Seanad Report: The EU attempt to harmonise divorce laws could cause the same disconnection of the European project here from the will of the people as was manifesting itself in the debacle in France, Brendan Ryan (Lab) warned.
He had no problems about liberalising the divorce laws, but he had a huge problem about promises that had been made at various EU referendums about what would, or would not, be involved.
If a referendum on divorce here, passed under certain conditions by a 0.1 per cent majority of the population, was now to be overturned because of a treaty in which divorce had never been mentioned, we were giving serious hostages to those who wanted to persuade us that the project of European union was essentially anti-democratic, Mr Ryan said.
"It is up to this country now to insist upon a solution to this issue which does not undermine the constitutional decision taken in this State."
Paschal Mooney (FF) said this was another example of someone within the EU interfering in our domestic politics in the way that had happened during the debate on the Nice Treaty, when Romano Prodi had more or less lectured us as to what we should do.
If the EU Commission and those who were supportive of the European ideal were anxious to ensure that the constitutional treaty was passed here, they were going a strange way about it.
The EU had no competence in this area and a decision taken by the sovereign people here could not be overridden.
Martin Mansergh (FF) agreed with Mr Ryan. This was a prime example of where the principle of subsidiarity must apply, because it did not directly concern economic matters.
Leader of the House Mary O'Rourke said many voters overcame their reservations and voted in favour of divorce because of the four-year separation requirement. Mr Mooney had said EU directives might be interfering in our domestic policy.
The point had been raised by Mr Ryan that voters felt disconnected from Europe. "No matter what way the question of divorce is resolved, voters will feel increasingly disconnected."