Vol. 230 No. 12
asked the Taoiseach if, arising out of his discussions with the Prime Minister of Denmark and the President of the French Republic, there have been any developments concerning the application of this country to join the EEC; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
2.
asked the Taoiseach whether his attention has been drawn to a press statement (details supplied) that General de Gaulle made it clear that Britain and other countries interested in joining the Common Market should do so as associate members; and whether this was included in the text of General de Gaulle's speech at the luncheon given for him on his visit to Paris.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
During my official visit to Denmark last week I had a full and useful exchange of views with the Danish Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and other Ministers on the applications of both our countries for membership of the European Economic Community. I found that our interests and our problems in this matter closely coincided. The Danish Prime Minister and I agreed to keep in close touch on future developments.
In Paris I discussed our EEC application fully with President de Gaulle, with Prime Minister Pompidou, with the Foreign Minister M. Couve de Murville and with other Ministers. All assured me that there is no objection in principle to Ireland's accession to the European Communities and that France looks forward to the day when it will be possible for this country to become a member. President de Gaulle and his Ministers adverted to the problems posed by the British application and, in this context, mentioned the close trading arrangements which exist between this country and Britain. The President referred to the suggestion he had previously made in public on more than one occasion that Britain might accept some form of association with the EEC. He inquired whether we here had given any thought to a similar approach in our case.
I explained why Ireland's application was for membership and the importance for Ireland of simultaneous accession with Britain. The President stated that, in the event of progress not being possible for a considerable time on the British application for membership, it might be helpful for us to have an interim arrangement with the Communities pending full membership. I expressed appreciation of his offer of support and goodwill in this connection but emphasised that our application, which is at present before the Council, is for full membership and that we hoped for an early favourable response to this.
I was gratified by the assurance of support for Ireland's membership of the European Communities which was given to me by President de Gaulle and by other members of his Government. I am happy to say that this helpful attitude was also reflected in the assurances I received from Prime Minister Pompidou and his Ministers in the context of our bilateral relations. M. Pompidou promised the co-operation of his Government in encouraging French investment in Ireland and in the development of our trade, tourism and cultural links.
My visit to Paris completed the series of visits to the capitals of the EEC countries which began last June. The discussions which the Minister for Finance and I have had with the Governments of these six countries and with the European Economic Commission in Brussels have resulted in a greater understanding of Ireland's position and have advanced our candidature for membership of the Community. It is now clear that all six Governments and the Commission have no objection in principle to Ireland's application. For them it presents no major problems. Moreover, they all accept the importance for Ireland of becoming a member at the same time as Britain.
Did the Taoiseach make any request at all for any definition of what was meant by "considerable time"?
No. The President and the Ministers said they could not anticipate the result of the meeting of the Council of Ministers, which is due to take place on 20th November.
Does the Taoiseach realise the extent of the confusion that has been created in the country by the initial contradiction, on the authority of the Irish Embassy in Paris, of certain reports, particulars of which I have furnished him, which I understand emanated from Reuter and Agence Presse France? Are we now clearly to understand that the meaning of all the communications made by the President of France to the Taoiseach was that our application for membership of the Community should be deferred, and will be deferred until that of Great Britain has been disposed of and that it is most likely it would have to wait for the settlement of the British application for membership and that ad interim there is to be no special association between the Irish and the EEC?
I would like to make it clear, as I think I have already done, that President de Gaulle spoke at the luncheon to which he invited the other members of the delegation and me after my talks with him—he spoke without a script but I understand that a script was issued officially after the luncheon in French, that certain translations were made but I am not responsible for the translations that were made—and I understood General de Gaulle in the course of the luncheon to mention the movement to greater Europe, the economic necessity for a strengthening of the Six as it stands and he emphasised that Ireland should be associated with this great development. What the meaning of "associated" in the context is I do not know, but the word "associated" has a very specific meaning in the context of the Rome Treaty itself. I mentioned in the course of my reply already that the French Government reiterated to me, the President and the Ministers to whom I spoke, the difficulties they saw in the way of opening negotiations on the British application. They felt it was a matter for Britain itself to resolve those difficulties. However, they as a single member in the Council of Ministers could not anticipate what the ultimate decision of the Council of Ministers would be but that they intended to maintain their attitude that negotiations should not take place until Britain took the steps they thought were necessary prior to negotiations. That does not indicate that the British application was not to be considered or that we are to seek accession other than what we sought. I cannot comment further than that.
While I appreciate the Taoiseach's dilemma in regard to the word which has been translated as "associated", in view of the fact that President de Gaulle throughout employed this word three times in the context of his remarks has the Taoiseach considered it expedient to seek clarification of what precisely the effect of the word is or are we to remain in the agreeable ambiguity that the Taoiseach thinks it means one thing while the President of France can go on thinking it is something else? This reminds me of the glorious day of the definition of the word "Republic".
Our application is before the Council of Ministers and that application is for full membership of the Community. The decision on the negotiation of that application has not yet been made by the Council of Ministers. The next meeting will be on 20th November. I am not sure that that will be a conclusive meeting or not, but if it emerges that the opening of negotiations on the British application should be delayed for a considerable time and therefore that the opening of our negotiations might be similarly delayed, then I conveyed to the President and the members of the French Government, to whom I spoke, that we would consider this other suggestion of interim arrangement with the Community, pending our accession as a full member. I have not put it further than that so far, nor will I until I see what the decision will be in regard to our application for full membership.
Can I take it that the Taoiseach is satisfied that the existing ambiguity should be allowed to continue until clarified by the Community?
I am not accepting that there is ambiguity.
There is ambiguity in the interpretation of what was actually said. It is important to know what he actually did say.
Is it not the clear impression from the Taoiseach's statement, without in any way attaching any blame to him and the delegation, that the result of their visit to Paris is that it is clear that it will be a very considerable time before our application is considered?
It is not by any means clear. The net result so far as my visit to Paris is concerned is that the French Government welcomed our application and see no difficulty in principle in it and look forward to the day when we become full members. Any interim arrangement to which I have referred would be in the context of ultimate accession as full members.
Have I not correctly interpreted the Taoiseach as saying that while the French Government have indicated that while they have no objection to our membership, the negotiations cannot take place until the negotiations with Britain are opened? The impression the Taoiseach has certainly given to the world and to the House is that negotiations with Britain will not open for a very considerable time. Does the Taoiseach now wish to alter that impression?
No, I do not. I do not think I have given an impression to that effect. I have indicated the difficulties the French Government see in the way of opening negotiations with the British Government on their application. They also intimated that it was a matter for the British to resolve those difficulties themselves, and the French Government also indicated to me that it need not take any considerable time for them to resolve these difficulties. This is a matter for themselves and I cannot press the British Government on that.
The impression the Taoiseach has left on me as a result of his visit to Paris is that we are further away than ever.
Could I ask the Taoiseach whether consideration will be given jointly to the several applicants, or whether prior consideration will be given to the British Government?
I do not know whether Deputy Esmonde has in mind the applications for membership or discussions on the applications subsequently. The Commission recommended to the Council of Ministers that they open discussions immediately on the applications of all members. That is the recommendation now before the Council and on which they have not yet made a decision.
Do I understand the Taoiseach to have ascertained from the French Government that in the event of the British Government's application not being accepted, and not being continued, he is prepared to accept a direct application on behalf of this country?
I will not talk on contingencies or premises of that nature. I will await the outcome of the Council of Ministers on the application now before them and the recommendations of the Commission.
Will the Taoiseach not agree that the position is very much the same as it was before he went to Paris? There is no change?
On the contrary; the position is different. We have now the mind of all Member Governments of the Community, which is that they see no objection in principle to our application. Further than that, if by any chance there is a long delay in the British application, the way is open to us to examine an interim arrangement.
3.
asked the Taoiseach if he will state, in the event of this country joining the European Economic Community, what major changes will take place in regard to the Land Acts in this country; and if such legislation will be amended to enable free purchase and sales of land and property in common with all Common Market countries.
As I indicated in the course of my statement to the Dáil on 25th July, 1967, the provisions of the Treaty of Rome regarding freedom of establishment apply to the purchase of, and settlement on, land. These provisions are, however, subject to the principles of the common agricultural policy which take into account the distinctive nature of agricultural activity, including its structural aspects.
So far, only limited progress has been made by the European Economic Community in implementing the provisions of the Treaty as they affect land. Bearing in mind the importance of farming in the Irish economy and the need to improve the structure of our agriculture, I would hope that, on our entry into the Community, it would be possible for us to retain sufficient regulation over the disposal of land to enable us to apply policies adequate to our needs. The precise arrangements to apply will be a matter for negotiation.
So far as the Land Acts are concerned, it would be premature, in advance of entry negotiations, to say what amendments, if any, might be necessary.
