Jim O'Keeffe
Question:2 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the matters he intends to raise or propose at the Summit of EC Leaders in Copenhagen in June 1993; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - EC Summit.
As the member state currently holding the EC Presidency, it is for Denmark in the first instance to propose the matters for discussion at the European Council on 21-22 June and the Danish Presidency has not yet finalised its proposals.
When I met Prime Minister Rasmussen earlier this year I proposed to him that the issue of co-ordinated action to create more jobs and deal with unemployment —both at EC level and at the multilateral level between the Community and the other world trade blocs — should be on the agenda for the Copenhagen Summit. I am satisfied this will be the case. For my part I will be doing everything I can to ensure that practical action to create much needed employment receives the fullest possible consideration in Copenhagen.
The Taoiseach anticipated my interest in the jobs issue. I am glad to note that the general question of co-ordinated action to create jobs will probably be on the agenda. Would the Taoiseach add to what he has said and let us know whether he intends to make any specific proposals on the co-ordinated action which could bring benefits to the Community and Ireland in particular which might be discussed at the summit? The second matter on which I would like to see the Taoiseach express a strong view is the question of Bosnia. Would he accept that the inadequate response of the Community to the horrors of Bosnia needs to be discussed? I suggest that the Taoiseach should make his views known on that issue and try to ensure that it is fully discussed at the summit.
I can readily accept what the Deputy has said in relation to the Bosnian conflict. Undoubtedly, this matter will be discussed at the summit. On the question of employment and providing a stimulus to generate economic activity I have been to the forefront in raising this issue with the other member states. I raised it at Birmingham and again at Edinburgh, from which meeting a growth initiative emanated. This has been discussed at a number of meetings of the economic and Finance Ministers since then. As I am sure the Deputy is aware, the Presidency is doing all it can at the multilateral level to get the United States and Japan involved in an effort to provide a world economic stimulus to generate economic activity. The way to create jobs is to secure growth.
Would the Taoiseach agree that all this talk about jobs at EC summits has so far amounted to absolutely nothing, that there is nothing to show for it? Would he also agree that the more European summits are seen to talk about jobs and do nothing the more the institution will be brought into disrepute? Would he agree that in Copenhagen we should see some evidence of action because so far all we have seen is a gradual diminution of confidence in economic prospects throughout the Continent?
I agree with the Deputy when he says that the question of employment was off the agenda for far too long and that it has now reached serious proportions. The Irish Commissioner is working on an employment policy to tackle this problem, given that 18 million people are unemployed in Europe.
There is a staffing problem.
(Interruptions.)
Let us hear the reply without interruption.
We should leave that problem to the European Community. We have no need to concern ourselves with that issue. President Delors is trying to co-ordinate the response to the jobs crisis, which is getting worse. The unemployment rate in Spain, at 21.7 per cent, is greater than here. I look forward to the summit in Copenhagen and hope that the Community will pursue policies to tackle this serious problem.
In view of his declared anxiety and hope that the summit will deal effectively with this issue does the Taoiseach intend to present any proposals to the summit? Will he agree that a debate should be held in the Dail on this matter before the summit takes place in order to strengthen his hand? Does he intend to raise the question of the ERM given that the Minister for Finance failed in his efforts last weekend to have amendments made to the system? Will he agree that the criteria for European Monetary Union are driving all the economies of the European Community into recession and that none of them meets the criteria or is likely to meet them? There is an urgent need to address that issue at the summit.
Deputies should not ask too many questions.
It is not correct to say that none of them meets the criteria——
One — Luxembourg.
——we do.
We do not meet them.
The Deputy should get his facts right before he starts to misrepresent the position. I am aware that the Belgian Foreign Minister and others have floated the idea that the criteria should be softened but I do not think there would be anything to be gained in doing that. We have taken action and complied with the criteria and look to others to do likewise. This may be an issue at the summit but I am not in a position to say so as I do not write the agenda.
Will the Taoiseach raise it?
I will avail of every possible opportunity in relation to initiatives which can be taken to try to alleviate the serious unemployment problem. Everybody in Europe knows what our position is.
The Taoiseach has given a very impressive account of the breadth and range of his involvement in these issues. Could he indicate what the summit might constitute as a "world economic stimulus"?
I would like to think that the parties to the GATT negotiations will get their act together. Now that the international financial markets have settled down the completion of the ratification process of the Maastricht Treaty would be another positive move. If they follow a growth policy to provide a stimulus to generate economic growth, Governments can secure growth in the world economy.
Is the Taoiseach going to tell them that?
While Deputy Dukes's question anticipated mine, would the Taoiseach not agree that a resolute, united Community approach at the summit towards a resolution of the GATT talks would be the greatest single direct incentive to liberalising world trade, raising employment and freeing trade worldwide?
Certainly I would agree and I made that point very strongly to President Clinton in March. Indeed the Danish Presidency are pursuing that goal. The greatest stimulus to the development of world trade would be an agreement on GATT. We have vested interests in relation to it. The talks were held back because of the French elections. There is a new French Government in place for a specific period of time. Let us hope that everybody will seriously address the matter of endeavouring to find a resolution of the GATT problems.
Would the Taoiseach agree that there has been no substantial content to any of the initiatives taken by the Community in regard to employment emerging from the Birmingham and Edinburgh Summits, that there has been a lot of talk but nothing concrete?
I am not totally happy with the initiatives taken so far. We want to strive to get more and more initiatives. For example, there was the growth initiative devised by the Finance Ministers at Edinburgh which has since been approved by the various member states. Quite clearly it is not enough; the more we want it resolved the more we will keep at it.
In relation to his comments on paid employment, would the Taoiseach, when he meets other Leaders in Copenhagen, say whether he would consider the highly developed renewable energy sector in Denmark with a view to introducing some of their schemes here since we have many under-utilised assets in that area, particularly in wave and wind power? Following his statement on the need for growth, would he agree that quite often growth can result in jobs being lost in that it leads to automation and rationalisation? In that regard would he agree that perhaps some discussion on a redistribution of work would be a lot more productive in ensuring more people are employed?
If the Deputy is referring to the concept of job sharing and the like, certainly I agree with him. I also agree with him in relation to the possibility of jobs emanating from renewable energy sources. It is true that Denmark has been quite successful in the development of wind energy. It is very difficult to understand why we have not been equally successful.
(Interruptions).
We know there is plenty of puffing of wind in this Chamber; we want to get more of it outside the Chamber. In relation to what the Deputy asked, he can take it that this Government is totally committed to that objective, as reflected in our programme for Government. We shall pursue all possibilities in relation to renewable energy and the contribution it can make to jobs and to low cost energy here.
Would the Taoiseach not accept that it is a fair criticism that he appears to be adopting an entirely passive role in relation to the crucial issue of jobs and a Community response thereto? Would he accept that that is entirely inappropriate on the part of a Leader of a country competing for the top position in the unemployment league? Will he tell us whether he will table even one specific proposal, or take any initiative whatever, on behalf of Ireland by way of trying to get a Community response to that appalling problem of unemployment?
It is quite clear what the Community asked everybody to do following the Edinburgh Summit, which was to avail of every possible opportunity within their overall budgetary positions in relation to large investment, to promote more growth within the Community itself. It is not true that I am adopting a passive approach to jobs or unemployment. I was the first Head of Government to raise the issue within the Community at the Birmingham Summit. After some time at Birmingham I eventually got it onto the agenda——
(Interruptions.)
The Deputies opposite did not do very much themselves. Deputy Jim O'Keeffe can be assured that I followed it up at Edinburgh, when a growth initiative was taken. It is not as great as we would like it to be but it is a contribution, and we are continuing to fight for that at every possible opportunity. When we have our national plan developed in relation to the usage of the Structural and Cohesion Funds, that will provide us with a further opportunity of creating jobs within this economy.
And our jobs position remains as bad as ever.