Legislative Proposals. They will be discussing:
* COM (2007) 697 re common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, 2002/19/EC on access to, and interconnection of electronic communications networks and services, and 2002/20/EC on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services.
* COM (2007) 698 re universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks, Directive 2002/58/EC concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector and Regulation (EC) No. 2006/2004 on consumer protection co-operation
* COM (2007) 699 re the European Electronic Communication Market Authority

On European Electronic Communication Market Authority there will be submissions from Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Commission for Communications Regulation, eircom, The Telecommunications and Internet Federation and The Irish Cellular Industry Association.

---
Source:
This Week in the Houses of the Oireachtas 7 -11 April 2008

The Answers to Ruairí's Questions

Remember I recently highlighted Ruairí Quinns questioning? Well here are some of the responses.

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources,


Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs

Minister for Defence

Minister for Education and Science

Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Tánaiste and Minister for Finance

Minister for Foreign Affairs

Minister for Health and Children

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Not answered Yet)

Minister for Transport

I havent posted the answers as they are in different formats. Some are in Tables which look terrible in Blogger.

Anyway if someone can connect the answers and figure out what we learn by these, id be obliged!

----
Source:
Parliamentary Debates (Offical Report) Dáil Debate Vol. 650 No. 4, Thursday, 3 April 2008, Written Answers

Previous Post:
What is Ruairí Quinn Looking for?

Some Contributions from the Second Day of Debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill

The debate resumed today at 1 o'clock

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Dick Roche (Fianna Fáil):

The main aims of the Lisbon reform treaty, as spelled out in its preamble, are to enhance the efficiency and the democratic legitimacy of the Union. This treaty is different from those that went before it. It was not produced behind closed doors, rather it was crafted in public. The reform treaty is not, as some would have us believe, the work of fevered minds with no mandate.

A second and equally important point is that this is a balanced treaty that represents a particularly good deal for the small and medium-sized member states. The latter point should be bourne in mind by those who mindlessly sloganise about voting “no” to get a better “yes”. There is no chance, nor is there a need, for a better “yes”; this treaty is good for Europe and great for Ireland.

The forthcoming referendum once again puts Ireland in a pivotal position. Without securing a “yes” vote in Ireland, this treaty will fall and the Union will be cast into a further period of introspection. That will damage the European Union but most importantly it will damage Ireland. Important as the treaty is for the European Union, its emphatic ratification is vital for Ireland.

The big winners in this treaty will be national parliaments. They will be given a dramatically extended role. They will receive draft EU law at the same time as national governments; have a longer time to scrutinise draft EU law; be able to object to a draft proposal on the grounds that it breaches the principle of subsidiarity - the national parliaments are made the guardians of subsidiarity in this treaty; and have the right to veto any proposal to change an issue from unanimous voting to qualified majority voting.

Membership of the European Parliament has been capped at 751. Concern has been expressed that the Parliament was growing too large to be effective. The treaty provides that no member state shall have less than six or more than 96 MEPs. As envisaged under the Nice treaty, Ireland will have 12 MEPs. The new arrangement means that the smaller countries have proportionately more MEPs per capita than the larger states.

Every EU treaty that has been put to the Irish people by way of referendum has become the subject of myths, distortions and untruthful efforts to confuse and mislead either by those, such as Sinn Féin, who have traditionally opposed Ireland’s involvement in the European project or by the ad hoc opponents that spring up around each referendum. This treaty has given rise to a bumper crop of myths. These myths are propagated by an intriguing collection of opponents, the bulk of whom have no democratic mandate and none of whom has any record of delivery for this country. We have had claims that this is a self-amending treaty. More specifically, there have been claims about the loss of our neutrality, massive transfers of competences and powers, loss of influence through the new voting system, a reduction of our ability to prevent decisions that are not in Ireland’s interests and the loss of an Irish Commissioner. Each of these myths is easily dismissed.

The self-amending treaty myth is precisely that, a myth. The treaty makes clear that any future treaty amendments “shall enter into force after being ratified by all member states in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements”. In Ireland, this means that any change of any significance at any future time will require a referendum.

The most enduring myth is that ratification will erode Ireland’s neutrality. Sinn Féin has consistently peddled this myth for 35 years. In 1972, for example, campaigning against our entry into the EEC, Sinn Féin opposed accession on the grounds that the objective was “a united states of Europe with a European army”. “Irish people”, we were warned, would be “compelled to fight wars the European powers decide to wage”. Our neutrality would be forsaken and compulsory military service for young people would be introduced. Opposing the Single European Act in 1987, Sinn Féin claimed it would “surrender power completely to the NATO-dominated EEC”. Sinn Féin’s opposition to the Maastricht treaty in 1992 was based on its prediction that it represented a “death knell for Irish neutrality”. In 1998, Sinn Féin opposed the Amsterdam treaty with the argument that it represented “the most significant step towards a military common defence in Europe” and would “ensure that the nuclear-armed Western European Union” was integrated into the European Union structures. Opposing the Nice treaty in 2001, the leader of Sinn Féin, Mr. Gerry Adams, who has been curiously absent from the current debate, said that the treaty would “bring us closer into a European army and into NATO”.

A huge amount depends on our decision, which will have an impact far beyond our shores. It will affect the lives of almost half a billion people across all 27 member states. The idea that we can “Vote No for a better Yes”, which is a vacuous slogan, is a dangerous delusion, as is any suggestion that a “No” vote is cost-free. A “No” vote comes with a massive price tag. It would be seen in Europe as a rejection, serving no purpose, of almost a decade’s work by the member states. If Ireland were to vote “No”, we would not be kicked out of the European Union. The EU will not come to a halt in such circumstances - it will struggle on. The danger, however, is that a balanced treaty which gives huge benefits to small and medium sized states, will be lost. If we vote “No”, we will squander the goodwill we have painstakingly built up since we joined the EEC 35 years ago. We will damage Ireland’s reputation as the “can do” member state - the small country that gets things done. We will undoubtedly send what IBEC has called “a worrying signal” into the board rooms in which decisions on foreign direct investment are made and will continue to be made. That would have a dire economic effect on this country.

A further real danger, which has not been discussed very often, was identified in a recent series of perceptive articles in The Irish Times. I refer to the possibility, in the event of a “No” vote here, that larger member states will conclude that after ten years of trying to reform the EU, their efforts have produced no results. In such circumstances, stasis will stare the Union in the face. If such countries become frustrated, they may decide to fall back on bilateral arrangements. This would produce the two-speed Europe that small and medium sized member states fought long and hard to prevent when the Convention on the Future of Europe was being drawn up. One of the underlying themes within the convention was the need to create a Europe that is based on equality. Another concern that ran through the debate was the idea that a two-speed Europe might develop. Such an approach would destroy the “community method” and ultimately undermine the Union itself. The European project is underpinned by the essential principle that member states are seen to be equals and act as equals. To undermine that principle would have a high cost.

Deputy Frank Feighan (Fine Gael):

The reform treaty will, I believe, improve Ireland’s ability to attract foreign direct investment and increase access for Irish business to international markets. We have a growing vibrant economy and many Irish people have purchased property in Europe and are investing where they see opportunities. Some very good opportunities are to be found and indeed there are bad opportunities on offer, too, as I know from personal experience. I was one of those who bought property in Bansko. However, there are great opportunities for a resurgent Irish economy within Europe. That can only be helped by liberalising markets and ensuring more business opportunities. There is a young vibrant market there that we can tap into.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children Deputy Pat 'The Cope' Gallagher (Fianna Fáil):

Key changes will be effected by the reform treaty. One welcome development will be the appointment of a President of the European Council. The President will co-ordinate the work of the EU leaders at European level. He or she will not have any power as the power will rest with the Council. A new High Representative will have responsibility for foreign affairs and security policy and will only be able to act with the agreement of the 27 member states of the Union.

The Council, representing the Governments of the Union, and the European Parliament, will have just 33 new powers and not over 100, as some are suggesting. These powers, by and large, will pertain to justice and home affairs issues. They will help the Union to tackle issues such as illicit drug trafficking into Europe. All of the 33 new powers will not necessarily pertain to Ireland because of our opt-out clause in respect of justice and home affairs.

The treaty is to ensure that the Union will become more structured. It sets out how it will deal with the new political challenges, be it climate change, the protection of energy supplies or the tackling of illegal immigration. There is nothing hidden in the treaty. A more effective and efficient Union will further the development of the European economy, including that of Ireland. This in turn will help to implement the Lisbon strategy, which is designed to ensure the Union will become the most competitive body in the world by 2010. It is in our own best interest politically and economically to vote in favour of the treaty

I realise from the debate that has just started throughout the country that there will be scaremongering during the course of the referendum campaign. We will be told that a vote for the treaty is a vote for Peter Mandelson and an end to the Common Agricultural Policy. We will be told that by signing up to the treaty, Irish agriculture will run into difficulties. These allegations are wrong and dishonest. I appreciate there are concerns about the WTO and the attitude of Peter Mandelson, but he takes his brief from the General Affairs Council. Our Ministers at the General Affairs Council and the Ministers in agriculture and trade will do their utmost to ensure the outcome of the WTO will be fair and balanced and that there will be no major detrimental consequence for Irish agriculture.

Let us vote in the referendum on the basis of the treaty and not on any other basis. People may have local or national grievances, but this is not the time to express their views by voting “No”. This is the opportunity to vote for the future of the country and to vote for future generations.

Deputy Pat Breen (Fine Gael):

Referenda are complex, but not very exciting. The Lisbon treaty is no different in that respect from previous treaties and must be explained in simple terms to the electorate. Since the formation of the EEC in 1957 when there were six members, the EU has changed significantly. We joined in 1973 with Denmark and the UK. EU membership has been good for Ireland and since joining we have created approximately 1 million jobs and received almost €58 billion in transfer payments. That amounts to approximately €15,000 for every man, woman and child in the country. Irish citizens have the right to move, work and reside freely in other member states. Many of our young people are doing that and vice versa. Many people from Poland and other post-communist countries are moving to this country and playing their very important role here. Of course, the introduction of the euro has made travel within the EU more convenient and much more effective.

I have no doubt that those who oppose the treaty will come out with the same arguments they produced during other referenda debates in the past. They will claim that the treaty will raise taxes, create a superstate, cost us money and lead to free availability of abortion and stem cell research. The other argument is that we will be forced to join a European army. These are just some of the arguments these people will come up with. Of course, they have a right to oppose treaties. That is what democracy is all about. However, I firmly believe that their arguments must be valid, based on fact and relate to what is contained in the proposed treaty. Their arguments must not be based on exaggerated and untrue claims that are intended to scare the electorate and create an atmosphere of fear.

The treaty will not raise taxes because it contains no reference to a common tax policy. Ireland will retain control of its own tax policy and tax rates. The treaty does not create a superstate. It safeguards our sovereignty and sets out the areas for which the EU has responsibility and its limits. It will not lead to abortion and stem cell research. The opposite is the case. Health policy is a matter for each individual country. We will not be forced to join a European army. Our neutrality is fully protected. European military activity is directed at peacekeeping and crisis intervention and participation is an option for any country. We have heard this argument over the past 40 years and it is not true. We must bring that debate to the people. I have attended a number of meetings on the treaty and this is the story that comes up all the time. I am asked whether we will have a super state and be conscripted into an army. That debate must be brought forward by all the political parties.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Brian Lenihan (Fianna Fáil):

The treaty is long and technical in nature and as such does not easily lend itself to campaign slogans and soundbites. In general, EU issues do not generate the kind of excitement and enthusiasm often associated with the cut and thrust, and adventures and misadventures of domestic political debate. I am reminded of another great Frenchman, Jacques Delors, who once said: “You cannot fall in love with the single European market.” The French, after all, are the great authorities on love in the modern world. While it may be difficult to form a passionate attachment to the terms of a treaty, we cannot deny its importance to the development of the EU and its internal workings for the foreseeable future. The treaty will give the Union the flexibility and the capacity to face many major challenges that Europe faces in the decades ahead. There is no doubt that there is a need to restructure the workings of the Union to take account of its enlarged membership and the various issues now confronting Europe.

When one looks at the arguments that we are faced with in the referendum - it is a good exercise to hold a referendum because it forces us to engage with the public and their concerns about Europe - so many of them relate to fundamental rights. People argue that they should have the right to cut turf, catch fish, harvest seaweed, obtain planning permission and so forth, but that there is a European rule which obstructs this. However, under this treaty, people will be entitled to challenge the European Union on the basis of their own individual rights. Intellectually, that is a very important change for Europe to make because at present the difficulty is that the power arrangements are seen as remote and bureaucratic as far as the individual citizen is concerned. At present, the European citizen in the European legal order does not have the right to invalidate a decision taken within the European legal order by the authorities. Our citizens do have that right under our Constitution in relation to decisions we take in this House. That, along with our electoral system, has brought the citizen very close to the Irish State. It is worth looking at this as a positive feature in this campaign. It is not one we should skirt around. We should be open about it.

Deputy Ruairí Quinn (Labour):

The Lisbon treaty represents five years of concentrated work beginning with the Laacken Declaration and the convention that preceded it where for the first time a treaty of reform of the Union’s institutions was formulated, not by an intergovernmental conference comprising civil servants and politicians but by a much more representative body comprising members of national parliaments, the European Parliament, social partners, governments and prospective Union members. The constitutional treaty was defeated by the French and Dutch but it was ratified by 18 other member states, which is often ignored. The Lisbon treaty is the constitutional treaty in reverse. A total of 95% of the provisions of the treaty were contained in the constitutional treaty. Commissioner Wallström, who is responsible for communicating information about Europe, was challenged by a stern commentator on this when asked what was the difference between both. She was asked if the reform treaty is 95% the same, why it was being proposed again. She responded that scientific research proves 95% of our DNA is the same as that of a mouse but that is not to suggest there is no difference between us and mice.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Sinn Féin):

This debate is about the implications of the Lisbon treaty for Ireland, Europe and the wider world. My party believes the Lisbon treaty is a bad deal. It was badly negotiated and is a bad result for the Irish people. It gives the EU too much power and reduces Ireland’s ability to stop decisions that are not in our interests. It is shameful that the Government has signed up to and is now advocating ratification of a treaty which undermines the interest of the Irish people. The Government has a responsibility to protect the interests of the people and once again on this occasion it has failed to do so.

There has been a great deal of scaremongering during this debate in respect of the economy. Some of my colleagues will return to prove this treaty will affect our economy in the future and to deny what the Minister, the Labour Party and Fine Gael have said. It is not too late for us. Even at this late stage, the Government can withdraw from this process. It can turn around agus impím ar an Rialtas a rá leis an Comhairle Eorpach gur shínigh an lacha bacach sin, an Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, an conradh in éadan tola muintir na hÉireann agus i gcoinne leasa an phobail agus go bhfuil muid sásta anois tarraingt siar go dtí go ndéanfar na hathruithe suntasacha atá de dhíth orainn. Muna ndéantar sin, beidh sé de chrógacht ag pobail an Stáit diúltú don mhuc i mála atá an Rialtas ag cur iachall ortha a cheannach.

Deputy Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fáil):

Today, EU partnership is able to embrace Britain and continental Europe and to transcend the conflicts and oppositions of the past. We have different allies according to the subject under discussion - Britain and Sweden on tax sovereignty; France and Poland on the CAP. We are part of the inner eurozone circle but not of Schengen. When Seán McDiarmada was asked in 1916 why a republic, he referred to the examples of France and America. The former, he stated, had been a firm friend of Ireland for generations while millions of Irish people had played a central role in the latter.

The policy of successive Governments to place Ireland at the heart of Europe has been a highly successful diplomatic strategy. As French President Nicolas Sarkozy told his British hosts recently, “If you are a full member of Europe, you have more of a say than if you are on the margins”. That is the nub of the argument. We need to maximise our influence on decisions of concern which are being taken and deliberated upon practically every week in Brussels. No one would understand why a member state which has done so well out of membership in terms of radically improving its position, a major success story of the EU, would rebuff and try to block the organisation that has made it all possible. Politicians and diplomats from countries such as Denmark that were forced by referendum in 1992 to opt out of European policies deeply regret that marginalisation and want to reverse it.

Every party with experience of Government, practically every representative organisation among the social partners, is advocating a “Yes” vote and they know what they are doing. With the level of financial turbulence in the world today, it is no time to take unnecessary risks or to damage the confidence so important to investors that we are well placed in Brussels to influence and shape the decisions that are important to us and to them.

Church leaders, including successive popes, well understand the big picture and have always been supportive of the European project. In an address to diplomatic heads of mission in the Vatican before Christmas, Pope Benedict XVI said that the Lisbon treaty, “gives a boost to the process of building the European home”.

The European Union operates on a balanced political philosophy. It is neither excessively neo- liberal, nor hardline socialist or state interventionist. I would be equally distrustful of ultra-leftism and of the visceral Thatcherite hostility to Europe commonplace in certain sections of the British media which a millionaire-led organisation called Libertas would like to import into Ireland. Their running away from cross-questioning at the forum on Europe this morning speaks volumes for the incoherence and incredibility of their case against the treaty. I am sure Fine Gael Deputy Lucinda Creighton welcomes the publicity of being on a Libertas poster in her constituency and would be rightly dismissive of the politically naive attempt to damage her.

Deputy John Perry (Fine Gael):

As a businessman and entrepreneur, an important aspect of voter decision-making is to be optimistic for the future. The entrepreneurial approach to decision-making has to do with vision, imagination, enthusiasm and self-confidence. The entrepreneurial thinking process understands that if new opportunities are to be successfully grasped it is important not to act based on yesterday’s logic. With an entrepreneurial approach, the voter will select the plan that is proactive and positive on the optimistic assumption that the benefits flowing from the plan will be achieved while the possible risks will be managed and any perceived downsides will be avoided. With a positive, self-confident outlook to the future, the entrepreneur will vote “yes”. From a business point of view and having regard to the advantages of a “yes” vote in attracting business to Ireland, hopefully a “yes” vote will be secured, given its potential to create jobs and attract investment from the US in particular.

For the entrepreneurial decision maker, the issues of likely reward and possible risk go together. On the reward side, all past experience points to the fact that being a full and active member of the EU has brought substantial economic and social benefits to Ireland and its citizens. This outcome is demonstrably quantified. One only has to think of the euro in one’s pocket to understand that the EU has been beneficial for Ireland. On the possible risk side, there is a confidence that specific actions for the management and mitigation of potential risk factors can be taken to ensure the risk element can be avoided into the future. There is a clear understanding that the risk factors can only be managed from a position of influence within the process of the implementation of the decision. One cannot manage potential risk factors as a spectator looking on.

Many of the arguments against the Lisbon treaty are simply recycled versions of “no” arguments put forward during every EU referendum held since 1972. These negative arguments were ill-founded then and they are equally so now. According to Mary Lou McDonald, MEP, Sinn Féin opposes the Lisbon treaty not because its members are eurosceptics but because they are ambitious for Europe and because they believe that, collectively and democratically, Europeans can achieve great things. They claim to be pro-European while at the same time opposing this treaty.

-----
Source:
Parliamentary Debates (Offical Report) Dáil Debate Vol. 650 No. 4, Thursday, 3 April 2008

Previous Posts:
Some Contributions from the First Day of Debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill

What is Ruairí Quinn Looking for?

I was going through the question paper for the Dáil Ruaire Quinn has tabled the following question for written answer:

*47. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the appointments to State boards, bodies or committees made since 3 July 2007 to date in 2008; the names of the persons so appointed; the dates on which the names of those persons were published in Iris Oifigiúil; the State boards, bodies or committees on which vacancies currently exist; the number of vacancies in each case; the State boards, bodies or committees in which vacancies are anticipated to arise up to and including 1 October 2008; and the number of vacancies in each case. — Ruairı´ Quinn. [12529/08]

He asked that question to the following Ministers:
* Tánaiste and Minister for Finance
* Minister for Health and Children
* Minister for Transport
* Minister for Foreign Affairs
* Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment
* Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism
* Minister for Social and Family Affairs
* Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs
* Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
* Minister for Education and Science
* Minister for Defence
* Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
* Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government
* Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources

Is he on to something the rest of us dont know about? Its a strange one? Any one any ideas?

UPDATE: He asked the Taoiseach also, its on the Question paper for tomorrow!

------
Source:
Question Paper - Thursday, 3rd April, 2008 PDF
Question Paper - Tuesday, 8th April, 2008 PDF

Some Contributions from the First Day of Debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill

Parts of the Contributions by TD's to yesterdays debate.

Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern (Fianna Fail)

The discussion of the Bill by the Oireachtas represents an important phase in our national debate on the treaty, which will be put to a referendum in June. The reform treaty is important for Ireland and Europe and it is a logical step for the European Union in a world of increasing globalisation. Ratification of this treaty is a logical step for Irish men and women who want to express their faith in a political project that has, in the past 35 years, changed our nation for the better.

I sincerely believe it would be a profound mistake for us to vote “No”. Such an outcome would cause great uncertainty within the Union. It would damage the Union and cast doubt on our collective ability to face up to the new challenges confronting our Continent. It would be seen as a victory for those across Europe who have never liked the EU way of doing business through the painstaking pursuit of agreement that can serve our shared interests as Europeans. Failure to ratify the treaty would be especially damaging to smaller countries like Ireland, which derive particular benefit from the level playing field provided by agreed EU arrangements. Most crucially, a “No” vote would be damaging to Ireland. It would damage our standing as a committed participant in the evolution of the Union.

Some opponents of the treaty have been speaking in alarmist terms about this. It is suggested that, suddenly, EU law will be superior to Irish law. In language similar to that of parties and newspapers across the water that want to put the EU out of business, these opponents are suggesting that this treaty will put the Irish Constitution out of business. They are wrong. This constitutional provision is not new. It is as old as our membership of the Union. The wording reflects the principle of the primacy of European law, well established by the Court of Justice in Luxembourg prior to Ireland’s accession to the European Communities.

The EU principle of primacy reflects the general principle of international law, recognised since 1937 by Article 29.3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann, that States must comply with international legal obligations freely undertaken by them in the exercise of their sovereignty. The practical effect of the principle of primacy is that it offers certainty and clarity regarding the relationship between the Union’s laws and those of member states. It applies only in those areas where the member states have conferred powers on the Union.

This principle of conferral is an important element which is helpfully highlighted and clarified in the reform treaty. It makes it clear that the Union does not have powers of its own. Its powers derive from sovereign decisions by the member states to give the Union certain powers. These powers are carefully set out in the EU treaties.

Bunreacht na hÉireann will continue to be the basic legal document of the State and will continue to determine, in the final instance, the precise relationship between Irish and EU law. The ultimate locus of sovereignty will continue to reside with the member states rather than the Union.

Deputy Billy Timmins (Fine Gael)

The same arguments are made time and again. Our neutrality is akin to the cat with the nine lives - it being lost on each occasion that we passed an EU treaty. Our neutrality must have many graves stretching from Rome to Maastricht to Nice. I would like to be in a position to say that our concept of neutrality has ceased and that we are full participants in the common foreign and security policy but this is not so. If something is worth being a member of, it is worth protecting. Where we can assist in dealing with evil and oppression, we should do so and follow our own sovereign decision. In recent weeks, there has been much criticism of China’s role in the Tibet Autonomous Region and yet that country, as a member of the UN Security Council, can decide our foreign policy, as can any other permanent members if certain circumstances arise. The comfort blanket of the UN can dictate our sovereignty in some decision making on foreign policy, while the European Union, strangely, cannot. This is paradoxical. I also believe that the majority of Irish people would favour our participation in the common foreign and security policy if they were afforded the opportunity to voice their opinion on it. Hopefully, they will get that opportunity in the not too distant future.

I hope we will get an opportunity to deal with details of the Bill on Committee Stage. There are many other aspects with regard to foreign direct investment, which I hope speakers from this side of the House will address. On Committee Stage we will raise some issues with respect to what will become subsections 13o and 14o of Article 29 of the Constitution. It may be unnecessary to include them as we believe the authority already exists in the Constitution given that we have signed up to the treaty.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton (Fine Gael)

What will this particular treaty achieve that will be so significant? Many people are asking whether the treaty is really necessary. Previous treaties focused on clear and crucial initiatives of the EU. At first it was dealing with the Single Market. As it progressed, it dealt with the common currency, the euro. More recently we voted for the Nice treaty to support the enlargement of the European Union, allowing 12 new member states from the eastern bloc to join the EU and benefit from it in the same way as we have done. We now face a new juncture in the development of the European Union. We face new challenges and the Lisbon reform treaty is designed to assist Ireland and other member states in facing up to these challenges.

These challenges are numerous. They are the challenges that affect each and every citizen of this country. Anybody who believes this referendum, this Bill or Europe is not relevant to their lives should think again because they are simply wrong. The challenges that face us are relevant to every citizen. They include the challenge of global warming and climate change, the threat to energy security in Ireland and the rest of Europe, the challenges associated with Third World hunger and peacekeeping and peace-enforcement missions in our neighbouring regions.

Critically, the treaty also addresses perhaps the greatest threat to the Irish people, that of the global economic downturn and the prospect of job losses in this country. The Lisbon treaty focuses on making Europe more competitive and on the completion of the Single Market, with the prospect of greater economic security for all of us in the context of our place in Europe in the future.

It is time to listen to the facts rather than the scare-mongering spin, and here are some of the facts. On the issue of neutrality, Ireland will retain its veto on all matters concerning European defence policy. We cannot be forced into anything of which we do not want to be part. The treaties will continue to recognise that EU policy “shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States”, a clear reference to Ireland. The constitutional prohibition in this country on joining an EU common defence force remains in place. The triple lock means that no Irish troops will be deployed without a UN mandate. That position is very clear. These three levels of protection from the treaty and the Constitution mean that no amount of spin from “No” campaigners can undermine the true facts of this scenario.

The changes introduced by the Lisbon treaty will equip the European Union to undertake widely supported crisis management and peacekeeping tasks around the world and particularly in neighbouring regions. The current UN-authorised EU mission to Chad, in which Ireland is playing a leading role, is a prime example of the European Union’s activities in this area of common security policy. The mission will provide security for the provision of humanitarian relief to hundreds of thousands of refugees and displaced persons, many fleeing persecution in Darfur. Surely that is a meritorious activity for Irish troops to be part of and I am proud of it.

By supporting this treaty, the Irish people will be enabling the European Union to take specific action which will benefit business interests in Ireland. The treaty will ensure increased access for Irish business to European markets. It will also ensure that Ireland will retain a veto in key areas for Irish business, such as taxation. We must not be deluded or confused on this issue - we retain our veto on taxation.

Overall the case for the Lisbon treaty is indisputable. The EU has been and will continue to be good for Irish business and the Irish people. Those of us supporting this Bill realise that we have the facts on our side. The people who oppose this treaty do so on the basis of misinformation, misinterpretation and the concoction of some far-fetched tales. By sticking to and promoting the facts it will become clear to the public that this treaty is in their interests.

Deputy Joe Costello (Labour)

The phoney war is over and the formal debate has begun in the Oireachtas. Both the National Forum on Europe and the Joint Committee on European Affairs will take the debate to the people throughout the length and breadth of Ireland, which is most welcome. The Labour Party is also taking the referendum very seriously. We debated the substance of the Lisbon reform treaty at our annual conference in November 2007 in Wexford and voted overwhelmingly to campaign for a “Yes” vote.

The European project unites the people of Europe by democratic consent on the basis of shared values and in doing so the participating countries agree to pool and share sovereignty in the pursuit of peace, prosperity, stability and solidarity. At the same time the principles of subsidiary and proportionality ensure that matters which can be dealt with by the individual member states are left to the individual member states.

At every referendum since Ireland joined in 1972, dire warnings and predictions were given and made about what Europe would do to Ireland. However, Europe did not do any of these awful things. It did not reduce Ireland to a province of a European empire or super state. It did not enforce the conscription of young Irish men and women into a European army, as we heard so often. It did not force Ireland into aggressive imperialist wars. It did not bring about a disastrous fall in the nation’s population - in fact the reverse has occurred. It did not cause wholescale unemployment or destroy the small Irish economy - again, the reverse has occurred. It did not undermine Irish culture or the Irish language; the Irish language is now an official language of the European Union. It did not put an end to trade union or workers’ rights; they are firmly supported and enshrined in the charter of fundamental rights. It did not introduce abortion or euthanasia, nor can it.

All these predictions were made again and again during every treaty debate by those campaigning for a “No” vote. Every one has proved to be groundless and inaccurate. They are being made again by the same individuals and groups who are opposing the Lisbon reform treaty. They are just as unfounded, inaccurate and misleading today as they were when first made.

The treaty creates new goals and challenges for member states. At the National Forum on Europe the Labour Party argued that the EU should take leadership of the great challenges of the day affecting humankind. Under the Lisbon reform treaty the EU has firmly placed itself as the leading player in tackling climate change and the sustainability of the planet. Article 37 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights states “a high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of the Union and ensured in accordance with the principle of sustainable development”. Likewise the Lisbon reform treaty commits the EU to become the world leader in Third World development, humanitarian aid and the eradication of global poverty.

The Debate will resume today.

------
Source:
Parliamentary Debates (Offical Report) Dáil Debate Vol. 650 No. 3, Wednesday, 2 April 2008

Notes on the the formation of the Government of the 30th Dáil

An Taoiseach: Bertie Ahern, Fianna Fail, Dublin Central.
There was no surprises when he was elected Taoiseach with a comfortable majority, 89 votes to 76. He stays on but more importantly as anointed his successor.

An Tánaiste and Minister for Finance: Brain Cowen, Fianna Fail, Laois-Offaly.
Cowen continues on in the important ministry and definitely is now seen as Bertie's replacement. If the economy does suffer, the problems will fall at his door though. Stamp Duty reform will be a major project here.

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries & Food: Mary Coughlan, Fianna Fail, Donegal South West.
Coughlan stays where she is but also now has to represent fisheries. This will be important as the fisheries industry here is not getting a good deal here in Europe. Maybe with her experience with fighting for farmers she can do the same for our fishermen.

Minister for Arts, Sport & Tourism: Séamus Brennan, Fianna Fail, Dublin South.
Brennan takes a diagonal (downwards) from Social Welfare minister to this portfolio. Not the most exciting one! Though it could be interesting with the Olympics next year.

Minister for Communications, Energy & Natural Resources: Eamon Ryan, Green Party, Dublin South.
The first new face in this cabinet, holding quite an interesting portfolio. Damien seams happy with his appointment. This protfolio has also changed its name, marine is gone (cant have the greens in charge of that!!! ) and energy is in the title, first time we've had a ministry with that, and its great a green minister is in charge of it!

Minister for Community, Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs: Éamon Ó Cuív, FF, Galway West.
Ó Cuív stays in this post, which I have major problems with, not least the naming of Dingle/Daingean Uí Chúis.

Minister for Defence: Willie O'Dea, FF, Limerick East.
O'Dea stays here, Battle groups still a bit of an issue here, are we in or out???

Minister for Education & Science: Mary Hanafin, FF, Dún Laoghaire.
Hanafin stays at this post where LC reform and third level funding remain big issues.

Minister for Enterprise, Trade & Employment: Micheál Martin, FF, Cork South Central.
The only Cork minister, stays where he is. Encouraging employment and investment huge issues here.

Minister for the Environment, Heritage & Local Government: John Gormley, GP, Dublin South East.
Another new face at the cabinet table! Gormley is left with a major headache over the M3 though! An independent Electoral Commission is promised :D delighted along with reform of Local Government.

Minister for Foreign Affairs: Dermot Ahern, FF, Louth. Ahern stays here at Foreign Affairs where he has been a good minister, reaching ODA promises is the trick here.

Minister for Health & Children: Mary Harney, PD, Dublin Mid West.
Harney is the only PD left at the cabinet table and stays at Health. Her tenure will be shaky as she has Nurses, Consultants and Co-location to deal with.

Minister for Justice, Equality & Law Reform: Brian Lenihan Jnr, FF, Dublin West.
A promotion for Lenihan from the position of Minister of State (with special responsibility for Children). This will be a challenging portfolio to Lenihan, whos father previously held the post. Hopefully he will be a different sort of minister then McDowell and we can look forward to Civil Partnerships coming from his department.

Minister for Social & Family Affairs: Martin Cullen, FF, Waterford.
Cullen has been moved from Transport to Social Welfare. Social Welfare can be a bit of a poison chalice, if cuts have to implemented as it hurts the least well-off.

Minister for Transport & the Marine: Noel Dempsey, FF, Meath West.
Dempsey moves from communications to Transport which also gains responsibly for the Marine. This makes perfect sense as an Island nation, a lot of our transport links are by sea.

Well that is all the Ministers, John O'Donoghue beat Ruari Quinn in a vote for Ceann Comhairle. Paul Gallagher SC has been appointed Attorney General.

Edit: The Programme for Government is availible here (PDF)

Morning Briefing, 7th March

Dia Duit!

Rinne mé dearmad ar Seachtain na Gaeilge atá ar suil an seachatin seo! Tá dhá bebo agus myspace amhain or an idirlion!

SnaG - SeachtainNaGaeilge.bebo.com

Ceol - SnaGCeol.bebo.com

- www.myspace.com/snagceol

An nuacht ar an maidin seo!

Northern Ireland goes goes to the polls today in a very decisive election. (CNN, Breakingnews, RTÉ, BBC, France 24) The Polls are open until 10pm tonight with the counting begining tomorrow. 250 candidates are contesting 108 seats. The election is by PRSTV, so transfers are critical for the last seats in each constituency, just like down here in the south!

Trocaire is to challenge the ban on its advertising (Breakingnews). This will be an interesting challenge, first time id say a charity has been forced to pull its ads!

Commonwealth troops serving in the Britsih Armed Forces are to form their own union. (BBC) They seam to be very dissatisfied with their treatment in the army.

The Dáil has passed rushed legislation to outlaw the soliciting children for sex. (RTÉ, Breakingnews). The Bill will go through the Seanad today and then onto the President of signature.

UK MP's will have a free vote today on house of Lord's Reform after two days of debate (BBC). There is a range of option on the table. The choices before MPs are: all elected; 80% elected and 20% appointed; 60% elected and 40% appointed; half and half; 40% elected and 60% appointed; 20% elected and 80% appointed; all appointed. Its is expected that a mixture will be the preffered option.

bhuel sinn é!

Slán!

Morning Briefing, 21st February

Dia Duit!

Well between the Govt. delaying the Civil Union Bill 2006 and the Polish President making homophobic remarks in Ireland (RTÉ) I'm really pissed off!

The UK are to make an announcement on withdrawal of troops from Iraq (RTÉ) It is thought likely that Mr Blair will make any announcement in an oral statement to the House of Commons following his regular weekly appearance at Prime Minister's Questions. I hope he does pull 'em out

At 5:00pm this evening the Seanad will debate the Mental Capacity and Guardianship Bill 2007, please if you know a senator ask them to vote for it.

The Civil Unions Bill 2006 also goes to a vote this evening after the continuation of the debate at 7:00p, tonight.

Trocaire has launched an online neworking site called 'Just World'

Thats all i can find for now!

Slán

Civil Union Bill - Open letter to minister McDowell

Minister McDowell,

I am writing to you voice my disgust at you comments in the house tonight on the Civil Union Bill. You claimed that the Labour party have done nothing for the LGB community, then what do call the decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1993, which the Progressive Democrats could have dealt with when they were in power pre 1992.

You Minister claimed that this bill does nothing for LGB couples, this bill will improve the quality of life and security for LGB couples. This bill will do more for LGB couples then what so far has been suggested.

No bill will satisfy everyone in Ireland.

I am disgusted that you in the government would table a last minute amendment to postpone the bill. This is unfavourable treatment of this bill and I am appalled at it. I was considering transferring my vote to the Progressive Democrats, but from the proceedings in the house tonight I have realised that the PD's may not be currently the 'liberal' party in Ireland.

This Government once again delays the implementation of important legislation.

I look forward to hearing from you on this issue

Yours in Pride
Stephen Spillane

E-mail info@michaelmcdowell.ie to voice your concerns

Civil Unions Bill 2007 - Get Lobbying!

On Wednesday evening, the Dail votes on the Labour Party Civil Union Bill, proposed by Brendan Howlin, TD.
Based on USI's lobbying to date, we estimate that we have around 70 of the required 83 votes for the bill to pass this stage. The Government will decide at Cabinet tomorrow (Tuesday) its position on the bill. If the Government opposes it, and they likely will, that will mean that unless we can find 15 TDs on the Government benches to support it, the bill will be defeated.

USI has identified the following TDs as members who may support the bill if pressure is applied. Between now and Wednesday, we need you to circulate this email to everyone on your mailing list, and ask them to contact these TDs before Wednesday, asking them to switch sides and support the bill.
Even if only one or two do so, it will be a big story, and a massive boost to the campaign. John Mc Guirk and I have spent the day ringing, emailing, and faxing party whips, individual TDs, press offices, and anyone who would listen to us!!

Remember, fax, email, and phone these TDs constantly and ask them to VOTE YES on the Labour Party Civil Unions Bill.


Sile De Valera – FF 01 6183000 sile.devalera@oireachtas.ie

Dennis O'Donovan – FF 01 61833079 dennis.odonovan@oireachtas.ie

Dermot Fitzpatrick – FF 01 6183699 dermot.fitzpatrick@oireachtas.ie

Jim Glennon – FF 01 6183910 jim.glennon@oireachtas.ie

Barry Andrews – FF 01 6183856 barry.andrews@oireachtas.ie

Fiona O'Malley – PD 01 6183062 fiona.omalley@oireachtas.ie

Peter Power – FF 01 6184232 peter.power@oireachtas.ie

Mae Sexton – PD 01 6183361 mae.sexton@oireachtas.ie

Mildred Fox – IND 01 6183548 mildred.fox@oireachtas.ie

Jerry Cowley – IND 01 6184050 jerry.cowley@oireachtas.ie

Marian Harkin – IND 071 9145890 marian.harkin@oireachtas.ie

Morning Briefing, 1st February

Dia Duit!!!

First one in awhile I know, but have been busy with campaign stuff!

Dáil seats for NI MP's (Breakingnews) I personnally disagree with them having anything to do with the Dáil as they were elected to Westminster not Dáil Eireann.

France implements its smoking ban (Breakingnews). Woooo! There are now calls for a European wide ban, which i believe would be a goo idea.

Ad causes caos in Boston (BBC)Jaysus, some people take things too far in their reaction! they look harmless like!!

Herouxville, Canada has posted on its website what immigrants are not too do (BBC)

"We consider it completely outside norms to... kill women by stoning them in public, burning them alive, burning them with acid, circumcising them etc."

It points out that women are allowed to drive, vote, dance and own their own homes

You got to love the Canadians!

Israel had developed a Flying car!!! (CNN)Excellent idea!!!!!!

Thats all for now, have a good day!!!

Comments in Dáil Eireann Yesterday

Mr. Dermot Ahern:

Why is there never a leadership crisis in Sinn Féin? Why is there never a leadership battle? I often wondered that.

from Here

Excellent one-liner from the Fianna Fail deputy during leaders questions yesterday! It was said why poor old McDowell was being asked about the CIA rendition flights.

Early he had refused to answer a question from FG Leader Deputy Enda Kenny due to the shouting down he claims.

Govt shuts down Dáil for two days running - Kehoe

Fine Gael Chief Whip, Paul Kehoe TD, has expressed outrage at the Government today (Thursday) for shutting down the Dáil for a second day running due to a lack of business.

The Dáil sitting was suspended shortly after 2.00pm for ninety minutes after the second stage of the Investment Funds Companies and Miscellaneous Provisions Bill 2006 concluded as the Government refused to timetable any Dáil business whatsoever.

“The contempt with which the Government holds the Dáil continues as does its record of promising much and delivering little.

“As soon as the debate on the Investment Funds Companies and Miscellaneous Provisions Bill 2006 finished, the Government should have scheduled some of the vital legislation that needs to be brought through the House but they preferred to suspend the Dáil sitting and discuss absolutely nothing.

“It is not as if there is no legislation to discuss. The 16 Bills on the ‘A’ List still haven’t been touched by the Dáil in this session and the legislative pile-up continues to grow. It is increasingly difficult to see how this legislative Mount Everest will be climbed and there is a strong possibility, as happened last year, that bills will be rushed through and debate ‘guillotined’ to prevent proper analysis.

“Fianna Fáil/ PD Ministers have abandoned the parliament and legislation is left gathering dust. The sooner there is a change of government the better.”

Yet again the Government have nothing to do despite the amount of legislation to be passed and the amount of problems in our society.

Govt shuts down Dáil: Is there is so little to debate? - Kehoe

Wednesday October 11th 2006

Govt shuts down Dáil: Is there is so little to debate? - Kehoe

• Govt’s April 2004 legislative list still has 10 pieces of legislation to be enacted
• 16 Bills on the ‘A’ List

Fine Gael Chief Whip, Paul Kehoe TD, said this evening (Wednesday) that the Government shut down the Dáil for ninety minutes between 5.30 and 7.00 despite the fact that there is a mountain of proposed legislation to be discussed and that Opposition Deputies are denied opportunities to debate issues of importance on a daily basis.

“This is yet another example of this Government under-delivering for the country. Do they really think that after an unjustified 82 day summer break there is so little to debate that the Dáil should be shut down this evening?

“As it stands there are 16 Bills on the ‘A’ List that must go through the Dáil Chamber and, unless these are begun to be dealt with, the legislative pile-up caused by years of Government inaction will get worse.

“In fact, the Government’s legislative list from April 2004 still has 10 pieces of major proposed legislation that are still to be enacted including the Defamation Bill, the Charities Regulation Bill and the Broadcasting Authority Bill.

“Despite this mountain of promised, undelivered legislation the Government sees fit to not only close the Dáil but also stifle debate in other areas, today refusing extra time to debate the Green Paper on Energy and refusing Opposition Deputies requests for parliament time to debate other vital issues. It is no secret that Fianna Fáil TDs in particular have little time for Dáil business but this emasculation of parliamentary power is outrageous even by their standards.

“The contempt with which Fianna Fáil and the PDs hold integrity in public office obviously also extends to the people’s parliament and discussing issues of national importance. This Government should be ashamed of themselves and, if the Dáil hadn’t been suspended this evening, Opposition Deputies would have had the opportunity to say so.”

Fine Gael calls for clarification on recall of Dáil for new UN force

Billy Timmins TD, Fine Gael Spokesperson on Defence, and Bernard Allen TD, Fine Gael Spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, have today (Thursday) reiterated their support for a new UN peace keeping force in Lebanon, and have called on the Government to clarify if the Dáil will be recalled on this issue.

Deputy Timmins said:
“Fine Gael supports the involvement of members of the Defence Forces in an expanded United Nations (UN) force in Lebanon. Ireland has a long and distinguished record of service with the UN, and we should also play our part in underpinning stability in Lebanon, and supporting the new ceasefire.

“The safety of any Irish personnel who may serve with the UN in Lebanon is of paramount importance. Before Irish troops become involved in any new UN force in Lebanon it must be shown that the current ceasefire is holding, and that it is respected by all sides of the conflict.

“The UN force in Lebanon must also have a very clear mandate, and must command the support of both the Israeli and Lebanese Governments in the implementation of that mandate. The cooperation of these Governments will be crucial to the success of any new UN force.

“The new UN mission should be one of peace keeping. Given the turmoil and loss of life in the region in recent weeks, the primary responsibility of this UN force should be to underpin moves to bring stability to the region and to protect the current ceasefire. The issue of the disarmament of Hezbollah, and other militias, has already been the subject of UN resolutions, and should remain the responsibility of the Lebanese Government.

Deputy Allen added
“UN Secretary General Kofi Annan had hoped that the new UN force would be in place within a matter of days. Clearly, there is a need to move quickly to bolster the new ceasefire. Irish troops are already serving in the Lebanon, but any new troop deployment will be as part of a new UN mission and subject to a new UN resolution.

“The Government should clarify if the Dáil will be recalled on this issue. Fine Gael will support the recall of the Dáil to debate this mission, and to approve Irish involvement in a new peace keeping force.

“These are clear criteria for the involvement of Irish troops in a new UN force in Lebanon. We strongly support Ireland’s involvement in bringing peace to Lebanon, and the entire region, but the principal actors in this conflict must have respect for the role of the UN, and must acknowledge and support this role.”

Dail may need to be recalled to approve Irish role in Lebanon mission - Timmins

Fine Gael Defence Spokesman Billy Timmins TD has said the Dail may need to approve Irish participation in a UN peacekeeping force because it is subject to a new mandate from the Security Council.

Deputy Timmins said Fine Gael would support any move to recall the Dail in order to facilitate an Irish role in the new mission.

"The acceptance of the UN Security Council resolution by Lebanon and Israel is very welcome and will hopefully pave the way to a peaceful conclusion of this dreadful conflict. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has indicated that a new UN peacekeeping force could be in place within ten days.

"Fine Gael strongly supports proposals for Irish involvement in any new peacekeeping force. However, it may be necessary for Dail to be recalled to sanction the participation of Irish troops in lebanon. Although a UN mission is already present in Lebanon, the new force would be subject to a different UN resolution. Fine Gael would support any move to recall the Dail in order to facilitate an Irish role in this new mission."