Richard Bruton
Question:10 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Taoiseach whether any new initiatives have emerged from his recent talks with the Austrian Chancellor and the Czechoslovak Prime Minister.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Discussions with European Heads of State.
Dick Spring
Question:11 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his recent meeting with the Prime Minister of Czechoslovakia.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:12 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the matters discussed with the Austrian Chancellor during his visit to this country; if the matter of Austrian membership of the EC was discussed; if the Austrian Chancellor sought this country's support for their application; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:13 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed with the Prime Minister of Czechoslovakia, Mr. Marian Calfa, during his visit to this country; if any initiatives are planned in regard to trade, economic or cultural relations between the two countries; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
It is proposed to take Questions Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 13 together.
My discussions here on 9 May with the Czechoslovak Prime Minister, Mr. Marian Calfa, focused on EC/ Czechoslovak relations, bilateral relations between Ireland and Czechoslovakia as well as the unfolding pace of developments in the EC and in Europe generally. The Prime Minister was accompanied by a number of his Ministers, Deputy Ministers and senior officials who had separate discussions with their Irish opposite numbers in a whole range of areas such as economic issues, foreign trade, industry, environment and social affairs and health matters.
As a result of these discussions, arrangements are being made to identify concrete areas of bilateral co-operation and projects covering training, communications and public administration and to co-ordinate joint efforts in the G24 context.
My meeting here on 10 May with the Austrian Chancellor, Dr. Franz Vranitzky, concentrated on EC/EFTA relations, Austria's application for EC membership, developments in Central and Eastern Europe and the CSCE. As I indicated at the joint press conference which we gave following our meeting, Austria's case for EC membership is a very strong one on economic, geographical and cultural grounds but it would be inappropriate for me to comment on this at this stage, pending the submission of the Commission's opinion in accordance with the provisions of Article 237 of the EC Treaty.
I have two questions to the Taoiseach: the first deals with his latter remark in relation to Austria and their proposed application for membership of the EC. I would not consider it inappropriate for the Taoiseach to comment on the possibility of their application, but is it not a fact that the Austrian Chancellor made it very clear that because of the magnitude of the preparations for 1992 Austria will not be putting forward their formal application until after that date? Second, in relation to the visit of the Czechoslovak Prime Minister, does he foresee discussions taking place — as he outlined — in the various areas of foreign trade, industry, social affairs and so on, at an early date between representatives of both Governments?
On the question of Austrian application, the Deputy is quite right, the Austrian Chancellor indicated that he fully understood the position in the Community and that negotiations proper on the Austrian application would not begin before the end of 1992. We had wideranging, fruitful discussions with the Czechoslovaks. These meetings will take place, but it emerged fairly clearly that at this stage the best contribution we can make to the Czechoslovak nation is on the personnel side, that we should try and help out either by sending our people over to Czechoslovakia or bringing people from Czechoslovakia here and giving them appropriate training.
In relation to the Taoiseach's meeting with the Austrian Chancellor, Dr. Vranitzky, can he say whether the question of neutrality arose in the course of those discussions; whether it is clear that the main obstacle to consideration of the Austrian application for membership of the EC is the clear Austrian statement that neutrality is not negotiable; and that they will not under any circumstances become involved in military commitments within the EC? Would the Taoiseach indicate whether our Government support that position and the Austrian Government in the maintenance of their neutrality?
As I said in answer to Deputy Spring — which he accepted — it is not really appropriate at this stage for me to comment on the merits of the Austrian application for membership because we have not received the Commission's report in accordance with Article 237 of the EC Treaty. Austria's position on neutrality is well known and it would not be for me to comment on that. There is no question of my supporting or not supporting Austrian neutrality; that is entirely a matter for the Austrians. I am sure I could say, without any breach of propriety, that is, as I understand it, there is no particular question at this stage of Austrian neutrality being in any way detrimental to their application.
In the context of the Taoiseach's discussions with the Czechoslovak Prime Minister, can he say whether he agrees with the proposals put forward by President Havel in Strasbourg on 10 May to the effect that a northern security zone should be established encompassing the territories currently covered by both the Warsaw Pact and NATO countries, in particular that a European Commission on Security should be established with its headquarters in Prague? Has the Taoiseach had any discussions in regard to these proposals? Can he say whether he is well disposed towards them or otherwise?
They did not in fact arise because we were concentrating mainly on bilateral issues but I have often given my own view which is that the best possible forum in which the security and stability of Europe as a whole can be discussed is the CSCE process. That is still my opinion. In so far as President Havel's proposal would be counter to that, I would not be in a position to support it because I think the best possible avenue for achieving progress in this area is through the CSCE process which is well established and being expanded now into the economic and human rights areas. I really see that as the way in which we can create a new structural framework for security in Europe.
Is the Taoiseach aware that President Havel said in Strasbourg that he wished to see the next meeting of the Conference of Security and Co-operation in Europe take place in Prague with a view to establishing a European Commission headquarters in Prague? Would the Taoiseach indicate whether he is well disposed to this line of thought?
Naturally, one would like to be sympathetic as possible to anything President Havel would say because he is a man for whom I have tremendous admiration. The Deputy will recall that I quoted from his presidential inauguration address in my Árd Fheis speech but I do not think that that——
We had turned off by that stage.
He did not mention that to me when I was talking to him.
I might have to recall the particular part of the speech I quoted from but I would not think that it is the best or most practical line of approach at this stage. In fact the Community has already decided that the CSCE conference should be in Paris, not Prague.
The Taoiseach is against the proposal in other words.
Perhaps a final supplementary from Deputy De Rossa.
May I draw the Taoiseach's attention to the fact that Chancellor Vranitzky in statements to The Irish Times made it clear that he believed some member states regarded Austrian neutrality as an obstacle to their joining the European Community? Would the Taoiseach put it on the record of the House that the Government do not see Austrian neutrality as an obstacle to joining the European Community?
I would have no objection to doing that but I do not wish to do so because to that extent I would be beginning to enter into a discussion or dialogue on the merits or demerits of the Austrian application. I do not particularly want to do that but certainly, as I said, Austrian neutrality is a matter for the Austrians, not for me, to comment on.
That is not quite the reply I am seeking. It is obviously a matter for the Austrians but it is also a matter for the European Community and the member states of the European Community who must judge the application of the Austrians. It is clear Chancellor Vranitzky believes their neutrality is an obstacle and they do not want to give up their neutrality. I am seeking a statement from the Taoiseach of the Government of a country which is neutral that they do not regard Austrian neutrality as an obstacle to their joining the Community.
This is leading to argument and repetition.
I do not wish to be compelled into——
Making up your mind.
——making any statement detrimental to Austrian neutrality because that would be completely alien to my thoughts.
A reply supporting it would not be detrimental.
On the other hand I am not going to be drawn into a discussion here on any aspects of the Austrian application for membership.
Give us a hint.