asked the Taoiseach the total number on the live register in Cork city and county at the end of March in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Cork Unemployment.
1.
The total number of persons on the live register residing in Cork city and county at the end of March for the years concerned are as follows:
30th March, 1973—5,364; 29th March, 1974—4,852; 28th March, 1975 —8,475; 26th March, 1976—9,611.
2.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if, in conjunction with the British Government or otherwise, he will propose to the Council of the European Community that special loans and grant assistance be given from the European Community to assist in eradicating the social and economic problems of Northern Ireland.
As the interests of Northern Ireland are represented in the European Communities by the British Government, it would not be appropriate for the Minister to make representations to the institutions of the European Communities for special assistance confined to that area. A joint approach can arise in the case of a cross-Border project and in this connection I would direct the Deputy's attention to the reply given to yesterday's Question No. 28.
I take it the Parliamentary Secretary will accept that within the terms of the Community itself it has been concerned to eliminate regional imbalances and that this cannot be done where there is civil or political unrest of the nature we have in the North of Ireland. In view of that would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that, even acting within its own principles, the Community should have a concern for the social disorders in the North of Ireland and that our Government, either informally or otherwise—in a spirit of co-operation—could call on the Community to actively assist in the area?
I certainly agree that the Community ought to have a concern but that concern ought to be called forth in concrete terms, in the first instance, by the Government which enjoys sovereignty over that area and that, unfortunately, is not us. To do otherwise would be to invite a rebuttal from the Community in the first place, a complaint from the other Government concerned in the second and would probably cause a great deal of resentment among the population of the area, with which we are all concerned, in the third place. As I said yesterday in connection with a similar question, although the burden of the Deputy's concern is shared by the Government the legality and propriety of doing what the Deputy appears to want the Government to do is not evident.
The Parliamentary Secretary must have misread both the actual wording and intention of my question because I do say: "in conjunction with the British Government". I want to make it quite clear that I say this in the spirit of recognising the obligations and rights of both Governments. I do think the Government should recognise that——
I want to help the Deputy to elicit information but I must dissuade him from making speeches.
Do the Government not recognise that there cannot be normal economic development of the kind that the European Economic Community has set as its own standard until such time as very positive steps are taken by the Community, at the request of whoever may be involved, responsible or concerned? That is all I am asking because it is very evident——
Order.
I am saying this seriously and I think the Parliamentary Secretary accepts it—that the North of Ireland is in——
I am sorry, Deputy O'Kennedy.
It is a very serious question.
It is a serious question and I want to assist the Deputy but he must conform to the Standing Orders of the House in pursuing the matter.
I appreciate the Ceann Comhairle may be endeavouring to assist me but I do not find the assistance very effective.
If the Deputy would co-operate with the Chair it would be very evident.
I think what I am trying to bring out is much more important than what is between the Chair and a Member of the House. Does the Parliamentary Secretary not recognise that we are dealing with a position where a part of the North of Ireland is in fact in a sense under represented in the Community and, in view of that, is there not a special obligation on both Governments to speak on every possible occasion, to promote their interests on every possible occasion, and is the Parliamentary Secretary telling me that is beyond the function of our Government?
As I said yesterday in reply to a question, of course at a certain level, at the level of informal, but nonetheless extremely important, diplomatic and personal contacts it may be possible effectively to pass the points of view the Deputy has expressed, points of view from which I do not dissent, but at the level represented here in this question, namely, whether we propose to the Council of the Community that special local grants be given to Northern Ireland, the answer is "no" because the sovereign Government responsible for Northern Ireland and so described in the Accession Treaty which we also signed is the British Government for better or for worse.
Question No. 3.
I am referring to joint help.
There is no question but that scope for joint help and benevolent activity bearing on Northern Ireland exist in the case of projects spanning the Border. I gave details of two such projects yesterday in reply to the Deputy and I explained why it took so long to bring the projects into being. We could not get the British Government to agree about the size of one project in which we would have been interested. It was a fairly big one and not something minuscule. We have got agreement now on two fairly big cross-Border studies and, I hope, in the end more concrete projects, and we are glad to have got that and in that context scope exists for joint activity, joint representations and joint proposals to the Community but that is the only context. Leaving aside our own political and emotional interest in the North of Ireland, unilaterally telling the Community what they should do in regard to the territory of another sovereign Government would, I think, do more harm than good and would be to invite a rebuff.
We cannot debate this matter at Question Time. Deputy Blaney may ask one final supplementary.
Is there inherent in that reply by the Parliamentary Secretary a clear definition of the Government's attitude to our constitutional claim to the Six Counties, that we are now reneging on that and sheltering under the umbrella of our signing the Treaty of Accession.
That is an extension of the question.
The Deputy expects a Minister's attitude to all things on the earth to be a seamless garment. It cannot, of course, be that. What I am saying is that in the context on which this question bears—namely, the possibility of activating the European Community towards eliminating the conditions about which the Deputy quite rightly complains—we cannot with legality or propriety undertake a unilateral step. I have explained that as well as I can. I also explained it yesterday.
Question No. 3.
I was not talking of unilateral steps.
Question No. 3.
Then what is the Deputy talking about?
Order. I have called the next question.