asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he has any plans to report regularly to Dáil Éireann on the progress of the current round of GATT negotiations; and if so, when he will next give a report on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions Oral Answers. - GATT Negotiations.
7.
Since it commenced I have ensured that the position on the current round of GATT negotiations, known as the Uruguay Round, is described in the twice yearly reports made to the Houses of the Oireachtas on Developments in the European Communities. I understand that the report covering the period from January to June 1987 will be presented shortly and that for the second half of 1987 will be presented later this year.
In addition, I intend to bring the Dáil up to date on the subject in my speech on the Estimates for my Department which will be debated in the near future.
The Deputy will wish to know that, as part of the negotiations, it has been decided to have a mid-term ministerial review of progress in December 1988. I also intend to report to the House, at that stage, on the state of progress. If he would like it I will be glad to send the Deputy a list of the different issues being covered in the Uruguay Round.
Does the Minister fully support the Community's position in regard to agriculture in this round? Will he indicate the Government's position on liberalisation in regard to services contained in this round? Will he further indicate his view of the proposal by the US in the context of this round that all aid of any kind to agriculture should be abolished by the end of the century? Finally, does he agree that it would be desirable, given the central importance of the issues in this round, for a special debate to take place, if necessary with strict time limits on speakers and so forth, for perhaps two hours some time before the summer recess — on the GATT round specifically?
They are four key questions. We do, of course, support the European Community direction in its approach in the GATT talks. It is expected to take some time. There is talk of three or four years before these things come to a head. The Deputy can take it that we fully support the European Community direction on this, particularly in regard to agriculture.
Some members regard agriculture as a fast track priority and others do not, and we are very much in the league which says that one does not rush this approach in the agricultural area for reasons which I know are obvious to the Deputy. We do support the EC, particularly in the agricultural area.
At the opposite end of the scale to agriculture, I think it is unlikely that discussions on services will move for a long time on liberalisation. Talks seem to be concentrated at the moment on means of achieving liberalisation of services. It is very unlikely that that will move very fast. I will certainly keep the Deputy informed about it.
In regard to the USA, again Ireland has a particular interest in the agricultural area. We will ensure that the European Community are very well aware of Ireland's sensitivities in the agricultural area and we would be quite worried about the United States proposal in regard to agriculture and will ensure that action is taken regarding a special debate, that is something I would not be able to agree to without consulting the Whips.
May I ask the Minister if he would investigate the possibility of giving his Government's support to a proposal I made at the OECD meeting in Paris in 1986 to the effect that members of the GATT who are indirectly affected by some voluntary deal between two other members, for instance, the semiconductor deal between the US and Japan, that third party members should be able to take action in the context of GATT against these voluntary arrangements given that, at present, voluntary arrangements of this kind are being used to circumvent the GATT distance entirely? Would he consider that Ireland should try to take a lead on this issue, a hope I expressed in the contribution I made at the meeting in question.
I agree with the Deputy that that area of bilateralism is a problem. I will undertake to give very serious consideration to his proposal which is a very thoughtful one. We will see if it can be moved up on the agenda.
Can the Minister say what his specific priorities are in connection with these negotiations? I appreciate that it will take a few years but surely he would agree that certain things should be happening very shortly.
If the Deputy reads the detail he will see that this is a very complicated area so I do not blame him for not reading it at night. I am not sure that we would want things to happen very fast. We might prefer if things did not happen that quickly particularly in relation to the proposals which are in the air in regard to rendering agricultural aid.
I asked about the Minister's specific areas.
I think we should have a debate on this.
Not now.