andMr. Timmins asked the Minister for External Affairs if he will make a comprehensive statement on the up-to-date position concerning Ireland's application for membership of the EEC.
16.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Membership of EEC.
15.
asked the Minister for External Affairs if he will make a statement on the present position in relation to Ireland's application for membership of the EEC; and if the Government are prepared to issue a White Paper regarding progress in relation to Ireland's application.
17.
asked the Minister for External Affairs if he will make a statement on the present state of negotiations for Ireland's entry into the EEC.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 15, 16 and 17 together.
As the statement is a lengthy one, I propose with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, to circulate it with the Official Report.
Following is the statement:
With regard to the question of publishing a White Paper on the progress of the negotiations, I do not consider that a White Paper at this stage of the negotiations would be appropriate. I shall, of course, continue to keep the House informed of the progress of the negotiations.
I would refer the Deputies to the reply I gave on 28th October, 1970, to questions by Deputies Corish, O'Leary, O'Donnell and Ryan in which I outlined the progress up to that date in the negotiations on Ireland's application for membership of the European Communities.
Since then we have had one further Ministerial meeting with the Communities on 15th December and two meetings at the level of Ministers' Deputies on 27th November and 19th January. At these meetings a number of matters have been raised which were mentioned by me in my statement to the Communities of 21st September, 1970, copies of which were made available to Deputies. Among these matters are
—transitional arrangements for the industrial and agricultural sectors;
—trading arrangements with the United Kingdom during the transitional period;
—the Community's Common Fisheries Policy;
—animal and plant health controls;
—dumping;
—sensitive Irish industries;
—tariff quotas.
Our negotiations in the past three months and those of the other applicant countries also have been mainly concerned with the examination of matters in relation to which problems may possibly arise in the context of accession to the Communities. For the purpose of this examination, there have been numerous meetings of a fact-finding nature with officials of the Commission.
My statement to the Communities of 21st September, 1970, sets out the matters that we have raised in the negotiations. We have presented detailed memoranda to the Community delegation on various matters of particular concern to Ireland. The Irish delegation has also made statements at the negotiating meetings in support of our positions as set out in the memoranda. On the basis of these memoranda and statements, the Commission has been carrying out, on behalf of the Community, fact-finding examinations.
Another matter to which we have been paying particular attention is the Community's common fisheries policy. From the outset of the negotiations, we raised the question of fisheries and have emphasised in statements at our negotiating meetings and in a memorandum submitted to the Community side our concern at the problems which the policy's provisions on common access to fishery waters would create for us. The Community has agreed that discussions should take place between Ireland and the Commission at expert level for the purpose of clarifying the content and scope of the fisheries regulations. Following this, discussions will take place with the Community about the problems that would arise for the Irish fishing industry if the fisheries regulations were to be applied here unchanged. This is a matter of major concern to some of the other applicant countries also and I hope that it will be possible to work out in due course in the negotiations solutions to such problems as exist.
In my statement of the 21st September, 1970, I expressed certain views on the subject of transitional arrangements. The Community delegation subsequently stated that, in its view, these arrangements should constitute a global solution covering the industrial, agricultural and all other important sectors and dealing with all aspects of the transitional mechanisms in these sectors. We and the other applicant countries have accepted this view. The Commission has submitted to the Council of Ministers its proposals as to the negotiating position to be adopted by the Community on transitional arrangements. These proposals are at present under consideration by the Council and it is hoped that a Community position will be adopted shortly.
At the last three meetings with the Communities, the Irish delegation has made statements on transitional arrangements. Last week we submitted an important memorandum setting out our proposals on the transitional arrangements which should apply in regard to the free movement of industrial goods, the alignment of our agricultural prices with the Community's common prices and our contribution to the financing of the Community. I have placed in the Library of the House, for the information of Deputies, copies of a paper summarising our proposals.
Briefly, the position we have adopted is that—
(1) a uniform transitional period of five years would be acceptable subject to reservations previously entered in regard to certain matters including sensitive industries, fisheries, animal and plant health controls and export tax reliefs;
(2) progress towards the free movement of industrial goods should be paralleled by progress towards the full application of the common agricultural policy and this should be achieved by pre-established detailed timetables;
(3) a corresponding progression should apply to the level of Ireland's contribution to the financing of the Community budget during the transitional period;
(4) there should be multilateral discussions on the various aspects of the transitional arrangements which need to be settled by common accord.
Our proposals contain detailed timetables for the elimination of customs duties in intra-Community trade, for the alignment of tariffs with the common customs tariff and for the alignment of our agricultural prices with the Community's common prices. We have also informed the Community that, in so far as other sectors are concerned, a transitional period of five years would suffice to enable us to assume the same obligations as the present member States in relation to the free movement of capital, the free movement of workers and the application of the principle of equal pay for the same work as between men and women. Similarly, we have indicated that a transitional period of five years would be required by us for the elimination of customs duties and the application of Community duties on trade in steel to which the provisions of the European Coal and Steel Community Treaty apply. We have now reached the stage in the negotiations where the fact-finding processes are largely completed and the main pre-occupation is with those matters which, in the words of the Community delegation, lie at the heart of the negotiations. Principal among these matters is, of course, the question of transitional arrangements and the negotiations in the coming months will be concerntrated mainly on this question.
Further Ministerial meetings between Ireland and the Communities have been scheduled for 2nd March and 8th June but this arrangement is subject to change if the progress of the negotiations so warrants. Our next meeting at the level of Ministers' Deputies has been fixed for 16th February.
Might I inquire if the five-year transitional period has been agreed by all the applicant countries?
There is a consensus now that it is accepted.
Including England?
They have said they will accept it.
Is there any indication whether it is acceptable to the six EEC countries?
I think it is acceptable to them.
I appreciate the Minister's reply is in the form of a seven-page document and I was wondering if it would be possible for the Minister fairly soon to give details to the House of the progress being made.
I was trying to find a way, through the Whips, of arranging for discussing the progress made. This seems the simplest way.
Would it be possible to have this information from time to time without putting down questions?
I could provide the information according as it becomes available. I have in preparation documentation which would bring Deputies up-to-date, but I do not think it is ready for circulation yet.
Assuming we get documentation, I assume it will be possible to arrange some sort of discussion, if necessary.
That is what I should like to do. We have not yet finished the debate on the White Paper but most Deputies involved in studying the matter have spoken and it would possibly be inappropriate to start another debate. If we could have some system of having a limited debate at which statements would be offered and replies given——
Has this not been arranged between the Whips? There was a report put back from the Whips as to the procedure to be followed. Is it not pointless to be talking about a debate in the House if what we were told last night is true?
What is the Deputy's problem?
The Minister and some Deputies seem to be anxious to pursue some items of a report but I understand from the discussions yesterday that the debate was to be resumed next week. Is that right or not?
The other debate does not permit of Deputies who have already contributed a great deal coming in again when new information is available. The most I can do is to give this information in the Official Report but there is a problem in relation to Deputies who have already spoken in the debate on the White Paper to speak again on the progress that has been made.
The Minister is precluding discussion as long as he keeps the existing debate on the Order Paper.
I am quite willing to consider any suggestions the House has to make.
There must be points in the report contained in the Minister's reply today that warrant further clarification. There would be no other means of getting information except by parliamentary question and this is rather a vicious circle.
I expect there will be questions arising out of the information I have just given, and these will be answered individually.
Does the Minister mean parliamentary questions?
Yes. They can be answered this week, the following week, and so on.
There might be advantage in concluding the debate which has been carried forward from the summer and then having a fresh, limited discussion on the information as it becomes available.
Perhaps at a certain period when adequate progress has been reached we could have another debate.