Address by Minister Roche to the Irish Members of the Committee of the Regions: 2

Governance. We were not unduly surprised when the Working Group tasked with

examining this area failed to reach an agreed outcome on many of the issues

it tackled. In the Plenary debate on the report of this Group it was

suggested that this was one group where there were differences of opinion

than in any other Working Group. Some on the group proposed extension of

the use of QMV in the area of taxation; our firm view that unanimity should

continue to apply was shared by other states. On monetary policy, the Group

supported the current breakdown in competence between the Union and the

Member States. However, there was further division on the question of

whether the Commission should be given a strengthened role in oversight of

the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines and Stability and Growth Pact. In both

these areas the Government believes that the current arrangements get the

balance right.

The External Action Working Group was asked to consider ways in which to

improve the coherence, efficiency and visibility of the Union's external

relations, including its development programme, external trade policy and

the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP).

Discussion in the Group has focussed on institutional arrangements in the

area of external action and practical measures which can be taken to

enhance the Union's role on the world stage in support of its agreed

principles and objectives. Issues relating to Defence have been discussed

in a separate Defence Working Group.

The Government is committed to strong and coherent external relations for

the Union, including in the Common Foreign & Security Policy. Ireland has

played an active role in this Group. We believe that there is a need to

find ways in which we can bring about greater coherence in our efforts

whilst maintaining the role and voice of the Member States. This includes a

recognition of the essentially intergovernmental nature of the CFSP whilst

preserving the lead role of the Commission in areas such as development

cooperation and commercial trade policy. We have kept an open mind on

institutional questions, such as the relationship between the External

Relations Commissioner and the High Representative for the CFSP, as long as

they would bring practical benefits and would not undermine the rights of

the Member States in this area.

We have argued that development cooperation continue to be a distinct

policy area with its own principles and objectives in Treaties, whilst

acknowledging also the importance of the Member States' development

programmes.

Together with like-minded Member States, we will pursue these positions in

the Group's discussions of the final report, being brought forward by the

Group's Chairman, the former Belgian Prime Minister Jean Luc Dehaene. This

report will be debated at the Convention next week.

The Defence Working Group was asked to consider the Union's role in the

field of security and defence and, in particular, whether there is support

for developing this role beyond the arrangements agreed at Amsterdam. The

Government is not represented on this group although Deputy John Gormley

and Proinsias de Rossa are both parliamentary members.

Discussion in the Group has focussed on issues such as the Union's ability

to realise its objectives in the crisis management area and the scope of

the Treaty definition of Petersberg tasks.

We have been closely following developments and maintaining contact with

other member States on the issues involved, especially with those countries

that share a similar perspective in the security and defence area. The

final report, which is brought forward by the Group's Chairman, Michel

Barnier, the French Regional Affairs Commissioner, will be presented to the

Convention in plenary session next week.

The Convention discussed the final report of the Simplification Working

Group, of which I was a member, last week. The Group was looking at ways

in which the number of different instruments could be reduced and perhaps

re-named so that they become more comprehensible to citizens. The Group

recommended that the number of instruments be reduced from fifteen to five,

with the two main instruments, Regulations and Directives, being re-named

"Laws" and "Framework Laws". The proposals in this area seemed very

sensible and likely to increase understanding of the decision-making

process.

I had some concerns about some of the report's recommendations. I was

concerned about the possible implications of the recommendation to abolish

the distinction between compulsory expenditure and non-compulsory

expenditure in the budgetary area. Whatever the procedure, it is vital that

expenditure on the CAP remains ring-fenced so that farmers can have

certainty over a multi-annual period. This principle needs to be protected.

I received a great deal of support for this view in the plenary debate.

The report made some recommendations on transparency and the quality of

legislation that I felt were positive.

I was disappointed, however, that the remit of the Group was very tightly

drawn - I felt more time should have been directed towards bridging the gap

between the EU and its citizens. There are very sound organisational,

economic and political reasons for doing so. Instead of looking at this

area, the Group focussed largely on internal issues. These are certainly of

importance, but they are not of immediate significance to citizens. I will

be pressing for the newly constituted Working Group on Social Europe, of

which I will be a member, to look more closely at how the divide can be

bridged

Deputy Bruton chaired the Working Group on Freedom, Security and Justice.

His Group's Final Report was debated by the plenary last week. I very much

welcomed the recommendations on an integrated approach to visas, migration,

residency, asylum seeking, and refugee issues. The Government has no

difficulty with QMV and co-decision being used in this area. I also

welcomed moves to simplify decision-making in keeping with the

recommendations in the Simplification Working Group.

The Government sees a need to balance the two realities of trying to

achieve more effective European action across the range of areas considered

in the report while recognising that many of these issues are deeply

sensitive and are at the heart of the relationship between the citizen and

the State.

The report, therefore, raises some areas of concern for us. As the

Minister for Justice said in his recent speech in Trier, we very much

believe that unanimity continues to be the best way of achieving real

progress in the area of police and judicial cooperation. This is necessary

to ensure widespread public support for progress in this area.

As I mentioned earlier, the Convention will be moving into the next phase

in the New Year. Work will begin on fleshing out the draft Constitutional

Treaty brought forward by the Praesidium at the end of last October.

Issues which have yet to be addressed, the institutions, for example, will

come more to the fore. In approaching these questions Ireland will operate

not from a dogmatic position, but from a pragmatic one. The balances

between the institutions - the Commission, the Council, the Parliament -

have been one of the Union's strengths. The current balance is right from

the viewpoint of smaller member states. While we would support measures to

make them more effective and to prepare them for the challenges of a very

much enlarged Union, we share the widespread view at the Convention that

any changes agreed should not upset those important balances.

The Government is approaching the Convention in a positive and constructive

manner and will continue to do so. We recognise the need for reform if the

European Union is to rise to the new challenges ahead and if it is to

sustain and develop public support across the Member States. Ultimately

the IGC will make the final decisions on the content of the next Treaty.

The exact timing of the IGC is not yet certain. We have proposed that

there should be a 'gap' period for reflection between the end of the

Convention (June or July 2003) and the IGC. We would also strongly support

the view that the new member states must be in a position to play a full

role in the IGC.

I our deliberations we should, I believe, bear in mind that the Union has

been an overwhelming success and we should not lose sight of this.. In

moving forward, we should take great care to protect the institutional

balances and the broad policy mix which have served us well to date. I am

sure that my colleagues here will confirm that there is wide support for

this view across the Convention, and on the basis of its proceedings to

date some very useful proposals, including those for enhancing the role of

national parliaments in the Union, are likely to gain consensus support..

As I said earlier the Convention is a matter of the highest priority for

the Government. The work of the Convention will be important in mapping the

way ahead. It will obviously play a significant role in the deliberations

of the Intergovernmental Conference that will agree the next treaty. It is

important that the work of the Convention receives rather more attention

than it has to date in this Country. I have already suggested that the

Seanad should dedicate some time to considering the Convention and the

future of Europe. I am particularly pleased that the National Forum is

holding a number of sessions dedicated to the work of the Convention. I am

also pleased to recognise the work of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on

European Affairs which has already held one major session on the topic and

which has decided to set aside valuable time in the New Year to continue

its deliberations. All of this, like your work here today, is valuable in

raising the level of public consciousness of the Convention, its work and

the wider debate on the future of Europe.

I thank you for inviting me and I look forward to your continuing interest

in the Convention.Top