I thank the Minister for outlining the detail of these proposals. He is certainly keeping us busy this week. As I have said when we previously debated motions on the sharing of PNR data, this data is important for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of serious crimes and terrorist offences, including drug-related offences and human trafficking. This information forms part of the broader management of our borders, although there are limitations to what the data can be used for. International co-operation in the fight against crime is crucial and the sharing of this information is a key aspect of that. I will put on the record again that the application of PNR data collection to ports and ferries needs to be examined, although I concede it will probably not be relevant to travel to Switzerland. These motions relate to a Council decision to sign and conclude an agreement between the EU and the Swiss Confederation. Sinn Féin is not opposing this motion. As we are here again to discuss an opt-in under Protocol 21, I want to make a number of general points on the matter. In standing up for the democratic will of the Irish people, the Oireachtas has a responsibility to be on guard at all times against anything that could potentially undermine our sovereignty. We also have to be on guard against attempts to undermine the protections which were crucial for Ireland signing up to treaties that involved further and deeper EU integration. Whenever the Irish people have voted on EU treaties, protecting and maximising Irish sovereignty have been to the fore of many people's concerns. It was for this reason, and of course to protect the common travel area, that Protocol 21 of the Lisbon treaty was put in place. There now needs to be a more comprehensive debate about where this State stands on the European Union and the areas described as freedom, security and justice. The regularity in which we faced opt-in motions and the comments of the Minister previously, following the review of Protocol 21 last year, suggest there is a move towards an ever greater ceding of sovereignty to the European Union in these areas. It would be useful if the Minister could outline, following the review, what measures Ireland is currently considering opting in to which we had previously opted out of. Individually, some of these matters might seem minor but the cumulative effect of a drift towards opting in to such measures is not always seen or understood by the public. There is no awareness that we are travelling in the direction of handing more and more powers over to the European Union, with little rationale in some instances. There is no discussion of the far-reaching implications of handing over increased powers in the areas of freedom, security and justice. There needs to be more concern about the ability of the people in this State to make decisions here in Ireland around matters in this area and less concern, in my view, about demonstrating our commitment to protecting and strengthening the EU's control over these areas. More and more people are alive to the dangers inherent in ceding sovereignty as the practical implications become clear. We lost our veto over international trade deals as a result of the Lisbon treaty. We see now the impact of that with the Mercosur agreement, which is clearly not in Ireland's interests as a trade agreement. It poses serious threats to Irish agriculture, the environment and food safety standards, yet it appears we could be locked in if the European Court of Justice does not intervene. We see it with regard to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, which provides for an investor court system and exposes this State to the risk of being sued by foreign investors where State actions could be perceived as affecting negatively on their investments. There will be other trade deals, some of which will be in Ireland's interests, and we will support them, while others may not be in our interests. The truth of the matter is that because we have ceded absolute control to a European framework which only provides for a qualified majority, there are likely to be instances where a deal is clearly not in the best interest of the Irish people and while an Irish Government may robustly oppose it, it will be implemented. For example, we know the EU is embarking on a free trade agreement with India. We do not know what the implications of that will be yet. There needs to be a full debate, which has not been the case in most respects. All of this reminds us that, even when we make decisions technically or theoretically for the right reasons, any time a decision is made to hand over and cede power to the European Union, that has implications. I fear that the discussions we have are not sufficiently robust or considered and we generally deal with motions that are rushed through the House. There are of course areas where co-operation or collective EU processes are the best and most effective approach. Passenger name recognition is one of those areas, which is why we will not be opposing this motion. We need to move beyond the simplistic argument that you are either pro-EU, and that means you support every single measure and proposal to cede sovereignty to the EU, or, as I would contend, you can be pro-EU but recognise there are consequences that have to be properly teased out. That is particularly the case in respect of areas where, under Protocol 21, we have opt-outs. Those opt-outs were secured for valid reasons and those reasons must be respected.

Sentiment score: 0.23