63((&+ 'DYLG%<51( European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection (QODUJHPHQW DQG 1LFH :KDW SDWK WR WDNH" National Forum on Europe 'XEOLQ0DUFK ,QWURGXFWLRQ It is not only a great honour but also a real pleasure for me to address the National Forum on Europe today, at your closing session. I have followed your work very closely, since October last. I admire the thorough analysis you have conducted up to now concerning Ireland, the future of Europe and Enlargement. As the Chairman’s interim report notes, the Forum is designed to be as inclusive as possible. I have no doubt that this approach has helped enormously in putting European issues centre stage. Last weekend, the Taoiseach’s discussions with European leaders in Barcelona about a Declaration on Neutrality put the Nice Treaty into the spotlight again. )RUXP¶VFODULW\RQ1LFH7UHDW\ In reading your report, Mr Chairman, on the first phase of the Forum’s work, I was struck by the clarity you were able to bring to the issues relevant to Ireland’s membership of an enlarging Union. Clearly the Irish people were missing this clarity, when they voted on the Nice Treaty. As we have seen since then, the reasons why people voted No were many and varied. One such reason that I, and others, picked up strongly, and highlighted in your report, were the concerns over sovereignty and, in particular, neutrality. 6KDULQJGHPRFUDF\WKURXJKHQODUJHPHQW But first of all this morning, we need to state, or re-state, why we are involved in this European adventure. In many ways the case for Europe would be easier to make if Ireland were not already a member of the Union. We successfully made the case for joining the Union prior to the accession referendum in 1972. The current candidate countries have made and continue to make a similar case. I do not believe for one moment that the majority of the Irish people now wish to turn their backs on the Union, or on enlargement. Fundamentally, the European Union is about sharing our principles and values of democracy, freedom, and justice. We have embedded these basics within the borders of our existing Member States. Our aim is to share our values throughout Europe, an extended Europe, a re-unified Europe. Democracy can never be taken for granted. Indeed, many of the countries in Eastern Europe, now on the threshold of joining the democratic force of the Union were denied democracy for so many years. We cannot afford to disappoint them, to deny them more democracy, more freedom and more justice and prosperity. This is what Nice is all about. 2 1LFH5DWLILFDWLRQ3URFHVV Most Member States have already ratified the Nice Treaty. In the remaining Member States, the ratification procedures are currently underway. It is only in the case of Ireland that doubt about ratification exists. It is incumbent on us to address that doubt. By means of the proceedings of this Forum and a Declaration on Neutrality at the Seville European Council, I believe that there is a sound basis to seek a mandate from the people for Ireland to ratify the Nice Treaty. I would hope that this could be done some time in the Autumn. I would now like to turn, Mr. Chairman, to address three crucial areas that are critical to the success of a second referendum on Nice. These are: - Neutrality - Sovereignty, and - Economic benefits. 1LFHFKDQJHVQRWKLQJRQ,ULVKQHXWUDOLW\ Nowhere was the confusion sown by the anti-Nice campaign more evident than in the allegations made about the threat to Ireland’s neutrality. I would like to bring some clarity to this issue. It’s not difficult. Very simply, there is no provision in the Nice Treaty that infringes on Ireland’s neutrality. Despite the claims to the contrary, Nice does not change a single aspect of Ireland’s traditional approach to neutrality. It is totally dishonest to pretend, as those opposed to the Nice Treaty do, that Nice represents a change in this regard. $5HVSHFWHG1HXWUDOLW\ Let me put it as clearly as I can: Neutrality is not at stake with the Treaty of Nice None of the other Member States has ever questioned Ireland’s neutrality. 1R(XURSHDQ$UP\ There is no legal provision anywhere, including in the Nice Treaty, for a European Army. This is another myth of the anti-Nice brigade. There can be no common EU defence without all EU Member States agreeing, in accordance with their own constitutional procedures. Even if at some distant time in the future some or most Member States wanted to have a common defence policy then Ireland could always negotiate an opt-out from any such provisions. 3 5DSLG5HDFWLRQ)RUFH As regards the Rapid Reaction Force, provided for in the Amsterdam Treaty. Again let me say – this is not a European Army. It is also important to note that the Rapid Reaction Force is limited to what are called the Petersberg tasks. These are tasks that we are all familiar with in the context of Irish soldiers participating in UN peacekeeping missions : - humanitarian and rescue tasks - peacekeeping tasks - crisis management tasks, including peacemaking. Is anyone seriously suggesting that Ireland could commit soldiers to a UN mission on the far side of the world, but would not engage with our European partners in similar tasks on our own borders? Would we stand idly by and witness ethnic cleansing on the Union’s own borders? This is the stark choice. 6DIHJXDUGV There are four safeguards that are essential to assuring the Irish people that the EU is not embarking on destroying Irish neutrality. Firstly, Article 17 of the Treaty provides that no Member State is obliged to participate in the Rapid Reaction Force. Secondly, any participation in the Rapid Reaction Force can only be decided through a Council Decision, by unanimity in accordance with Article 23 of the Treaty. Thirdly, the Irish Government has made the commitment that it will only provide troops for UN sanctioned missions. If this needs to be further copper fastened in domestic legislation, there is nothing in the Treaties to stop such an initiative. In any event, Dail approval is already envisaged. Fourthly, and this is the new element announced by the Taoiseach in Barcelona last weekend, A Declaration on Neutrality. $'HFODUDWLRQIRU,UHODQG Such a Declaration would be made by the fifteen Heads of Government and State at the Seville Council, ‘Meeting in the Council’, in June. Such a declaration would be a powerful reaffirmation of what is the existing legal position, namely that no Member State is obliged to participate in the Rapid Reaction Force. And also a clear acknowledgement and undertaking by the Heads of State and Government that Ireland would not be required to participate. 4 6RYHUHLJQW\ Turning to another aspect of sovereignty, since 1973 there has been a lurking fear that a small Member State like Ireland would be swallowed up in the huge EU process. I don’t believe this to be the case. Our membership of the EU over the past 29 years has shown how we can develop Ireland’s influence in a way totally out of proportion to our size. This has been due to a number of factors not least the identification of key issues and their successful strategic advocacy by successive Irish administrations. In my youth sovereignty meant freedom from being governed by the English. Politically we were free from them but economically we were tied. Today Ireland’s sovereignty is enhanced through our membership of the EU. For a small country like Ireland sovereignty could be an empty concept if it could not be used to advance our interests. By sharing our sovereignty in the EU we have achieved a level of economic development that was unthinkable 30 years ago and would have been unattainable if we had adopted an isolationist approach. We entered the EU on the coattails of the UK in 1973. Our economy and our currency was tied to that of the UK’s. In one short generation this has all changed. Ireland, through its membership of the EU has demonstrated its ability to stand tall on the world stage. (8(QODUJHPHQWWKHVRFLRHFRQRPLFFDVHIRU,UHODQG There are some who argue that Ireland´s newly found wealth will be put in jeopardy arising from enlargement. I regard this as a false argument, but allow me to throw a little light on the issue. Looking back, there have been very real benefits reaped by Ireland since joining the EEC in 1973. Tangible benefits across the whole range of social, economic, cultural and political spheres. The ultimate question needs now to be posed – could the modern Ireland afford to turn her back on membership of the biggest trading bloc, the biggest single market in the world? Could Ireland afford the loss of influence in, for example, World Trade Organisation negotiations on key agricultural issues by not being represented by the European Commission? To my mind, any reasonable person would say NO to such propositions. 5 7KHEHQHILWVRIPHPEHUVKLS You have heard from others in detail how Ireland has benefited from membership. But let us reflect on just one or two figures this morning. Ireland has received over ¼ELOOLRQLQ(8WUDQVIHUVVLQFHDFFHVVLRQ These transfers have been expended on the large-scale modernisation of the economy : - ¼ELOOLRQVXSSRUWLQJDJULFXOWXUHDQGIRRGDUHD±DNH\H[SRUWDUHD Just look at the transformation – agri-food exports are now valued at some twenty times what they were in 1972. Yet these exports now only represent less than ten per cent of the total, compared with almost half on accession. - ¼ELOOLRQVSHQWRQWUDLQLQJDQGHGXFDWLQJRXUZRUNIRUFH This investment has been a key ingredient in attracting so much foreign capital investment and in liberating so many people from a life on the dole.