I was commenting on a newspaper report, which indicated that the spokesman for the Opposition would be the director of elections for the Opposition. I was not elevating him to parliamentary status in Strasbourg.
While fully appreciating Parliament's role it is only natural that a small country like Ireland, represented by only 15 out of 434 European members, should be cautious about any moves that would impinge on the powers of our national institutions of Government. Development of the institutions of the Community in line with changed circumstances is to be welcomed but must proceed hand in hand with mutual solidarity between member states and with the promotion of economic convergence, which is an objective both in the Preamble to the Treaty of Rome, and in the Treaty of Accession insofar as Ireland is concerned.
The complementary institution to the Parliament is the Economic and Social Committee. In most cases before a Commission proposal can be adopted by the Council it is sent for the opinion of the ESC. The committee is a consultative body composed of 15 per cent representatives from employers, trade unions and other groups directly interested in Community activities such as farmers and consumers.
The committee was reconstituted according to the normal four-year cycle on 18 September 1982. Ireland's nine seats were allocated on the authority of the Government to representatives of the employer, trade union, agriculture and social sectors. The Irish representatives on the committee therefore represent a cross-section of our society and we are fortunate to be able to avail of their contribution to the process of Community legislation.
Turning now to the Community's external relations, the period under review saw continued strains on the world trading system. The Community and its major trading partners have in general avoided a protectionist response to these strains, and at the GATT Ministerial meeting held towards the end of November 1982 delegates adopted a declaration which reaffirmed commitment to overcome protectionist pressure and resolved to support and, indeed, improve the GATT trading system. Avoidance of protectionism and "beggar-my-neighbour" policies is essential for Ireland, with our small open and, consequently, vulnerable economy.
This, however, is not to say that no difficulties were experienced during that time. Deputies will recall that in the dispute with the United States over European steel exports an agreement was reached in October 1982. More recently, however, the United States took measures which have, in effect, limited its imports of specialty steels from the Community. A satisfactory accommodation, possibly in the form of compensation for other products, is being pursued in this case.
The United States and other trading partners, such as Australia and New Zealand, have also criticised aspects of the Community's agricultural trade policy. This was an important issue at the GATT Ministerial meeting in November 1982 where the Community resisted pressure for commitment on the limitation of export subsidies. The differences between the Community and the US have become more acute following the subsidised US sale of one million tonnes of wheat flour and 24,000 tonnes of dairy products to Egypt in January and July 1983. The Community views these sales as infringing GATT rules and has been using GATT channels to make its dissatisfaction felt and to seek redress. The Government will seek to ensure that the Community's right to a fair share of the world market in agricultural produce, which was confirmed in the Tokyo Round negotiations, is maintained.
The growth in the Community's trading imbalance with Japan was also a matter of serious concern in the period under review. Deputies will appreciate that for certain member states which manufacture goods such as motor cars, television sets etc. which are in direct competition with Japanese goods, this is a very sensitive matter. The Community has therefore sought to encourage Japan to open its markets to imports of manufactured goods. I am encouraged by the steps which the Japanese Government has taken in this respect. It has shown a growing understanding of the concern with which Japan's trade surplus is viewed by its trading partners.
During the particular period under review little progress was made in the area of co-operation between the developed countries of the North and the developing countries of the South. Since then, however, certain positive developments must be noted in the preparatory work for launching the proposed round of Global Negotiations on Economic Co-operation for Development. The second Brandt Commission report, Common Crisis, the OECD work on world economic interdependence, the Commonwealth Secretariat paper The North South Dialogue; making it work, the statement from the Non-aligned Summit in New Delhi in April, having all helped to keep the dialogue alive and to point the way towards future progress. The very fact that UNCTAD VI in Belgrade in June 1983 produced a modest body of work is in itself considered a relative success.
The Council took note of progress already achieved in implementing operations in support of food strategies in the three initial beneficiary countries of Mali, Kenya, and Zambia and in a move welcomed by Ireland, agreed to the extension of Community support in this matter to Rwanda. For the information of Deputies, this programme aims to address the problem of increasing food deficiencies in developing countries. It is innovative however in that it goes beyond the provision of food aid and involves also measures to boost agricultural production within developing countries. This integrated approach is intended to avert the danger that straight-forward food aid may act as a disincentive to production, in developing countries.
I, and this country generally, strongly support this new approach. I am very hopeful that it will be successful and, if it is, that it will be extended to many of the countries. Basically, while food aid fills a temporary gap, the only real solution to the problem of hunger in the Third World is to encourage self-sufficiency in those countries, to encourage them to develop their own capacity to feed themselves. I see in this particular programme of the EEC the seeds of such an approach which, hopefully, will lead to fruition.
Ireland welcomed the submission of the Commission Memorandum on Development Policy which was discussed at some length at the Council (Development Co-operation) on 8 November 1982, at the Council (Foreign Affairs) on 22-23 November 1982 and on 3-4 December 1982 at the European Council, and which stressed the importance of proposals for Council decisions on priority questions such as the negotiation of the new ACP-EEC Convention.
Ireland welcomed the continued awareness on the part of the Community of the important contribution made by Food Aid to development, as evidence by the Council decision of 3 December 1982 to increase from 927,663 tonnes to one million tonnes the amount of cereals aid to developing countries by way of Community Action. The Food Aid Framework Regulation, which made for greater stabilisation of food aid actions, was also agreed at this time.
Final negotiations on an International Agreement on Jute and Jute Products, 1982, were concluded at an International Conference held in Geneva, 20 September — 1 October 1982. While the Instrument of Ratification of the International Agreement on Jute and Jute Products 1982 was deposited by Ireland on 28 June 1983, this agreement did not enter into force as expected on 1 July 1983, because certain countries had not become members by the deadline of 30 June 1983. It is now very likely that members of the agreement will meet early in January 1984 in Dacca and decide to bring the agreement into force among themselves, even if it does not have the level of membership stipulated in the agreement.
The Common Fund for Commodities has been open for signature at the UN headquarters since 1 October 1980. It still remains for the Agreement to enter into force since it must be ratified, accepted or approved by a minimum of 90 States, accounting for at least two thirds of the Fund's Directly Contributed Capital of $US470 million. By 30 September 1983 the Agreement had been signed by 110 states and ratified by 64 states accounting for only 41.466 per cent of the fund's capital. While the conditions for entry into force have not yet been fulfilled, it remains only for those states which have already ratified the Agreement to decide on a new period for the fulfilment of the requirements for entry into force of the Agreement.
As the report states the Commission proposals for agriculture products and on certain related measures for the 1983-84 marketing year were presented to the Council by the Commission on 23 December last. Although details of the outcome of these discussions will be contained in the next report, it would I feel be appropriate to say a few words about the outcome.
Agreement on prices was eventually reached at the Council of Agriculture Ministers on 16-17 May last. During the course of the seven Council meetings which led to this agreement, certain adjustments to the Commission proposals were made. Broadly speaking, I believe that the eventual outcome was very good for our agriculture in general and represents a considerable success for the Government.
Price increases were agreed across virtually the whole range of our produce to give an average increase of 9½ per cents. This included an adjustment of the "green rate" for the Irish pound by 3.8 per cent initially and a further 1.2 per cent from June. The increase for our main products was as follows: milk, 7.5 per cent; beef, 10.8 per cent; sheepmeat, 13.7 per cent; cereals, 8.2 per cent; pig-meat, 10.8 per cent and sugar 9.2 per cent.
In addition the calf premium which was due to expire was continued together with the suckler cow premium. Together there are worth £47 million and were continued in spite of some opposition during the negotiations.
As regards milk the price increase was below the average level because of the operation of the production threshold arrangement provided for in the 1982-83 farm price settlement. Nevertheless, it represented an extra 6.3p per gallon for the dairying industry. In relation to this there was increased FEOGA financing both for school milk and the consumer subsidy on butter which in a full year would benefit this country by some £2½ million.
Overall these price increases will result in approximately £190 million extra for the Irish farm sector in the 1983-84 marketing year. The balance of payments should benefit to the tune of £180 million. The impact on the consumer price index was estimated at 1 per cent in a full year which is very modest for a deal which is of such a substantial benefit to the economy at large. I have outlined some of the main features of the agreement in order to illustrate the commitment of the Government to the agricultural sector and our determination to ensure the continued development of the industry. This is a commitment which is being and will be shown in the current post-Stuttgart negotiations to which I have already referred.
The end of 1982 saw intensive efforts to achieve a Common Fisheries Policy fail. However, in the first weeks of this year a compromise was found which all member states could accept. Difficulties have been encountered in settling the level of the total allowable catches and individual member states' quotas for this year and efforts are continuing to find a solution. It has been generally acknowledged that Ireland did reasonably well in terms of the benefits accruing from the establishment of the CFP. However, a recent decision by the Commission on the abolition of export refunds for mackerel is a retrograde step as far as our fishing industry is concerned. My colleague, the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry, Deputy O'Toole is pursuing efforts to have the position reassessed by the Commission.
The Community's structural funds are important instruments for assisting our future development and the development of the Community as a whole. While the Stuttgart Mandate includes three funds, the Regional Fund, the Social Fund and the Agricultural Fund (FEOGA) follow-up work at present is being concentrated on the Regional Fund. The Commission's proposals for the Regional Fund are complex and we are at present considering all the implications for Ireland and for the Community. However, it is clear that the major problem with the Regional Fund is that its resources are inadequate for its task, that is, to reduce the gaps between the richest and the poorest regions of the Community. This is one of the points we are making forcefully in the present negotiations.
In the field of energy, the most significant development was the drop in the price of crude oil in the world market. While it is agreed that such a trend has an adverse effect on the search for alternative sources of energy and fuel switching, nevertheless such a saving was welcomed by this country. The drop of a few dollars in the price of oil, however, had no effect on worthwhile projects such as the search for indigenous sources of oil and gas, construction of the coal-burning generating stations or the building of the pipeline for the distribution of gas. If present exploration efforts continue and lead to major results, we might take a different approach to the question of oil but not at present.
The role of solid fuels received very active attention from us during this period because of a proposal to grant-aid peat in addition to coal and lignite. In the area of coal we supported the viewpoint of some delegations that the production aid proposals should be counter-balanced by Community assistance for the use, infrastructures and distribution facilities connected with coal.
A most important development, in the transport sphere, during this period was the adoption of a regulation granting limited financial support in the field of transport infrastructure. While the amount allocated under the 1982 regulation was limited to 10 million ECU and aided only three projects, its real significance lies in the fact that this was the first occasion on which discussions on the question of establishing a transport infrastructure fund, which began in 1976, culminated in the actual disbursement of aid. While no Irish project benefited from this particular regulation, two of our projects are at present being considered for inclusion in a proposal for a programme of infrastructure aid which is currently under discussion. In the long term we are striving to ensure that Ireland will share, to the maximum extent possible, in any general improvement in the Community's transport network brought about as a result of the operations of the Transport Infrastructure Fund although the amounts of money so far provided are quite small.
The European Parliament in December 1982 rejected a supplementary budget which would have given budgetary effect to a Council decision of 26 October 1982 that certain reimbursements should be made to the United Kingdom and Germany. The Parliament's main objection was to these types of ad hoc measures being funded through the budget. Parliament would prefer to see problems of budgetary imbalance as between member states being solved by a balanced development of Community expenditure policies rather than by repayment to individual member states.
In January 1983 the Commission proposed a further supplementary budget, this time to the 1983 budget, which would go some way towards meeting the preoccupations of the Parliament. In this supplementary budget 400 million ECU of 1,092 million ECU destined for the UK would be put with the 210 million ECU destined for Germany — if Deputies have a problem following the figures I would refer them to paragraph 3.3 of the report — in a budget heading for special measures of Community interest in the energy sector in those two countries. Further, the conditions for disbursing the funds would be so defined as to give Parliament greater control over the expenditure. The Commission also proposed a further 35 million ECU for expenditure on energy projects of a general nature, that is, not confined to specific countries. Finally the proposed supplementary budget would be financed entirely from positive balances on the receipts side of the 1981 and 1982 budgets, that is, it would not require any increase in the receipts side of the 1983 budget.
Following agreement by the Council and the Parliament to the Commission's proposal the President of the Parliament declared the supplementary budget as adopted on 10 February 1983.
The Twenty-First Report contains a summary review of developments in European Political Co-operation during the period under review. In general European political co-operation proceeded in a satisfactory manner.
The Solemn Declaration, signed at Stuttgart in June, which I referred to earlier, aims among other things at improving the effectiveness of European political cooperation — the process whereby the member states consult and co-ordinate on foreign policy. I should say that the adoption of the Solemn Declaration does not entail any extension of the scope of foreign policy co-operation. Rather the text sets out practical ways and means in which this process may be strengthened and made more coherent.
The major upheavals which took place in the Middle East during the period under review have had repercussions which are still being felt today. The tragic events that have occurred in Lebanon in recent weeks, and are continuing even as we speak, are part of the continuing consequences of Israel's invasion of Lebanon in June 1982. The Ten have made clear their support for the territorial integrity of Lebanon and have stressed the need for national reconciliation and for early progress towards the complete withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon, except those whose presence is requested by the Lebanese Government. The Ten welcome very much the decision of the rival groupings in Lebanon to engage in reconciliation talks in Geneva and hope that these will lead to national reconciliation. The Ten are convinced that the abnormal situation there is a further obstacle to the achievement of a just and lasting settlement in the Middle East as a whole.
On 21-22 March 1983 the Ten emphasised that, above all, the time had come for Israel to show that it stood ready for genuine negotiations on the basis of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, in the first place by refraining from enlarging existing settlements in the occupied territories or creating new ones. These settlements are contrary to international law and a major and growing obstacle to peace.
East-West relations have deteriorated steadily in the past few years. Such events as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, the imposition of martial law in Poland in 1981 and, most recently, the shooting down of the Korean airliner have eroded confidence. It is clear that a genuine and sincere dialogue is now required to promote a climate of stability and predictability in East-West relations. In this regard there is an overriding and urgent need for the United States and the Soviet Union to halt the deterioration in their political relationship and to replace the current mood of challenge and confrontation by a process of dialogue leading to agreement. It is to be hoped that, with sufficient political will on both sides, the dangerous tensions that exist today can be dispelled and replaced by a revival of the spirit of détente.
The situation in Poland, and the negative impact of that situation on East-West relations generally, continues to be a cause of major concern. Martial law was imposed in Poland in December 1981, and the Ten, both jointly and individually, expressed their disapproval of this development. The Council of the European Communities also demonstrated its disapproval of the pressure exerted by the Soviet Union against efforts for renewal in Poland, by placing a limit on the importation of a wide range of goods from the Soviet Union. The Heads of State and Government of the Ten, meeting in Stuttgart on 17-19 June, of this year, expressed their conviction that only a national reconciliation which took full account of the aspirations of the Polish people could lead Poland out of its grave crisis. On 22 July of this year, the Polish Government formally ended the state of martial law and announced an amnesty for the majority of political prisoners then held in detention. Nevertheless, the Polish Government subsequently incorporated into domestic legislation repressive measures which maintained the spirit of martial law.
The Government, in common with the other governments of the Ten, will continue to follow closely developments in Poland, and the nature of the Ten's relations with Poland will be determined by the extent to which the Polish Government may be ready to pursue a policy of reconciliation with the Polish people.
The Madrid Follow-up Meeting to the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) completed its work on 9 September. The work of the Conference, which began in 1980, took place against the backdrop of a steady deterioration in East-West relations. Nevertheless, in Ireland's view, shared by the other members of the Ten, the concluding document agreed at the conference is both balanced and substantial. The concluding document contains worthwhile improvements on the provisions contained in the Helsinki Final Act of 1975. The most notable advances concern the guarantee of the right to form free trade unions and of their right to exercise freely their activities; the further elaboration of provisions to facilitate human contacts; and the decision to convene a conference on confidence — and Security-Building Measures in Europe (CDE) which will begin work in Stockholm in January 1984. The concluding document marks the first major agreement to have been reached by the US and the Soviet Union since the unratified Salt II Agreement of 1979. It is to be hoped that the measure of agreement contained in the concluding document, given sufficient goodwill to exploit it, could mark the beginning of a return to stability and predictability in East-West relations after the reverses which the détente process has suffered in recent years.
I now turn to the question of relations between the Ten and Third Countries, including the USA. The increasingly significant role of the Ten on the world stage is reflected in the growing desire of third countries or groups of countries to establish contact with them. Over the years the Ten have developed contacts with a wide range of countries in a pragmatic and to a great extent informal way. The period covered by the Twenty-first Report saw the expansion of contacts between the Ten and the United States with the establishment of regular twice-yearly consultations at the level of the EPC Troika, comprising representatives of the past, present and future Presidencies. These consultations have proceeded smoothly.
In Asia, the situation in Afghanistan remains a source of grave international concern and seriously affects the stability of the whole region. The Soviet intervention has caused great suffering to the Afghan people and forced millions to seek refuge in neighbouring countries. Ireland and its partners in the Ten regret that, despite the overwhelming support at each successive United Nations General Assembly for the resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of all foreign forces and reaffirming the right of the Afghan people to determine their own form of government, the occupying forces continue to ignore the terms of the resolution. This disregard for the UN Resolutions has in no small way contributed to the lack of progress of the UN initiative, diligently pursued by the Secretary-General's special representative, Mr. Cordovez, which contained very positive elements in a genuine attempt to find a settlement to the Afghan problem.
The Ten are concerned at the continuing situation of stalemate in Kampuchea. Ireland and its partners have consistently supported successive UN resolutions calling for the withdrawal of foreign troops, the right of the Kampuchean people to determine their own future and a commitment by all states to non-interference and non-intervention in the internal affairs of Kampuchea. The Ten regret deeply that, despite these resolutions being passed by the overwhelming majority of the assembly, all efforts to end the occupation of Kampuchea have foundered on the refusal of Vietnam to comply.
The Ten will continue to support any initiative which aims at a just and lasting peaceful solution to the Kampuchean problem and restores peace and stability to South East Asia.
The Ten are deeply worried by the delay in granting independence to Namibia and the continuation of apartheid in South Africa. The longer these issues remain unresolved, the more likely it is that change will be brought about by violent rather than peaceful means. However, it is clear that South Africa is determined to resist all attempts at progress.
Most recently, the South African Government has entrenched apartheid in a new constitution which was approved by the all white electorate on 2 November of this year and which will come into force next year. The new constitution provides for limited participation by the coloured and Indian population in separate parliaments but it continues the policy of total exclusion of the black population. Naturally, the new constitution has been denounced by the leaders of black opposition movements in South Africa. It deserves our denunciation too. Democracy can be delayed, but it will not be denied. Our concern and that of our Community partners is that it should be achieved peacefully and soon.
The South African Government continues to block progress towards Namibian independence by insisting on linking it to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola. At the same time South African occupation of part of Angola and their support for terrorism there forces the Angolan Government into continued dependence on Cuban assistance. The linkage of these two issues has been condemned by virtually every country in the world, most recently last month in the UN Security Council which mandated the Secretary-General to continue until the end of the year his efforts to assist progress towards independence for Namibia in accordance with Resolution 435. Ireland supports the Secretary-General's efforts and hopes that he may make some headway in the very difficult task of dealing with an intransigent Government in South Africa.
On the continent of Latin America it is probably fair to say that it is the situation in relation to human, social and political rights in Chile which gives most cause for concern at the moment. The government of that country appear to have little, if any, sensitivity either to the just demands of their own people or to the pressure of international opinion. On the other hand, it is indeed heartening to see in Argentina the establishment of a new and democratic administration. I am sure that Deputies will join me in wishing President-elect Alfonsin every good fortune in tackling the very great political and economic tasks before him and in consolidating democratic institutions in that great country.
I regret to say that, since the end of the period covered by the report, there has been no improvement in the terrible situation in Central America. Human rights violations continue on a massive scale, as do social and economic injustices, and tension within and between certain countries of the region.
In El Salvador conflict continues between the government and guerilla forces. Presidential elections which had been expected to take place in December have been postponed. Concern continues with regard to the human rights situation in Guatemala, in spite of — perhaps the cause of — a change in leadership. Nicaragua has been subjected to attack from guerilla forces operating from Honduras and Costa Rica. There has also been increasing concern in the United States at the situation, and the involvement of that country in the region. The Government continue to believe that the promotion of essential social and economic reforms is the surest, indeed the only, way to achieve long-term peace in Central America.
The Taoiseach joined with the other Heads of State and Government of the Ten Community countries in Stuttgart on 17-19 June 1983 in expressing their conviction that the problems of Central America cannot be solved by military means, but only by a political solution springing from the region itself and respecting the principles of non-interference and inviolability of frontiers.
Ireland, in common with the other member states of the European Community, sees a particular cause for hope in the efforts of the Contadora Group of countries to achieve a lasting peace in Central America. The fact that the countries engaged in these efforts all belong to the region itself is an added reason for hoping that they will persevere and be successful. I am glad to note therefore that there has recently been progress by the Contadora Group towards reaching agreement with the countries of Central America on the principles that should govern relations between the countries of that region.
The regional issue which most occupies public attention at the moment is clearly that of the armed intervention in Grenada on 25 October by the United States and other forces. The Government's attitude to this event has already been made clear, both in this House and outside it. We consider that the action cannot be reconciled with the Provision of the United Nations Charter which prescribes that states . . .
shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.
Nonetheless, what is important now is to achieve at the earliest possible time the return of democratic government to the island and the withdrawal of foreign forces. In this connection, I am glad to note from the UN Secretary-General's recent report on conditions in Grenada that it is intended to proceed to elections in which all political parties will be able to participate and that the United States have indicated their intention to withdraw from the island.
That, then, is a sketch of the major developments in the Community for the last six months of 1982. I have also made reference to important issues which have arisen since that time. If Deputies have questions to put on any of the aspects touched on in my statement, or indeed any issues of Community interest, I will be glad to try to respond at the earliest opportunity.
As a commentary on the events I have outlined, I would suggest that the Community has now reached the crunch and has been forced to face the issues which will decide its future. In playing its part in this self-examination. Ireland, together with other member states who value what the Community stands for and could stand for, has tried to have attention focussed on the positive elements which could emerge from this critical review. The opportunity exists for the Community to decide whether it wants to develop as a re-invigorated force on the world scene or whether it prefers to become a club whose members pay in so much for a range of limited services rendered.
Of course it is not easy for any one in a time of recession to commit himself to a vision which may seem to be hopelessly out of touch with current realities. But the institutions and each member state of the Community have a duty to defend the vision contained in the Treaties. It could be said cynically that Ireland need only have narrow self-interest at heart to mount any defence of the Treaties. It is certainly true that we would deny anyone the right to alter radically the terms upon which we entered the Community. However, I think that we in this country would go further. We maintain that no one has a right to call a halt to the ideal which motivated the founders of the Community. In pressing our own legitimate interests we see no conflict in pursuing that ideal.
