Alice-Mary Higgins
National University of Ireland · Independent · Ireland
“We are signing up to be customers of liquefied natural gas - potentially fracked gas, potentially coming from a country that is busily fighting against climate action and trying to fast-track our route to destruction. We will be doing that every year in the budget and every day in the terminal.”
“We are not getting solid measures on those safeguards. The other safeguards we have, which are our planning laws and climate laws, are being either fast-tracked or suspended. We are suspending the existing safeguards and are not putting hard safeguards into this Bill, and we are being asked to go on faith.”
“Nonetheless, I have some practical questions. We need a little more on what the emergency is because it is not sufficient to say we will deal with it then. The emergency is the ground on which the Minister of State is asking for the normal planning process and the climate Act to be suspended. We need to know what the emergency is.”
“It should happen only after all relevant market-based measures have been implemented. Those market measures should include the demand-reduction strategies that are eligible under N-1, including demand reduction by large energy users, and should have been implemented, exhausted and proven insufficient.”
“Sure there is detail in it but the key issue is that what he is asking of the Oireachtas, which is to agree to it being built, is on the argument of there being an emergency. It should be very clear what the emergency is. I mentioned previously that the committee said our N-1 obligations could be met through demand management.”
“It comes from real places with real communities that are immediately and terribly impacted by fracking, as well as having an impact on the atmosphere that surrounds our beautiful planet, which we are destroying. As the Minister of State said, it impacts not just on business but on the liveability of large portions of this planet.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,900 lines we hold for Alice-Mary Higgins, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 33 of 38.
“An issue that should and could have been addressed, and perhaps still will be in the subsequent legislation, is the position in circumstances where there has been substantial refurbishment. Currently landlords are allowed to put up the rent where there has been substantial refurbishment. That is an issue in terms of addressing climate action. We have constantly said that retrofitting should not be used as an excuse in relation to the hiking of rent because that creates a perverse dynamic against renters seeking to engage around that. It is also an issue for persons with a disability where accommodations have been made in relation to them. This means that one of the most vulnerable groups within the rental market is not properly protected. That issue was not addressed. In my remaining time I will talk about the enforcement of RPZs.”
“There are concerns around the six-year tenancy piece which affects predictability for households of knowing they can plan their lives, they can plan their children's schooling across a number of years in the same area, and they can have employment and know they are going to be able to build their career in that area. That limitation is a key consideration and concern. Focus Ireland has highlighted that the new regulations will create an even more complex private rental market in Ireland, with tenants' rights being dependent on the circumstances of their landlord and when the property was built. The resetting of rent every six years creates a deep concern, while doing so on the commencement of a new tenancy creates a risk of incentivising new tenancies.”
“While the Bill is attempting to make a last-minute intervention in terms of renters outside the rental pressure zones not being caught out with massive rent increases, and that has been the headline, that the Government is going to create this big rent pressure zone, even though it already could have created it, but chose not to, there is also a lot of very bad news for renters in what the Government were announcing. An end to the ban on no-fault evictions is really concerning, because while I am entirely in favour of a ban on no-fault evictions, I am concerned the delay and lag will lead to a situation whereby we are seeing a lot of no-fault evictions in the next few months. That issue is not being tackled or protected against.”
“Section 3(c) of this Bill, seems to make a lot of what is in 24A of the Act of 2004 somewhat defunct. It makes it complicated in terms of how that will be impacted. We have the ministerial power to declare rental pressure zones and now we have legislation in terms of the declaration of rental pressure zones. It is not clear how those will intersect. It seems the implications maybe have not been fully considered in that regard, which is concerning for renters, many of whom are quite frightened this week.”
“It would be interesting to know what has changed. Under section 24A(5) of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004, which this Bill is seeking to amend, the Minister already has the power to create new rental pressure zones. This emergency action from the Government is coming in the context of why that power has not been used. That is the power in law already, whereby the Minister could have been declaring a number of areas as rental pressure zones and is explicitly allowed to under the Act. The Act already allows new areas to be declared. Why has that not been used effectively? Why is this blanket measure coming in rather than making immediate use of that power under section 24A(5), particularly in the context of the response to the announcements last week?”
“I think we were told vacant property taxes were impossible and possibly unconstitutional at a reasonable level, and then they appeared. It would be great if, when the Opposition comes up with ideas, those ideas were listened to, taken seriously and properly considered, rather than the time lag we have between things such as the Opposition looking for vacant property tax to be properly applied or for rent freezes, as it did a number of years ago. The Bill before us seeks to cover the oversights and spare rentals from the RPZs from the consequences of the announcements last week. The way it has been presented has been somewhat messy. A crucial point is the Government could have done this already. We were told constantly how extending RPZs across the country would be unconstitutional. Those arguments do not seem to apply currently.”
“However, the Government did not seem to anticipate how such an announcement would create this highly volatile, precarious situation for renters who are currently living outside a rental pressure zone. It is entirely predictable that landlords, whose goal is not to provide the public with housing but to maximise profits, would seek to raise the rent considerably in that period of time. That is why we are seeing this somewhat scrambled-together Bill now. The other changes may not be coming later, but this measure is clearly an attempt to protect against the unforeseen, but entirely foreseeable, outcome of the Government's announcement. The Government should be taking urgent action. We should have a rent freeze. We were told many times it was impossible. It is a litany of things we were told were impossible that then happened.”
“It is a case of how we can entice those who benefit very well from a dysfunctional rental market to engage more with it, rather than representing the interests of the public. That is where the language of balance comes in. Let us be clear, the duty of the Oireachtas and the Government is to the public and to the needs and rights of the public when it comes to the need and right to have a home that is secure and which allows you to plan your life, whereby it can be the base from which you engage in society. It is also important for social cohesion, which should be a priority. Regarding this Bill, last week the Government announced its plans to make massive changes to the RPZ system in March next year, which included the piece in front of us and a number of other measures.”
“We have done it again and again. We have asked the developers, and they will say something like "lower the standards". Then the standards get lowered and they do not deliver the housing because they have abandoned the permissions they already have because now they can do a new planning permission application and get it for lower standards. Or, they tell the Government they need it to lower planning standards and make the planning process easier. They get the planning permission and do not use them, or in the case strategic housing development, they got the planning permission and then they did not use them. They just have land that is worth a lot more now. Similarly, in the area of rental, so much of it has been led by what the large-scale actors want.”
“There are those empty apartments and then, when we talk about supply in our city centres and in communities throughout the country, there are areas where the planning permission is already there for public housing and other initiatives, and the Government has stalled in delivering those houses. There is not an obstacle there. There are also the many thousands of planning permissions that are already in private hands that have not been enacted because many are waiting to see if they can make more money if they build it later. This has been a consistent approach, reflected again and again in bad idea after bad idea. I am being very frank. The strategic housing developments and others are constantly going to those who are profiting from a housing crisis and the Government is asking them what they think it should do next.”
“I want to open by commenting on one important thing. We hear the line again and again that supply is the issue or supply is the problem. We need to be really clear that profiteering is the problem. That is the problem. Supply is important, but profiteering is what has been the obstacle in housing. I have seen it over the last ten years in these Houses, again and again. Senator Andrews spoke earlier about the area where I live. There are empty apartments all over those areas where the rent is kept at an artificially inflated level because they are parts of portfolios which allow investment in a theoretical rent in a series or set. They are being treated as assets and portfolio objects rather than homes.”
“Ireland will be a leader and will be consistent with its words and with what I believe to be the passion, belief and hope for a world of international law that the public wants when we have dual-use goods, action in relation to our powers on inspections, proper penalties for those who breach our laws by flying weapons over us without even seeking approval, divestment in full form, removal of the sale of bonds and the passing of the occupied territories Bill. That is what is on the docks right now.”
“It needs to follow through in relation to ensuring we give leadership in saying we will not approve prospectuses that fail to even mention international law, we will not facilitate the sale of bonds offered by the finance minister we have heard quoted at length earlier in this debate who has a clear agenda, and we will not be complicit in relation to dual-use goods - the technologies of war. Bear in mind, this is the kind of technology that brought us things such as "Hello, daddy", the idea that, when a father arrives home, you bomb the family home. Let us be consistent.”
“There are nine countries in the European Union who still are not concerned about human rights breaches by Israel in relation to the association agreement and that is why we must act. Passing, in its full form, the occupied territories Bill is action and leadership and I believe other countries will follow if we lead. Also, that ICJ ruling's key line, the obligation of member states "to take steps to prevent trade or investment relations that assist in the maintenance of the illegal situation created by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory", is crystal clear. That was not created last July. The ICJ has reminded member states of the obligations they already had under international law, but if we are serious about that ruling, it needs to follow through into full divestment of the Irish State from any area.”
“The tide turned for the worst and it turned based on inaction and failure to show that we are serious about international law. I believe now Ireland is acting but the message is not, "Wasn't it great we waited?" The message is: you do not achieve change by hiding behind a culture of complicity and going along with business as usual. You achieve anything by acting, and Ireland will. I was with Senator Black in the European Parliament and we met with people from many different countries. They are realising - the penny is dropping - that we are living in history now and that how we act now will be the history books of the future. It is useful that Ireland is acting rather than hoping there might a change in position because we have to be realistic.”
“Ireland has been consistent but Ireland has also been complacent and at times complicit in the normalisation over decades of a situation of colonialism, of casual and continued breaches of international law, and of a message that international law does not apply and that business as usual continues and rewards those who breach international law. That has been the situation for decades. Sadly, we have had a false logic. I am proud to have been a co-sponsor, back in 2017, of the occupied territories Bill but we have heard a narrative for years that in Ireland we are such wonderful master diplomats that we are not going to do anything and we are going to wait and bring everybody along with us slowly and the tide might turn.”
“I thank the Minister, Deputy Harris, for what I believe is genuine from him in terms of a commitment to moving forward, although we will, with others, and I see the Chair of the foreign affairs committee here also, be looking to ensure we do not see a dilution of the occupied territories Bill and that we see its full meaning, impact and compliance with international law reflected. We also need to puncture some of this narrative of self-congratulation which I am also seeing coming through from certain other Ministers and from certain other narratives. There is this idea that Ireland has always been consistent.”
“Again, it is very important that this should be designed in a way that ensures these properties are there not for short-term lets or investment but for living in. Well done to the proposers of the Bill.”
“We deal with things by engaging with them on Committee Stage rather than by delaying them. These are with regard to some of the measures on partial change of use in buildings where the height is not more than 10 m above the ground. I am concerned about some of the streamlining of some of the planning measures. It is very important we maintain key standards, particularly in areas such as fire safety and disability access. A one-stop shop component is envisaged but it is very important these crucial standards are not diluted in any way. Perhaps we could have provisions whereby we do not see speculative investment. We do not have use for speculative investment which could lead, for example, to investment properties being created, potentially jeopardising the rental of shops at street level.”
“As I have said, the amendment of section 8 of the Derelict Sites Act to ensure there is publicly available information online is crucial, as are the removal of the obligation on the local authority in terms of owners' representations on adding properties to the register, and addressing the issue whereby somebody who is such an absent landlord they cannot be contacted means the property is not being registered. This is addressed in the Bill and it is extremely welcome. There are many other measures, including the two-year timeline of being on the derelict register leading to a new set of actions involving the Minister. All of this is very welcome and very constructive. I want to signal I have concerns relating to a couple of aspects of the Bill which, as it proceeds through Committee Stage, I am happy to engage on.”
“With regard to the vacant site levy, the fact the money went back to the central Exchequer was a real disincentive to local authorities. This could have been a tool to fund local authorities. If the vacant site levy had been going into a fund which was to be used for compulsory purchase, we would be looking at a tool that might have incentivised a dynamic of movement with regard to these measures. Again, as I say, there are many other areas where we need to see decision-making move forward, but as I am conscious of time, I will not go into them. We need to see a strengthening of information, powers and action in these areas. I will highlight a few of the key elements of the Bill which I welcome.”
“There is a lack of joined-up thinking in many areas of Government policy on this. I commend Senator Noonan and others who tried to address this in a number of different ways. The Bill being put forward today tries to join the dots in a number of constructive ways. I am conscious of missed opportunities. When the Finance (Local Property Tax) (Amendment) Act 2021 came through, it was decided in that legislation that the information on vacancy provided there would not also have a function in relation to issues such as the vacant property tax, or link up with that issue of vacancy. There have been issues with many of these tools, including with the residential zoned land tax, which relates to the vacant site levy.”
“It is now almost a decade later and some of the buildings that were vacant or technically derelict then have been derelict for that entire decade and are now close to the point of ruin. These are buildings which at the time and over the past decade, had action been taken, could have been restored into vibrant properties and homes, spaces which could be contributing as has been said to the life of our cities and towns and the lives of those who live in them and indeed to the vibrancy of our streets. Too much time has been lost. I regret that the Government seems willing to lose yet another year before proceeding on this. Those years of properties being allowed to descend into greater dereliction or into ruin are an indictment at a time when we have a housing crisis of such a level increasing year-on-year over the past decade.”
“Our Bill at that time also looked to make the derelict sites register publicly available and online, to give local authorities powers regarding the acquisition of derelict sites either compulsorily or by agreement, to strengthen the application of the vacant site levy and to restrict the termination of tenancies in the context of buy-to-let planning, which was a related provision. At that time, we were told the vacant site levy could not be increased as it was already at the limit, yet, years later, it was increased finally. We were also told that this was something that needed to be thought out, as there were many unintended consequences and so forth about looking at derelict sites. That was in 2017.”
“This is a very welcome and important Bill. I regret that the Government seems to be looking for a timed amendment in respect of it. Frankly, this is an issue on which we have waited too long. It has dragged on for far too long. In 2017, members of the Civil Engagement Group including myself, Senator Lynn Ruane and the then Senator Grace O'Sullivan from the Green Party, and others, brought forward a derelict and vacant sites Bill. It was opposed by the Government at that time. Some of the provisions that were in that Bill I see reflected again here. They were good ideas then and they are better ideas now. There are of course many other positive components to this legislation as well.”
“That is why I was a little late for which I apologise. They secured constitutional measures in the Colombian courts that talked to the rights of the river and talked to the rights of communities in respect of illegal mining. It is important is that in our supply chains, those of us who are purchasing the gold from illegal mining for example is something we address. It is a reminder of how crucial the human rights component in public procurement is, especially at a time, worryingly, the EU has paused the implementation of the due diligence directive on supply chains. In our public procurement, we can raise the highest standards and we should.”
“Most contracts are still at the lowest price but it just means that those who submit the lowest price also have proven themselves on quality and the returns in terms of benefits are multifold. They get far more for their expenditure. It is important that SMEs and social enterprise are supported. We should maybe look to community wealth building initiatives. We have seen a strong initiative from Dublin City Council in terms of community wealth building as a core economic strategy. We also see the role of co-operatives. There is an obligation on every public body to reflect human rights and equality in their public procurement. My legislation would look for the reporting relating to that. Before I came to the Chamber, I met with Colombian human rights river defenders, who have done extraordinary work in tackling illegal mining.”
“This is one component of my legislation; the other legislation comes to big purchases or the once in a generation purchases. It provides for a minimum of 50% quality when it comes to purchases that are over the large thresholds. Sadly, an example of this is the children's hospital where only a 70% weighting was given to price and a 30% weighting given to quality, which meant the lowest bid automatically had the advantage, although we have seen, which is often the case, when lowest bids are successful, there are supplementary claims again and again in a drip-feed and the price escalates. The Netherlands has been using a quality approach since 2016. It requires a social return relating to contracts. Officials there have found a 0.3% increase in costs at the design point when it comes to contracts.”
“Some of the questions that should be thought about at the contract design point are: how we deliver social benefits and social values through procurement? How do we promote sustainability? How will it support or potentially damage the delivering of our climate targets? How will it work in terms of our objectives on the circular economy? These are all real policies that we have that we should further each time. How will it support the participation of SMEs? How will it support innovation? How will it support inclusion? There are simple things in the design of contracts. One example that has been given often is, rather than just looking at procuring playgrounds, if we procure playgrounds that are inclusive and support biodiversity, we get better playgrounds that work for everybody.”
“In the excellent green public procurement policy, which was developed under the previous Government, there is a recommendation for legislative measures relating to green public procurement. Individually when we look to those who are making the choices, it can often seem that the simplest quickest thing is the cheapest bid. There needs to be that culture shift whereby we still have the discretion whereby we are not attaching a social clause or environmental clause in terms of the points that Senator Murphy was making, or in terms of my Bill if we are not applying quality, we would explain why. We should think about quality or think about why we are not thinking about quality. That thought early on can develop huge benefits.”
“My legislation, as the Minister of State will be aware, seeks to make price-quality ratio the default rather than lowest cost, which is still used for approximately one third of contracts in Ireland, so that the norm would be that we would always apply quality criteria We would also bring a more thoughtful approach. If we were not to do so, we would have to explain why we have not chosen to apply a price quality approach. One of the previous speakers referenced social clauses and other clauses attached to legislation. They are very important. It was a notable point that it is not enough to suggest it; we need to require it for it to really happen in terms of a culture shift. Similarly, we need a legislative push to ensure that culture shift relating to the quality and price quality approach.”
“There is a new debate on enhancing that social component in the next round of discussions on the new directives from Europe. On value for money, or "most economically advantageous tender" as it is worded there, there are options within it. There is lowest cost; price-quality ratio, where you look to what is the best balance and where a proposal is tested on both price and quality; and the life-cycle costing, which is very important in an environmental context, where we look at what the life-cycle cost is over a wider frame with respect to supply of materials, etc.”
“That is why I really welcome that when the Minister of State talked about value for money, she did so in that wider frame. Value for money is not simply what is cheapest. It is not even what is cheapest and quickest. It is about sometimes asking what is the optimal use of our resources, human and financial, in terms of delivering on time, quality, value for money and the wider societal, economic and environmental benefits that can come from an act of procurement. That is what value for money is in a really meaningful sense. The Minister of State will be aware of my Quality in Public Procurement (Contract Preparation and Award Criteria) Bill, which looked to that question of the options we were given by the European Union.”
“There are times when we should be doing less bundling, and sometimes operating smaller grant mechanisms at community levels is more appropriate. Sometimes debundled and local purchasing, when it comes to small and specific purchases, is actually more effective. When we look within the EU rules, recital 91 of the public procurement directive in 2014 states, "This Directive clarifies how the contracting authorities can contribute to the protection of the environment and the promotion of sustainable development, whilst ensuring that they can obtain the best value for money for their contracts." This is part of the original vision, even from the European Union, of how we are meant to be using it, and that is as a tool, in this case specifically with regard to the environment and sustainable development.”
“The CervicalCheck scandal is one that jumps to mind because that was one where the Scally report identified the issue of contracts being awarded on a lowest cost only basis, and lowest cost being the priority factor in the awarding of contracts in that example. When done well, public procurement has extraordinary impact in terms of social, environmental, economic and sustainable benefits for society. For too long, we have not really leveraged it. It is simply seen as how we buy the things, how we pay for the things and how the contracts go out rather than recognising it as the policy lever and the tool that it is. Sometimes we talk about how the EU rules will not let us do this or that. In fact, those EU directives are quite wide and offer quite a huge scope for action.”
“We are looking at more than €100 billion. It was €120 billion, I believe, in the context of the national development plan. This is an extremely powerful lever within any economy, and within the Irish economy the Government is one of the main actors. It can have an extraordinarily significant impact, not just on one those who are awarded contracts or who will use and benefit from the goods the State is purchasing, but also by creating, setting and raising standards in the culture more widely. There has been and tends to be a lot of focus in the media on examples of bad public procurement. We know that, when it goes wrong, there are very significant financial and personal costs. I will come to some of those which I specifically sought to address in my own legislation.”
“I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Higgins to the Seanad. Public procurement is a topic I have been very passionate about for a long time, and I thank the Minister of State for the kind comments in her own speech with regard to some of the work I have been doing, and some of the very positive engagement I have had with the Office of Government Procurement, including on my quality in public procurement legislation. I thank the Minister of State for her comments on that. With regard to this very important new strategy, it is trying to encourage engagement and create excitement around the development of a new national public procurement strategy. Public procurement is one of the most powerful tools we have as a State. On the money spent, my figures were €12 billion in 2019 and it is obviously more than that now.”
“The idea seems to be we need to get involved with defence programmes for cyber attacks when we have seen in the United States that the attacks on democracy came in broad daylight through unregulated tech firms that had led and led a clear agenda of division. Clearly, Ireland should be stepping up through our civilian powers that we have in terms of European law rather than playing the cyber card. Lastly, in terms of neutrality I will quote the following, "Neutrality is a policy issue that can change at any time." That was from Micheál Martin. Of course, we want to have our legal protection and for Ireland to play that role at the UN and be that bridge for Europe to the United Nations. We have credibility that can strengthen the United Nations. If we throw that away-----”
“This is where Ireland can actually contribute. Ireland can contribute in helping out European leaders on peace. It is an unjust peace that is being proposed in Ukraine. Of course we want peace, but if Ireland had been more active in championing peace and pushing Europe to take the lead on peace, maybe we would be looking at a more just deal that fully respects the UN Charter and makes sure Ukraine has sovereignty over its resources in the future, which will be so important, and that there are talks about Resolution 1325 and the role of women in peace. This is where Ireland can be something different. On this narrative of cyber attacks, let us be clear. Where Ireland can step for the European Union and for our colleagues is by actually being strong regulators in the online space.”
“The European Union and the United Nations were not produced in an idealistic, wonderful moment in history. They were produced in the realities of war, understanding the realities of war and that there are standards you must apply. I am very surprised to hear a Minister of State defending the decision-----”
“Alongside that, we are also talking about cutting our social cohesion funding - the thing that knits us together - in order to put the money into defence. We are literally sabotaging peace and the building of peace in order to rush towards armaments manufacturing. When the Minister of State met with his Lithuanian counterpart, did he raise the fact that Lithuania decided to exit the cluster munition treaty? It is now saying that it will be on board with some of the worst weapons available in the world. That is a decision Lithuania made and I have asked repeatedly where Europe is in that regard, and where Ireland is as the key host of that ban. I was in Croke Park when we negotiated that global ban. What Ireland could be doing right now is reminding Europe that the work and investment in peace matters.”
“That is what is happening with the omnibus Bill. Bills we have worked on gut the supply chains on things like child labour and human rights and remove the obligation for climate strategies from very large companies. As we give out about Trump, we are chasing the deregulatory agenda. In fact, what Europe could and should be doing is something different, which is producing policies and investments that recognise the physical reality, which is that the world is diverse, human rights matter and we are facing a climate crisis. You cannot simplify away those realities. We should be having innovation and investment that makes us the leader in what the world actually needs, not simply in what corporations want.”
“We are going to listen to citizens now and we are going to hold corporations to a somewhat higher bar. We are back on the values train." That is now being abandoned again. When we talk about competitiveness, let us be frank. Before 2008, Europe was on track for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. That agenda, project 2020, was put aside in favour of a short-term set of goals from then lead Commissioner Juncker which were all about short-term pay, pay, pay. That is why Europe lost ground and fell behind on technology and the environment. We had ten years when countries could not invest because they were paying off their quarterly returns in a short-termism that damaged Europe. We are now about to make the same mistake but we are calling it “simplification”. Let us be clear. This simplification guts environmental standards.”
“Now, if you ask about austerity in Europe, nobody wants to talk about it. There is a recognition that mistakes were made. In that period when there was a recognition that mistakes were made, we saw co-operation in respect of Covid medication, which, unfortunately, did not extend to the global south. We saw an increase of waiving of some of the fiscal rules to ensure that societies’ basic health systems could function, for example. We saw initiatives such as the Future of Europe, which I participated in. We saw initiatives such as a very key set of legislation to ensure that corporations would be more accountable on their environmental and human rights standards and, through the Future of Europe, that citizens would be listened to. It was a signal to Europe, saying, "We know we made mistakes in austerity.”
“There are many ways to be strong, and the way that Europe has to be strong has to be a way that is also good. However, what we are seeing, sadly, is a shift away - I do not believe all is lost - and a moment when Europe is in danger of losing some of its credibility and some of its spirit when it comes to that bit about being good and protecting values. We saw the credibility that was given because Europe raised environmental standards, workers' standards, women’s rights, equality and LGBT rights. However, we also saw an abandonment of much of the European social project during the period of austerity, when a very short-term focus on yearly financial returns led to the undermining of some of the core work of Europe in terms of building social cohesion and co-operation. A recognition of that came afterwards.”
“Many countries in Europe engaged in the horrors of colonisation - countries with bloody histories and bloody records across the world, as well as conflict with their neighbours. That is why it was remarkable and wonderful that the European Union was founded, building peace between European nations, and that it also had such a strong focus on the idea that we should raise our values and standards collectively. That is what has brought a lot of the support in Ireland and across Europe for the European Union. I saw it when I took part in the Future of Europe project. Citizens from right across Europe said what they were proud of was when Europe was good. In many cases, however, the institutions of Europe said, “What we are hearing is you want a Europe that is strong." They are not exactly always mapped together in the same way.”
“will change the destinies of those regions which have long been devoted to the manufacture of munitions of war, of which they have been the most constant victims." For perspective, the coal and steel project specifically recognised the danger that when we are involved in militarisation and the manufacture of munitions of war, in driving the engines of war, it is the citizens of European countries who suffer. We hurt ourselves. That is crucial because that message seems to have been somewhat forgotten in Europe at the moment. The European Union was founded after the horrors of the Second World War but also after not just hundred but thousands of years in which Europe had been at war within itself. Countries in Europe fought and battled each other.”
“That declaration and the founding of the European Union in its earliest form was, of course, about responding to the horrors of the Second World War, as was the United Nations, a similarly important multilateral project which also responded to the horrors of that war in its commitment in its charter is to protect future generations from the scourge of war. Similarly, in the context of the Schuman Declaration, there was a project of peace and commitment to the creative work for peace. The Schuman Declaration states, "The pooling of coal and steel production ...”
“I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I also welcome his commitment to engaging with the Seanad committee on the scrutiny of statutory instruments. It is an important part of how we play our role in ensuring we not only look at the EU laws and directives coming through but also contribute to ensure we have the best laws and decisions coming out of Europe. It is an important part of accountability and engagement. Others spoke about Europe's founding moment and the Schuman Declaration, which we will mark on Europe Day next week.”
“I note the trade unions' campaign on things that do not cost money but which, I hope, the Government will might progress, namely, recognition of unions, rights to collective bargaining and protection from union busting. These will all be required under EU law but we should be doing them anyway, rather than waiting until 2029.”