asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the remarks attributed to the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs on a "Today Tonight" programme that he and the Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs did not object when matters relating to defence were discussed at a meeting of the EPC.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Discussions at EPC Meeting.
41.
The Deputy will be aware that defence questions fall outside the scope of European Political Co-operation and cannot, therefore, be discussed in EPC. This was the situation before drafting of the Single European Act and remains the position now that it has been signed and will be when it is ratified. This is acknowledged by all the member states.
Before asking a supplementary, may I say that I have one priority question only on today's Order Paper. Another one I had down you ruled out of order, Sir, because a similar question had been asked on 24 March last. In relation to Questions Nos. 59, 34 and 4 similar questions were asked on 24 March last, yet they are on the Order Paper but mine is not. I draw it to your attention, Sir. I should like to discuss with you some time what is the difference between the two.
I will be glad to do so with the Deputy. I am sure there is a very good and cogent reason.
In response to the Minister's reply to Question No. 41, was the allegation made on the "Today Tonight" programme incorrect, that the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark said that for the first time an Irish Minister had allowed a discussion on defence matters to take place in EPC?
In fact, the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs does not agree that that is specifically what he said. However, that is another day's work. I am not here to defend the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs. As the Deputy is well aware, in any formal meetings on European Political Co-operation defence and military matters are not raised. If the debate on European Political Co-operation tends to move into that area, the Irish Foreign Minister, or indeed often the Danish Foreign Minister, raises an objection to it. This does not at all prevent — at informal meetings which the former Minister will have attended also — informal conversations taking place between the Ministers of countries, members of NATO or the Western European Union, concerning their own matters. That takes place side-by-side, in an informal way. We are not involved in those discussions. I hope that puts it clearly, that at formal meetings these do not arise but in informal discussions between countries members of NATO or the WEU they can arise within an informal framework or setting.
Does the Minister accept I appreciate that at informal gatherings of members any discussions can take place but the allegation was that at an EPC meeting the Irish Minister remained quiet while matters of defence were being discussed? Whether or not that is so, would the Minister not consider it his duty to stop any discussion like that taking place at EPC meetings?
Yes, I concur with that view, at a formal meeting of the EPC——
——or even at an informal meeting over lunch——
——it is my duty to do so, as suggested but it is very difficult to prevent it happening in an informal way. As the Deputy will appreciate, one cannot stand up at the beginning of one's soup course and come back at the end of that course.
The Minister would want to watch it because it can be the thin end of the wedge.
Question No. 42.
I must say that Question No. 42 was referred to earlier and you kindly asked me to restrain myself in anticipation of the Minister's reply.
It was associated with Question No. 20.
In the course of supplementaries and in the course of the Minister's reply to a previous question you yourself, Sir, advised the House that this was a matter for another question.
Question No. 20 was not reached. I said it was associated with it.
But No. 42 is a priority question for answer.
I will answer Questions Nos. 20 and 42 if the House wishes. I am willing to be helpful. Question No. 42 was to be taken with Question No. 20 which was not reached.