andMr. McQuillan asked the Taoiseach if in view of his statement of 27th April, 1962 that when this country joins the EEC there will be no drawing-out again he intends to make himself and the country fully aware of, and influence if need be, the political and defence commitments of membership before accepting such membership.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Political and Defence Commitments of EEC.
1.
As I have stated here on earlier occasions, full information will be made available in due course as a basis for discussion by the Dáil of whatever decision may be proposed by the Government in relation to membership of the European Economic Community.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that, in the negotiations now being carried on in relation to the industrial and agricultural commitments involved in joining EEC, the discussions relative to those negotiations could be carried on in the context of the political and defence commitments also? That would save the Government finding themselves presenting possibly unacceptable political and defence commitments——
Surely this is an argument, not a question.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that it is desirable to carry on the negotiations in respect of the industrial, agricultural, political and defence commitments concurrently?
That is an argument, not a question.
Does the Taoiseach not agree it would be desirable?
No, I do not think I do. The Deputy can be assured the Government will propose to the Dáil nothing that we believe would be unacceptable.
I take it the position previously indicated by the Taoiseach still stands, namely, that when we are told the conditions under which we may join, these conditions will be made available to the House, so that they may be studied and understood and, with full knowledge of what they are, the House will then take a decision as to whether or not we shall join the Common Market? Is that still the position?
That is what I have just said.
Apart from making these proposals available to the Dáil, does the Taoiseach intend that the people should be given an opportunity to voice their approval, or otherwise, of such a very important issue?
The Government's proposals will be made to the Dáil.
Only to the Dáil.
Does the Taoiseach anticipate that, when the Dáil is asked to make a decision, this decision will include any proposals there may be in respect of defence policy and the political implications of our entry into the Common Market?
The Deputy may be assured the Dáil will be given all information relative to the position.
What I asked specifically was: does the Taoiseach believe that, when proposals are submitted, they will include political implications and defence commitments into which we might be asked to enter?
I could not answer that question.
Why is it not possible to answer it? Is it because nobody knows? Is it because not only the Taoiseach but the other countries involved do not know what the political or defence commitments are? Is that the reason these are not discussed?
As the Deputy knows, negotiations in that regard are going on.
Nobody knows. Does anybody know, as far as the Taoiseach is aware, what the political and defence commitments are in regard to the proposal for ourselves and, say, Britain joining EEC?
If the Deputy means that there is no document in which these matters are specifically defined, that is correct.
2.
andMr. McQuillan asked the Taoiseach the reasons why he believes it desirable that the Government should be aware of, and negotiate on, the industrial and agricultural implications of entering EEC, but undesirable that it should look for formal or informal consultations concerning the political and defence implications of such membership.
The general obligations in the economic field of membership of the European Economic Community are clear from the text of the Rome Treaty. Article 237, however, prescribes that the conditions of admission and the consequential adaptations of the Treaty required on the entry of a new member are to be the subject of an agreement between the applicant and the existing members. Hence, a country wishing to become a member must undertake negotiations to that end.
The political implications of membership of the Community are in an entirely different category, as they are nowhere precisely defined and are, indeed, still the subject of negotiations among the Six.
Could the Taoiseach say broadly, from what he knows, does our joining EEC mean the abandonment of our neutrality?
That is a different question.
Could it happen that, having reached agreement on the economic, agricultural, social, and other matters of that kind, this country could then join EEC, without knowing what the political and defence commitments might be?
This country is negotiating for membership of the European Economic Community, and that is all.
Is it a fact that this country is negotiating only on the industrial and agricultural end? Surely there are negotiations also going on on the defence commitments and the political implications? Is that not the position?
We are negotiating for accession to the Rome Treaty.
Are not the political and defence commitments vitally important, apart altogether from the industrial and agricultural commitments? If it were found that there was a workable agreement in regard to the latter, could it happen that this country would then join EEC, without realising what the defence and political commitments were likely to be?
I refer the Deputy again to the terms of the Rome Treaty.
Would the Taoiseach say which comes first—the political and defence commitments, or the industrial and agricultural commitments? Which is given priority?
Is it not a fact that there is no obligation on us to enter into a military agreement as a condition of our entering the Common Market? Is it not also a fact that we ought not to insinuate a military agreement on ourselves?
There is certainly no commitment of that kind involved in acceptance of the Rome Treaty, but it is clear the Treaty envisages something more than a mere trading arrangement. The aim is to establish a situation which will encourage the political integration of Western Europe.
A good deal of Europe belongs to us. We ought to have an interest in it.
Is it not a fact that we have, through the Taoiseach, subscribed to the political and defence implications of the Bonn Declaration, which must be taken in conjunction with the Rome Treaty? In these circumstances, is it a fact that the Taoiseach has not found out what exactly the Bonn Declaration means by any political or defence commitments?
The Bonn Declaration provided for the instruction of a committee to draw up a convention for the consideration of the different Governments. That committee has not drawn up a convention.
If the negotiations taking place now with regard to economic matters meet with approval as far as the Government are concerned does that mean that the Government will accept any political or defence commitments that may be arrived at?
The Government will accept nothing that it does not know all about.
The Taoiseach has already said that he accepted the political and defence objectives.
I did not say that.
The Taoiseach has already said that he will accept the political and defence commitments in the Common Market. How will he get out of that now?
I did not say that.
3.
andMr. McQuillan asked the Taoiseach whether this country's delegation to Brussels concerned with Ireland's application to join the EEC has been asked by the EEC powers to discuss, or may themselves initiate discussions on, the political or defence implications or commitments arising out of Ireland's proposed membership of the EEC and this country's acceptance of the provisions of the Bonn Declaration.
The answer is in the negative.