RT HON CAROLINE FLINT MP, MR MATTHEW RYCROFT AND MR MICHAEL DAVIDSON

4 FEBRUARY 2009

  Q40  Mr Clappison: I am tempted to ask the Minister in the light of the interesting model of democracy which she has enunciated, and the analysis which she gave of people's reasons for voting—and we have to have an analysis, apparently, of people's reasons for voting if they do not vote the "right" way—

  Caroline Flint: Irish analysis.

  Mr Clappison: Given the analysis which you have given us, Minister, you talked about abortion, defence and taxes, were there or could there have been any right or legitimate reasons for people voting against it in Ireland?

  Angus Robertson: It is up to the people of Ireland.

  Caroline Flint: This is an Irish analysis of what has happened. I am just reporting back to the Committee what was presented by the Irish Prime Minister.

  Q41  Mr Cash: You have accepted their explanation.

  Caroline Flint: And therefore it is our Irish colleagues who are deciding on the way forward. An elected representative of the Irish people, that being the Prime Minister, indicated at the December Council that they were looking for these legal guarantees to reassure the Irish people about what areas of concern will not be affected by the Lisbon Treaty, and they have indicated that they will be seeking in 2009 to have another referendum. That is a matter for the Irish to decide in terms of what they do, and not for myself or anyone else. As I said before, ultimately, we have to have all 27 Member States ratify the Lisbon Treaty to go ahead otherwise we will fall back on the Nice Treaty.

  Mr Cash: Does it not affect us, Minister?

  Chairman: Mr Cash, Katy Clark has been in another meeting and she wants to come in.

  Q42  Ms Clark: I was just going to pick up on the point that Kelvin Hopkins was making about the Viking case and other cases to which he referred. You will be aware that across Europe, and particularly in Britain, many of the concerns that were raised about the Lisbon Treaty were not really to do with anything that was in the Lisbon Treaty itself but were perhaps more to do with the direction of travel in Europe. That seems pertinent to the political debate and the media coverage this week in terms of the wildcat strikes. You will probably also be aware that the European TUC is calling for an amendment to the European Union Treaty to take into account these cases that affect employment rights. Is that something that has been part of any of the discussions that you have been involved with?

  Caroline Flint: Not with Ireland, no.

  Chairman: I think that is a No. Mr Hands?

  Q43  Mr Hands: Do you think that specific legal guarantees for Ireland are best described as being a "post-dated cheque"?

  Caroline Flint: No, I think we have had a process we have gone through here in which the Irish have come forward to other Member States to ask for support to resolve these issues around clarity about what is and is not in the Treaty. That is a process with which we are engaged at the moment. The elected Irish Government have said that they will be looking to have a referendum in 2009. As with other Member States who have yet to ratify the Treaty, we stand by to allow that process to continue. That is democracy and that is a matter for the Irish to decide.

  Q44  Mr Hands: Could I ask you about that. You say that is democracy, but is it right that the Irish people, who had the text in front of them and voted No last year, and are now being invited to vote Yes on the basis of a set of protocols that might be attached to the Croatian Accession Treaty (if Croatia is indeed to accede to the European Union, which I do not think is necessarily a definite thing, some time in 2010 and 2011) do you not find that a bizarre interpretation of democracy whereby you can have a re-vote based on a pledge in the future?

  Caroline Flint: I think that is a matter for the Irish. Over the coming months, as work is developed on the text of the guarantees and when a decision is made about whether that will be a binding decision or a protocol, presumably at some point in 2009 there will be a referendum, and therefore it will be for the Irish people to decide whether they are satisfied with the guarantees, in whatever form they may take, and how they vote on that. We can speculate about that but that is down to Irish voters at the end of the day, and really a matter for them. What we are very clear about, and other Member States are clear about, is that this is not about unpicking the Lisbon Treaty or changing it.

  Mr Cash: It is.

  Q45  Mr Heathcoat-Amory: Let us not speculate about the future, let us just examine what you have said to us. You have agreed that Ireland has asked for and has been granted legal guarantees, and you have used that phrase. You have also said in a letter to us that "there will be no change to the Lisbon Treaty". My question to you is—and it follows what Mr Hands just asked you—how do we give legal guarantee without changing the Lisbon Treaty?

  Caroline Flint: Because as far as I am aware—and it is quite difficult obviously because we have not got a text in terms of these guarantees—in terms of the discussion at the Council, the issues that were raised by the Irish Prime Minister, it was felt, were actually not issues that were being affected by the Lisbon Treaty, and to that end these legal guarantees are a reinforced clarification about what the Treaty is not about, which was part of the process and which caused concern for Irish voters, as analysed by Irish commentators, elected and unelected. In that sense it is not a change. When over the course of the months ahead the guarantees are drawn up, every Member State will have the opportunity to agree those guarantees. It will not be purely a decision between our Irish colleagues and the Commission. All 27 Member States will have to agree those guarantees. As I have said, it was made very clear by the Member States that they did not want those guarantees to be in any way unpicking the Lisbon Treaty but just to clarify and reassure what the Treaty was not about and is not about.

  Mr Heathcoat-Amory: You have not answered my question. The Irish are not after explanations and assurances—

  Caroline Flint: They are, that is what they asked for.

  Q46  Mr Heathcoat-Amory: Just let me finish my question. It may be your position that they are deluded and ignorant and so they misunderstood what was in the Treaty, but that is not the position of the Irish Government. They do not patronise their own voters like that. They want legal guarantees. They have recognised concern, for instance over perhaps the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which will become binding in Treaty law, to family matters, to social matters, and to abortion. Therefore they wish to have—and it has been granted—legal guarantees, not explanations. In other words, there is an admission that the Treaty does affect future Irish policy. You said to us that there will be no change to the Lisbon Treaty so you are ruling out a protocol there which would be legally binding. How are we to give the Irish something that is both legally binding but will not change the Lisbon Treaty or its effect?

  Caroline Flint: I have to say the words you use to describe the Irish people are not words that I have used. All I am relaying back to the Committee is the presentation of the Irish Prime Minister and his presentation of the Irish analysis of what caused concern amongst voters in Ireland. That is on the record and anybody can read that. In relation to some of the issues around the Charter of Fundamental Rights, for example, the Charter records existing rights by which EU Member States, including the UK, are already bound because they implement EU law. As the Irish surveys have shown, there were some clear views and concerns about how abortion might be affected. That is why the guarantees to reassure in this area are very important.

  Q47  Mr Heathcoat-Amory: What is a guarantee? You are talking about an assurance again. It is a legal guarantee. How is that to be done without changing the Treaty or the effect of the treaty on Ireland or ourselves?

  Mr Cash: Or ourselves, exactly right.

  Mr Rycroft: Just to add one thing to what the Minister said, reading the Conclusion of the December European Council it says that this legal guarantee will be "a guarantee that the provisions of the Irish Constitution in relation to the right to life, education and the family are not in any way affected by the fact that the Treaty of Lisbon attributes legal status to the EC Charter of Fundamental Rights."

  Q48  Mr Heathcoat-Amory: How is that legally binding?

  Mr Rycroft: As the Minister said in answer to an earlier question, the form of the legal guarantee has not yet been decided.

  Mr Heathcoat-Amory: You cannot answer the question. At last we have got it. Minister, if you had just said, "I do not know," we would have saved about 20 minutes.

  Caroline Flint: That is not fair. I think I gave a very clear explanation about what is going to happen over the months ahead.

  Chairman: I think Mr Heathcoat-Amory has put it correctly. A Council Decision cannot be a legal guarantee, and we do not know yet whether that legal guarantee, when it is expressed in writing and put to the Council of Europe or whoever makes this decision, will require a change to the Treaties, although it seems that those who would wish to sign up to it have said that it will not change the Lisbon Treaty. The question hangs in the air: how can you possibly guarantee those things in Articles 40 to 44 of the Irish Constitution on family rights, including abortion, without amending the Lisbon Treaty? That is an Irish conundrum to which we will see if there is an Irish answer. It is not for us to discuss because we do not know what form it will take. Mr Bailey?

  Q49  Mr Bailey: Earlier you said that -and I think I have interpreted you correctly—that if the Lisbon Treaty is rejected a second time that the Nice Treaty applies. I suppose that I am asking you to speculate. If the current situation is plan B and Lisbon is rejected, have we a plan C or do we just revert to Nice, and how do you think this will affect relations with the EU and Ireland and the UK and Ireland?

  Caroline Flint: I do not want to over-speculate, I have to say, but the answer is that if Lisbon is not ratified by 27 Member States, it will not happen, and we will revert to Nice, and that is it. We will just have to cross that bridge when we come to it, I suppose. At the moment, things are still up in the air because, as I have said, Irish colleagues have indicated that they are going to go through a process at the end of which they will be looking to have a second referendum. Of course we have got some other countries that have yet to ratify as well. That is where we are. I think the European Union in many different ways—and I know there might be some different views around this table—adds value to what we do as a country. I think Lisbon will help us do that in an even more positive way, but we will see where we are, and this time next year we will know where we are.

  Chairman: I think, Minister, we are at the end of your very long and very detailed evidence session. I thank you for taking the time and to your colleagues, Matthew and Michael, for coming along. Best wishes to your colleague who is unwell. I am sure it has thrown some light on the issues before us. I hope that you will take our sincerity in this matter and the seriousness in our questions about what should happen with draft Council Conclusions and there will be clarification of what up-stream documents should be presented to us. We have no wish to have ministers here to answer complaints. We would much rather have letters written to ministers saying thank you very much for having kept the Committee not only very well-informed but also in good heart. Thank you very much for attending.