Questions Nos. 1 and 2 in the name of Deputy John Bruton have been postponed.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers.
Ruairí Quinn
Question:3 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he has any plans to establish a separate Government Department of European Affairs with with its own Secretary and Estimate, independent from the Department of Foreign Affairs to promote and co-ordinate Ireland's interests within the European Community; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs is the member of the Government responsible for the conduct of Ireland's relations within the Community, where he represents us in the General Affairs Council which is the central forum for the conduct of the business of the Council of Ministers. Other Ministers are responsible for EC business within their particular areas of responsibility.
The effective pursuit of Irish interests in the Community is further strengthened by the exercise of co-ordination responsibilities by a Minister of State for European Affairs in my Department who chairs the standing interdepartmental European Co-ordination Committee. The committee reflects the increasing role of the European Council which meets at Head of State or Government level twice a year or more often if necessary.
I do not see any reason to change the existing arrangements which provide an integrated framework for the conduct of our EC relations and our foreign relations generally. EC affairs and foreign relations generally are indeed becoming more, rather than less, closely interwoven.
I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. My question was inspired by the Taoiseach's recognition that there is an information deficit in Europe generally and among Irish people in particular. Having regard to that, would the Taoiseach agree that there is need not for a committee or some kind of integrated framework which is not accountable democratically to this House, but for a separate Department of European Affairs to address the information deficit which the Taoiseach identified during the Maastricht Treaty referendum?
The information deficit would not be solved by a change in the institutional framework, as suggested by the question. A new Department would separate the conduct of our relations with the EC from the rest of our foreign policy leading to less co-ordination. Establishing the new Department would also risk dissipating expertise in EC matters which the Department of Foreign Affairs have built up over the years. I have looked at other member states and found that the Department of Foreign Affairs is primarily responsible for the co-ordination of EC policy. None of the member states has a separate Department of European Affairs. The Minister of State in my Department, Deputy Tom Kitt, co-ordinates the affairs of the various Government Departments more or less on a monthly basis. The information deficit is a different problem. Everybody must play their part in attacking that, not just EC institutions based here but members of the European Parliament who can improve the information flow on what is happening in the Parliament affecting the lives of ordinary citizens.
Will the Taoiseach explain the philosophy behind his Government's thinking which on the one hand espouses European union while at the same time regarding it as foreign affairs issue? At what stage will European union cease to come under foreign affairs and become a domestic affair, like every Government Department? At what stage will that warrant a European affairs Department like the Department of Finance or the Department of Industry and Commerce?
Changing the name of the Department will not correct the problem the Deputy is referring to.
I am talking about dividing functions.
We are talking about an information deficit and changing the structure or the name of the Department will not solve the problem. There are other ways of solving it.
I am not talking about changing the name but about establishing a separate Department, separating the functions of foreign affairs from European affairs. Would the Taoiseach agree that, given the choice of priority, international affairs and Anglo-Irish affairs have priority over European affairs in the Department of Foreign Affairs? That is at the nub of the problem. Until those functions are separated we will not have a Minister with exclusive responsibility for European affairs at the Cabinet table.
I have to disuade Members from the notion that they may debate this matter now.
Will the Taoiseach avoid the use of phrases like "European information deficit" and talk about the public not knowing what is going on, which is what we are really talking about. There is too much "Euro-speak" being introduced into the affairs of this House. I hope we can at least correct that in this House. Pending the implementation of Deputy Quinn's proposal, could we establish a committee on European Affairs and/or Foreign Affairs as quickly as possible, and preferably before we adjourn for the summer recess so that the committees can meet over the summer?
I hope the Whips will be able to put the matter to bed either today or tomorrow. I am not holding it up.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that what is being proposed is a foreign affairs committee which would have a relatively minor responsibility for European affairs but what is urgently required is an Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs which would of right have responsibility for monitoring Government activity at European level and at which Ministers would be obliged to attend to explain their roles at European levels? I believe this is the best way of closing the information gap that exists both at public and Dáil levels.
A similar proposal is being considered by the Whips at present. They are considering the establishment of two sub-committees: a sub-committee on foreign affairs and another sub-committee on European affairs. Provision can be made for members of the European Parliament to attend and contribute to meetings. This would go a long way towards solving the problem we are discussing.
May I put it to the Taoiseach that we are suffering from a democratic rather than an information deficit? When major issues such as the Maastricht Treaty and European Union have to be discussed, would the Taoiseach agree that we should allow adequate time for a proper debate on a motion and that the matter should be debated rather than Members making a series of statements?
It is a matter of ongoing debate whether such subjects are dealt with by questions or in other ways. If, as Deputy Barry suggests, we get rid of "Euro-speak" we should not use terms like "democratic deficit" which is more "Euro-speak" and we should be aiming, as the Council suggested over the weekend, for more application of the subsidiarity rule and for a better understanding and clarification of it.
That is more "Eurospeak".
The Deputy did not wait to hear me finish my reply. We have to explain what the subsidiarity rule is and then clarify it. Decisions have to be taken at the appropriate level. If a decision is best taken at ground level, that is where it should be taken, although in certain cases decisions have to be taken at European level — in other words, we are trying to stop the growth of an anonomous super-State. We are all aiming at that. We are trying to make the decision process more relevant to the lives of ordinary citizens. We are trying to transmit information on what is happening out there through the media and through the process of debates in this House and the members of the European Parliament will have to play a greater role in disseminating information to the general public.
We are dwelling over long on this question to the detriment of all other questions. I will call two more Deputies on the basis that they will be very brief.
Arising directly from the Taoiseach's reply, is he aware there is no ongoing discussion between the Whips on a committee system for European affairs? In response to the Government proposal, the Labour Party suggested setting up two separate committees. Therefore, the matter is now entirely in the hands of the Government to decide to accept our proposal for two separate committees working independently, one on foreign affairs and the other on the key issues of European affairs. Will the Taoiseach desist from telling the House that the matter is still under discussion because the Labour Party made known their views to the Chief Whip several weeks ago?
An accuracy deficit.
I hope the parties will find a solution to this. I understand that the Whips discussed the matter last week. There was an agreement——
What is the Government's view?
The Foreign Affairs spokespersons were supposed to meet with the Minister for Foreign Affairs to discuss the matter. It is not true to assert that there is no ongoing discussion as the discussion is ongoing and I hope the matter will be finished this week once and for all.
On that point, would the Taoiseach agree that any such committee should be fully informed about what is happening at EC level and should be fully up-to-date on the negotiations at that level and that they should not be precluded from discussing this country's negotiating position on any proposal before the European Community?
This matter has to be settled in the terms of reference of the committee.
It is included in the draft terms of reference.
Deputy Quinn rose.
I am sorry, Deputy, as I said earlier, if Deputies want to pursue this matter they can do so in a different way.
May I ask one short question?
Very well.
On the specific matter of these committees could I ask the Taoiseach to convene a special meeting of the Whips to resolve this matter finally?
I will gladly do that.