asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether in relation to this country's proposed entry into the EEC he will make a general statement on the national as distinct from the economic issues involved with particular reference as to how entry may affect the prospects for national unity.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Membership of EEC.
23.
Membership of the Community for both parts of Ireland will lead to a narrowing of the differences, in the economic and social fields, between North and South. To decide to stay out means not only that we forgo this progress but that we build the Border up into a European frontier by our own decision.
Can the Minister say whether the documents already signed are by their nature helpful, unhelpful or neutral in so far as our Border problem with the Six Counties is concerned?
The Treaty of Accession will be quite neutral. Titles used would be titles which were used in other trade agreements, in joining the UN; titles used by Britain are titles they have used formerly. Both countries have used these titles in multi-lateral and bi-lateral agreements. There is no recognition of a territorial claim and no acceptance by the other parties to this agreement of any significance. As the Deputy is aware, the use of the title "Ireland" and the use by them of a title which includes part of Ireland would be mutually exclusive and they do not mean anything except for the purposes of the terms of any agreement. There is no significance in that. In terms of the North of Ireland, the Community, not recognising any border, would take the description only to determine what is the size of the enlarged EEC.
Would it be correct to say that when NATO were being formed this country would not join NATO because of the fact that Deputy Blaney has mentioned—that we were not prepared to join an organisation which recognised the Six Counties as part of Great Britain? Where has the change occurred?
The fact that our country is partitioned was the reason at that time.
It is not so now?
It is still that way, but we are not joining NATO.
You will have to join NATO.
No. The Deputy is making the mistake of reading Labour Party propaganda.
The Minister is making the mistake of thinking people are not intelligent enough.
I want to make it quite clear that there is absolutely no commitment in terms of our defence or neutrality arising out of the Treaty of Accession that we have signed. There can be nothing imposed on us, even if all the other nations try to do so, outside of the economic terms in the Treaty of Accession.
Why then did the Minister say: "A Europe worth joining is a Europe worth defending"?
I believe that but we have no commitment and unless the Dáil and our people want otherwise, my opinion is only my opinion.
You will have a German general telling the Irish Army what to do.
The Deputy would frighten the wits out of him. I should like to make it quite clear again that in terms of an international agreement, which we have made, if there was any force on us to do something against our will in the matter of defence, then we would not have to abide by the Treaty because it was not in the Treaty.
How did you get out?
Why is the Deputy talking about getting out? We are not in yet.
And we will not be in.
Would the Minister be good enough to listen to some relevant supplementaries? Are not the titles used in the Treaty of Accession precisely the same titles as are used and have been used by this country since it attained its freedom more than 50 years ago in the exchange of ambassadors between Ireland and Britain, and that it involves no more recognition of the division of this country than to receive a British ambassador here or to have our ambassador received in London?
I am quite satisfied that the people who are asking these questions want to be quite clear. I am satisfied that apart from the noise they are making, these questions are being asked honestly because people have these anxieties. As Deputy Ryan has said, there is absolutely no commitment to accept another country's description any more than to commit ourselves in the exchange of ambassadors, in multi-lateral or bi-lateral agreements, in membership of the UN or membership of the ILO.
The Labour Party need to study history and law. It is precisely the same as it was 50 years ago.
May I ask the Minister can we not pull out if we want to?
Yes. That is why I made it clear that we have signed a Treaty of Accession——
(Interruptions.)
The Japanese have another word for it.
It would be totally unlike what this country would do to break a treaty but if anything more than we have signed is forced on us, then we do not have to keep that treaty. I want to make it quite clear that we have no obligations beyond the ones we have signed for and there will be no change in the Constitution except the minimum necessary to cover that.
The Minister wants to change everything.
If I could change the Labour Party——
The Minister has been trying for a long time.