asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will specify the Ministers of the member states of the European Community who attended the Council of Ministers' meeting on the Regional Fund on 30th January, 1974; and the portfolios they hold in their national Governments.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - EC Regional Fund.
17.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I am circulating with the Official Report, for the convenience of the Deputy, a statement setting out the information requested.
Following is the reply:
Representation of Governments at Council meeting on 30 January, 1974. The Governments of the member States of the European Communities were represented at the Council meeting on 30th January, 1974 as follows:
|
Belgium: |
|
|
Mr. Renaat Van Elslande |
Minister for Foreign Affairs |
|
Denmark: |
|
|
Mr. Jens Christensen |
State Secretary for External Economic Affairs |
|
Federal Republic of Germany |
|
|
Herr Walter Scheel |
Minister for Foreign Affairs |
|
Herr Hans Apel |
Parliamentary State Secretary for Foreign Affairs |
|
Herr Otto Schlecht |
State Secretary for Economic Affairs |
|
Herr Manfred Schueler |
State Secretary for Finance |
|
France: |
|
|
M. Olivier Guichard |
Minister for Equipment and Regional Development |
|
M. Jean De Lipkowski |
State Secretary for Foreign Affairs |
|
Ireland: |
|
|
Dr. Garrett FitzGerald |
Minister for Foreign Affairs |
|
Mr. Justin Keating |
Minister for Industry and Commerce |
|
Italy: |
|
|
Sig. Carlo Donat-Cattin |
Minister for Special Investments for the Mezzogiorno |
|
Luxembourg: |
|
|
M. Gaston Thorn |
Minister for Foreign Affairs |
|
Netherlands: |
|
|
Mr. Max Van Der Stoel |
Minister for Foreign Affairs |
|
Mr. L.J. Brinkhorst |
State Secretary for Foreign Affairs |
|
United Kingdom: |
|
|
Sir Alec Douglas Home |
Secretary of State for Foreign and Common-wealth Affairs |
|
Mr. John Davies |
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. |
Could I ask the Minister how many Ministers with portfolios attended at that Council of Ministers? I asked the Minister to specify the Ministers of the Member States who attended. How many, in fact, did attend?
It is a bit complicated. Our system of terminology here as regards Ministers and portfolios is different from what it is in some of those countries. I will put it this way. There were Ministers for Foreign Affairs there from Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom. They were in some cases accompanied by other Ministers and in the case of other countries like Italy a Minister with special responsibility for regional policy was there. The Deputy will see the reply.
Does any other Foreign Affairs Minister in the world attend as many of these meetings as the Minister does himself?
That does not arise.
Most countries are represented even more widely than we are because they are members of more organisations than we are. I have rarely attended any meeting over the past year that was not attended by other Ministers of Foreign Affairs. Yet, they have to go to other meetings as well.
18.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the progress, if any, which has been made towards the establishment of the Regional Fund of the European Community.
As the Deputy is aware, on 31st July, 1973, the Commission of the European Communities communicated to the Council of Ministers a proposal for a Council regulation establishing a regional development fund. Subsequently, on 11th October, 1973, the Commission transmitted to the Council a proposal for a Council regulation on the list of regions and areas which the Commission considers should benefit from the fund. Subsequent consideration within the Council has centred on the vital questions of the size and distribution of the proposed fund.
At the Council meeting on 17th-18th December, 1973, it was agreed to resume discussions in the month of January, 1974, since it was not possible, following examination in depth of the basic problems arising in respect of the proposed regional development fund, to arrive at a satisfactory decision prior to the deadline of 1st January, 1974, set by the Paris Summit Conference of 19th-20th October, 1972, and by the Copenhagen Summit Conference on 14th-15th December, 1973.
Following further exploration of the positions of the various member States, it was agreed at the Council meeting on 30th January, 1974, to invite the Commission to submit to the Council revised proposals in respect of the fund for consideration at a special meeting which was originally to have been held on 18th February, 1974. This meeting has now been postponed and a revised date has yet to be agreed.
Will the Minister accept that the attitude of the Council towards the regional fund is tied up with, for instance, the energy crisis within the Community?
I am not sure what the Deputy means by "tied up with". There was a form of linkage established by the British Government for a brief period between agreeing to establish the energy committee and agreeing to a regional fund but at the last meeting—I think it was—they withdrew that linkage. Whether countries in the attitude they adopt are in any way motivated by considerations connected with the energy crisis is something on which I could not express a view.
Is the Minister aware of the statement made by Chancellor Brandt prior to the Copenhagen Summit in which he said that if the Community could not reach a common position on the energy crisis the Rome Treaty was not worth the paper it was written on? Is that not an indication that this common stance is a condition of developments in this and in other areas?
I think certain countries, particularly Germany and the Netherlands, are very concerned with that point of view and, indeed, have expressed it quite strongly but that problem has to a large extent been overcome since then as the withdrawal of the British linkage indicates. Although the Washington Conference cannot be said to have been successful from the Community's point of view, in view of the division between one country and the other eight in the formulation of the final communiqué, the difficulties to which the German Chancellor referred at that time seem to have been somewhat mitigated at Washington.
I am impressed by the Minister's optimism. I appreciate that this is a major issue which cannot be resolved at Question Time. Is the Minister now optimistic that these discussions will be concluded towards the implementation of an effective regional fund which would have significant benefits for Ireland?
I think that the division in the Community at Washington does create a problem for reaching agreement on a number of items although it may, perhaps, have ameliorated some German problems vis-á-vis some of the other Member States. It does create a fresh problem which quite evidently has been an obstacle already to holding the meeting that was to have taken place last Monday to settle this issue. In view of the cancellation of that meeting and the fact that we have not yet fixed an alternative date, I would not want to express great optimism on a solution in the immediate future. At the same time, I do not want to suggest that this is impossible or necessarily unlikely but I do not want to mislead the House into thinking that the present situation in the Community is satisfactory or conducive to reaching agreement on a major issue of this kind.
One last supplementary—I understand that this is not a matter within the control of the Minister or of all of them—but the Minister will recollect that from time to time in the course of negotiations and discussions he has expressed optimism as to what was happening at these consultations. Does the Minister now accept that the grounds for his optimism were apparently not there in fact?
I have expressed the view that the Irish share as originally proposed was inadequate, that we could not agree to any solution that did not significantly increase that and I expressed myself as hopeful as to our success in achieving such an increase. I remain hopeful on that point, but what has happened is that in the last month or two difficulties have arisen about the size of the fund which is a separate and new issue, rather than the question of the Irish share. That is an aspect of it about which I am pessimistic but I am quite optimistic that if and when they come to agree on the size of the fund a solution will be found which will be significantly more favourable to Ireland than the solution originally proposed.
If the size of the fund can be——
I am sorry, Deputy. The Deputy has already said this is a major issue which cannot be debated at Question Time. Question No. 19, please.
The German Government did not indicate its tentative doubts about the size of the fund or give any indication about these from the month of July until I think the month of September. That attitude caused a lot of confusion because we did not expect that attitude and no indication was given that it was likely to be so firmly held.
Could the Minister——
No. 19. I am sorry, Deputy. The Chair has given quite a lot of time to this matter. Please obey the Chair. Question No. 19, please.
When I know when the next meeting is I may be able to help the Deputy but at the moment there is uncertainty about it.
19.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will indicate the amount of the moneys likely to be made available from the EEC Regional Fund for arterial drainage purposes.
The Council of Ministers is considering at present proposals from the Commission of the European Communities for the establishment of a regional development fund and the conditions under which it will operate. Until agreement is reached on such matters as the eventual size and the manner of distribution of the proposed fund's resources it is not possible to supply at this time the information sought by the Deputy. However, the general tendency of expenditure from the fund will be to create industrial employment or infrastructures related closely to industrial development so that expenditure on arterial drainage will remain a matter solely for national administration.
Would the Minister press for money to be made available, taking into consideration the importance of drainage and settlement generally?
We have been pressing for a wide definition of infrastructural investment for the purposes of this fund but that is resisted by a number of countries who wish to confine the fund to industrial investment and infrastructural investment closely related to particular industrial projects. That is why I do not express optimism about arterial drainage being brought within it.
Agriculture is a very important industry and should be included in the term "industry".
The position here is that agriculture is excluded because it is covered by the FEOGA Fund and the regional fund is intended to deal with industry and services such as tourism, not with agriculture.
Could the Minister say whether in any proposals put forward by the Government for assistance under any of the funds, say the social fund or some of the others, arterial drainage has been included?
That is a separate question but the FEOGA Fund and its distribution was largely, if not completely determined before we adhered to the Community. What the Deputy is really asking is whether arterial drainage can be financed by assistance from the FEOGA Fund. That is a separate question which I would not attempt to answer here.
Have the Government prepared any scheme in anticipation of funds being available from the regional fund?
In regard to the use of the regional fund?
Yes.
Certainly the Government are preparing a scheme in order to ensure, when the fund becomes available, that we can get into business quickly and make sure we get our full share.
Could the Minister tell us what schemes have been prepared? We were told that you could not prepare a scheme in advance of funds being allocated but now the Minister has told us that they have prepared a scheme.
Deputy O'Kennedy may not make a statement. I am calling Deputy Callanan for one final supplementary.
The Minister said to me on a previous occasion that you could not draw up schemes until such time as the fund was available.
We cannot have an argument of this kind.
I said the work was in progress on the preparation of schemes. Obviously you cannot complete them until you know the precise terms of the fund. That is self-evident.
Is the Minister aware that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance gave me a very straight answer when he said there was no money available from the EEC for drainage? I want to know what effort has been made to see that money is made available because it is vital to the survival of the west of Ireland that money be made available. We were told in a straight answer that money was not available for the Board of Works.
That is a separate question. There is no fund at the moment in existence or proposed by the Commission from which money could be available. I say that subject to correction on the question of arterial drainage because I have not the information here. So far as funds are concerned there must be a proposal by the Commission to establish a fund. The question here relates to the regional fund and as far as it is concerned I have indicated that it does not look as if arterial drainage can be financed from that.