Ireland has, like almost no other country, become an example of the strength of the European idea and European integration. It is hard to imagine today that less than 30 years ago Ireland was the poorest country in the European Community. The time is long past when many people left its shores because it was poor, underdeveloped and offered them no future. Today, Irish products are successfully exported within the European common market and throughout the world. Ireland is now a modern, forward-looking country with a booming economy.
The impressive rise of Ireland from an agricultural to a modern, knowledge-based society is a success story of European structural assistance, but it is of course just as much a success of the Irish themselves, who made excellent use of the opportunities the EU offered. For that they are admired and respected throughout Europe. If Ireland is to make the transition from net recipient to net contributor in a few years' time, this may be unpopular at home, but it is the ultimate proof of how far you have come.
As a German I can only say "Welcome to the club!"
Ireland has not just profited greatly from Europe, Europe has also greatly profited from Ireland. Important reforms such as those in agriculture, in regional policy or in the Lome process have been initiated and shaped with much help from Ireland. Precisely because of its successful development, Ireland's views are given special consideration in Brussels. We Germans have learned to value the Irish as dedicated Europeans. For us, Ireland is an important, indispensable partner and fellow champion for a more integrated Europe.
The European Union is currently undergoing what may be the most profound change in its history. It will in the years to come go through its biggest enlargement yet. It has to redefine its position in the increasingly globalised multipolar world of the 21st century. And as if this were not enough, it must at the same time find the courage to reform its own internal structures. For if it failed to do so, the Union would be given over to internal erosion and would lose much of its ability to act. So, we really can't complain that there is nothing important to do.
Where are we today in Europe? What are the exact tasks facing us? And by what vision should we be led?
Let me begin with the results of Nice. The significance of this summit lies in the fact that it created the practical conditions for enlargement and simultaneously launched the necessary process of further deepening the EU by agreeing on the Intergovernmental Conference 2004. It is the right balance between enlargement and deepening that has always been the magic formula for successful development in Europe. And the fact that Nice managed to preserve the balance between these two vital pillars of European progress despite an extremely difficult negotiating situation, is a success. Nice was a step forward for Europe.
A step ahead not least because of the decision to introduce greater flexibility into the concept of enhanced co-operation in the EU. In a future Union of 27 or more members this will be crucial if in future we want to be able to co-operate more closely at all. The principle is that no one shall be excluded. The door will always be open to anyone who can and wishes to follow.
By becoming part of the European Union, Ireland has moved from its location on the geographical and economic sidelines of Europe towards its political heart. Ireland can thus well understand the efforts of the candidate countries who wish to repeat that journey. However, much more is at stake here than in earlier enlargement rounds - and not just in terms of quantity - for what we are now doing is reuniting the Europe divided by Hitler and Stalin. Eastern enlargement is not just a historical and moral imperative, it also offers great opportunities for the old members, since central and Eastern Europe is now experiencing a boom like no other region in the world. Moreover, others will not sit back and watch, but will try for their part to use their opportunities as the Quebec summit has shown. Europe can simply not afford to give itself over to stagnation or timidity in the world of the 21st century.
Ireland's success has become a role model for the new candidate countries. Her voice is therefore accorded special weight in central and Eastern Europe. It is impressive to see how wisely and strategically the Irish - despite their geographical distance - are getting ready for eastern enlargement: they are bearing their share of pan-European responsibility with a clear regard for the great economic opportunities that are opening up to them.
Enlargement will add more than 100 million people to the common market and will offer Irish exporters, too, secured and free access to those markets. Ireland grasped this fact early on and is making political and economic investments on that basis. And that's something we very much welcome.
Now enlargement must be implemented both carefully and as soon as possible. All member-states must do their bit to ensure that the difficult chapters to be negotiated in the months to come - agriculture, structural policy, freedom of movement - are taken forward fast. In this regard Ireland has always behaved in a most exemplary and constructive manner.
Let me make just one more point on freedom of movement and the related freedom to provide services, since this topic is being negotiated in Brussels at the moment. As you know, given its geographical location and the situation on its labour market, Germany is particularly interested in ensuring that there is a gradual transition when new states accede. This is nothing new for the EU. When Spain and Portugal joined the Union, transitional periods were also agreed, which indeed went further than our current proposals. Experiences at that time were positive on all sides. We therefore hope that we will have your support on this issue, so important to us.
WITH the decision to hold an Intergovernmental Conference in 2004, our attention now turns to the necessary internal reform of the EU. Here we face questions which go much deeper than those dealt with at previous IGCs. What has to be decided at European level? And what by the nation-states? What role is to be played by the national parliaments and what by the European Parliament? How can the rights of the citizens be protected more effectively than so far?
The question of a more exact delimitation of competences will be at the heart of the 2004 IGC. Why is this so important? First of all, we have to make clearer to the citizens, the regions and the municipalities what Brussels is or is not responsible for. But the debate is also of such importance because it is not just about competences and questions of efficiency and, of course, about power, but also ultimately about our own identity - as citizens of Ireland, Germany and France on the one hand and as Europeans on the other. What is the right balance between nation and Europe, how much diversity do we want and how much unity do we need? That is the real focus of the debate we now have to conduct.
Europe is a continent with a history spanning thousands of years, with ancient cultures and languages such as Gaelic. Our different societies have developed within the context of the European nation-state. Today, the nation-state is thus the primary vehicle of the identity of our peoples - exceptions do not disprove this rule - and even in an ever more integrated Europe, its ongoing existence will be indispensable; this is the major difference to the history of the US constitution which otherwise offers many historically interesting parallels to current developments in Europe. But in Europe no one wants to abolish the nation-state, no one wants to create a European "superstate".
At the same time, in core fields of common interest - external and internal security, the common currency, the common legal area - the pressure of globalisation will force more "Europe" and deepened integration upon us. Europe has to be fully able to act on issues which can only be decided and implemented at European level and the only road I see in this context is the sharing of sovereignty and full parliamentarisation. Not as an end in itself, rather as the only way for Europe to maintain its ability to act and to approach the challenges of the 21st century with a sense of assurance.
If the nation-state and national culture is to be protected along with the deepening of integration in key areas, then - and I want to emphasise this here especially - it is also the smaller nations of Europe which stand to gain. Looking back through history, no one can deny that the weight and influence of the smaller countries are much greater in an integrated Europe than they would have been without integration. This is by the way a crucial advantage of integration over intergovernmental co-operation. With the decisions on commissioners and the weighting of votes, Nice showed that a country like Ireland can assert its national interests in the Union very well without losing sight of the wider picture or sidestepping its responsibility.
Another major question with a view to 2004 is that of democratic legitimation. So far integration has relied primarily on legitimation through efficiency. As long as Europe offered tangible successes for the economy and the citizens, it met with their approval. But nowadays, efficiency Is reaching its limits as a source of legitimacy for European integration. "Europe" plays a greater and more direct role in the daily lives of the citizens yet the people cannot work out who decided what and whom to hold democratically responsible for these decisions.
TODAY, the EU is no longer a mere union of states, but more and more a union of citizens. Nevertheless, European decisions are still taken almost exclusively by the states. The role of the elected European Parliament as a source of direct legitimation is underdeveloped. This role has to be further strengthened if we are to overcome the democratic deficit of the Union - through more decision-making powers for the European Parliament and the creation of a second chamber. Moreover, it would do justice to the outstanding role of the President of the EU Commission as initiator of European decisions and advocate of pan-European interests if he had the legitimacy generated by elections.
Division of competences, more weight for the parliaments, making the treaties simpler - never since the early days of European integration were there so many fundamental questions on the agenda and never were there so many momentous decisions to be made. The debate therefore has to be conducted in all member-states - and in the accession countries as well much more publicly than before. Just last weekend, one year after my speech at Humboldt University, this debate has gained momentum in Germany. Chancellor Schroder has launched a new initiative aiming at the reform and democratisation of European institutions, the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament. In this respect a bipartisan consensus is beginning to take shape in Germany. I very much welcome this. We need a truly pan-European, an honest, sound discussion on all impending questions. The results of this debate must then be reflected in the concrete reforms to be drawn up by the relevant national and European executive and legislative organs.
European integration has given Europe a historically unprecedented period of peace and prosperity. For Germany, this was the road out of the ruins of World War Two, for Ireland the road leading away from the problems of an underdeveloped country dominated by agriculture. We very much hope that the Northern Ireland peace process will also soon be completed successfully in a spirit of close and fruitful co-operation with Britain.
But we cannot be satisfied with what we have achieved so far because today we face entirely new questions. How will a Union of 27 or more remain able to act? How can it best bring its shared interests to bear in the multipolar world of tomorrow? The answers to these vital questions will depend on whether or not we manage to make Europe into a democratically transparent and legitimate political subject which is understood and accepted by the citizens and is fully able to act on the issues which can only be tackled at European level. This is the debate that is taking place under the heading "2004", under the heading "The future of Europe". In this debate, we Germans are counting on the self-confident voice of Ireland and of Irish Europeans.