The National Forum on Europe had been called a "talking shop", but, more importantly, it was a "listening shop", the chairman, Senator Maurice Hayes, said in a report on the forum's activities since its inception at Dublin Castle on October 18th.
The forum had provided a focus for the debate on Europe which the Irish people had not had for some time. However, after four months of deliberations by the forum, it was emerging that the nature of the debate on Europe was changing.
A broad set of preoccupations had emerged which merited further debate: 1) Would the proposed new balance between the institutions of the EU ensure adequate influence for smaller states such as Ireland? 2) How could citizens best influence the Europe of the future and what were the respective roles of national parliaments and the European Parliament? 3) How could Ireland's policy of military neutrality be accommodated in relation to EU security and defence policy and how were national interests or values best upheld in areas such as taxation, justice and home affairs? 4) Who was really making the decisions in Europe: should national parliaments contribute to policy-making and how could the voice of the citizen be heard at the right level?
The focus was now on differences of view over the purpose and method of European integration and Ireland's role in the future Europe. As with a similar debate in France, the key questions were: What does Europe stand for today? How should it be shaped in the future? What do we expect from Europe? With whom should we continue to construct the European Union, to do what and how?
Mr Hayes said that the "unprecedented debate" had been conducted without taboos. Reviewing the progress of the discussions, he said that there was "a shared conviction that what happens in Brussels is directly relevant to us in Ireland and that what we think and feel in Ireland, the values we hold dear, the principles we espouse, should and can influence the direction of European and world policy-making".
He said that all the parties and groups taking part in the forum had indicated support for enlargement of the EU: "One note that came through discussion on a fairly consistent basis was a degree of frustration that consideration be given to a 're-run' of the Nice Treaty referendum, or, more specifically, to putting the 'Nice question' in the same form to the people once again. Nevertheless, it is fair to say that the broad impression formed on the basis of debate . . . is that there is no body of opinion against enlargement per se."
Speakers had been invited from countries seeking EU membership and, while some had expressed grave disappointment at the Irish rejection of Nice, Mr Hayes said that they had left the forum "convinced of the genuinely positive attitude and support of the Irish people" for their entry into the EU.
He said participants at the forum recognised that this was a "defining moment in the existence of the EU and, by extension, a defining moment for Ireland". Ireland had been transformed by EU membership, but some speakers recalled negative aspects. They felt there was too great a focus on economic integration at the expense of the social dimension or they wished to see more EU involvement in environmental protection and less emphasis on foreign and security policy.
"However, despite the difference in assessment as to the 'balance', the shared view of forum members is reflected in the remarks of the Taoiseach at the launch of the forum: 'Some of our people have doubts about the future direction of the Union, but no one doubts the advantages membership has brought us'.
"Without in any way implying an uncritical approach to proposals for future development of the Union, debate at the forum has recognised that EU membership was one of the factors which enabled Ireland to outgrow the former one-sided economic dependence on Britain and, along with membership of the United Nations, EU membership has underlined the fact that Ireland has taken its place among the nations of the world and has gained psychologically in terms of national self-confidence in attaining direct access to a wider world of ideas and influence as well as commerce.
"Some participants have argued that EU membership has enhanced the value of our sovereignty in practical terms and enabled Ireland to avoid the pitfall of political isolation. Others have warned of the risks of moving towards the establishment of an EU federal state, weakening the very sovereignty which has been of such fundamental importance to Ireland."
In addition to the plenary sessions of the forum at Dublin Castle, a series of eight regional meetings had been held in different parts of the State. A further round might be held later. As in the plenaries, there was "widespread support" for enlargement. "Opposition to the idea that the people be asked to vote again on the same question concerning the Nice Treaty was widely expressed. Many considered that this would be undemocratic, while others disagreed, citing precedents."
The forum had received 65 formal written submission from organisations and members of the public. More than one-quarter of these had expressed opposition to at least some aspects of the Nice Treaty. It was clear from an examination of these that issues related to perceived EU militarisation, uncertainty over future decision-making arrangements and concerns over sovereignty were to the fore. The forum would be hearing evidence based on these submissions."It is clear that views expressed through this process will be an important input into the ongoing deliberations of the forum and Ireland's input in turn into the work of the Convention [on the Future of Europe] set up by the Laeken European Council."