Vol. 442 No. 1
3 Mr. J. Mitchell asked the Taoiseach if, in considering the Government's stance on the person who should be appointed next President of the European Commission, due regard has been taken of the views of the individual's attitude towards the sale and consumption of drugs; and if this matter was discussed with the Dutch Prime Minister, Mr. Rudd Lubbers during his recent visit to Dublin.
4 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the considerations which he will take into account in arriving at his decision on the next President of the EU Commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 4 together.
As I indicated in this House on 19 April last I will be reserving my position on the filling of the post of President of the European Commission until all the candidates for the job have declared themselves. When the time comes to make a decision, I will obviously be concerned to ensure the appointment of a candidate who will act in the best interests of both this country and of the European Union generally and who will reflect the policies of the Union across all areas.
Has an Irish name been put to the Taoiseach, formally or informally, for consideration as President of the European Commission?
No.
In his discussions with the Dutch Prime Minister, who is a candidate, has the Taoiseach expressed his concern at the policy of some Dutch local authorities in Amsterdam in relation to the legalisation of certain drugs? Does the Government agree with the policy in Amsterdam or would it prefer another policy to be pursued? What are the implications of that policy if the Prime Minister of the Netherlands becomes President of the European Commission?
When the Dutch Prime Minister visited Ireland he was not in a position to have any discussions in relation to filling the post of President of the European Commission. He was Prime Minister and, as he explained to the media and me, his constitutional position precluded him from commenting. In due course he may become a candidate. The attitude of the Irish Government towards drugs and the whole drugs industry is clear. I will certainly make that position known at the summit in Corfu if the position has been filled by then. At present we do not know the full list of candidates.
No doubt the Taoiseach will be concerned about the drugs problem and the knock-on effects as far as crime and vandalism are concerned in this and other cities in Ireland. During the Taoiseach's discussions with the Dutch Prime Minister did he raise the drugs issue and the problems which the Amsterdam policy is having on the rest of the Community?
Of course we discussed these and other problems and agreed on the need for co-ordination and co-operation between all member states in the Union in the fight against drugs. We are concerned at the level of drugs seized off our coasts. Clearly Ireland was used as a conduit in some shape or form to bring drugs not only into Ireland but to other member states. We both agreed on the need for stepping up action in that area and that all member states should coordinate their action and policies in this regard.
The Taoiseach said no approach has been made to him in relation to an Irish nominee. I put it to him that it would be in the interests of Ireland to have an Irish nominee for the presidency of the European Commission and even better if we could succeed in having one appointed. It should be the Taoiseach's function to seek an acceptable nominee and to present that name to his colleagues, the other Heads of State. One obvious name has been mentioned in many international magazines, The Economist, the Financial Times and so on, that of the former Commissioner, Mr. Peter Sutherland. Would it not be very much in Ireland's interests for the Taoiseach to promote that cause and win the presidency of the European Commission for Ireland?
I think Micky Doherty has a better chance.
He will certainly get the Taoiseach's vote.
I thought for a moment that Deputy O'Keeffe was making the case for our very successful Commissioner, Pádraig Flynn, but apparently not.
It is interesting that the Taoiseach is not proposing him.
I had a recent meeting with Mr. Sutherland. He has done an excellent job on GATT and in Europe and in any area in which he was involved. He is not, and has no interest in seeking the post to which the Deputy refers.
Would the Taoiseach consider it worthwhile to seek to encourage him to take an interest as I understand he is not interested in continuing with the World Trade Organisation? Does he agree that this is a historic opportunity for Ireland to get the presidency of the Commission and that it should be his job to try to organise it?
Mr. Sutherland has made it very clear to me and to everybody else who asked him that he will be in the World Trade Organisation until the end of the year. What he does after that is his decision but he made it very clear he will be there until the end of this year.
Is the Taoiseach aware that the Commission for Social Affairs expressed a preference for the nominee from Britain? Is that a personal view or is it supported by the Taoiseach and the Government?
In arriving at the decision on whom to support, will the Taoiseach bear in mind that it would be in the interests of this county to support the nominee from a smaller country rather than one from the larger counties?
If the Commissioner expressed support for Sir Leon Brittan, that would have been a personal observation. We would be very foolish to declare our hand until after we have seen all the candidates in the field. That is the way it will be. The Deputy's view will be uppermost in our consideration when all the candidates are in the field.
In view of the importance of this post and the need to ensure that the Presidency is progressive and forward looking and does not tend to roll back the social dimension of the European Union, will the Taoiseach agree that we should debate in the Dáil how the appointment should be made and what candidate the Government may be supporting? Will he also agree that such an initiative would help to open up the area of European politics in view of the confusion that exists as to how the Union operates?
Views have been expressed that the criteria for the job should be laid down the next time it becomes available. In this instance it is the accepted wisdom that the job is likely to be filled at the Corfu Summit but some member states are expressing the view that it may be later. I do not know the reason.
The Government will fully consider all the candidates in the field and will not make its decision in advance. We will make the best choice and give our support to the person whom we believe is best suited for the job in so far as Ireland is concerned.
With no disrespect to Sir Leon Brittan, is it not the case that there is an informal understanding that this time a nominee of one of the smaller states should be in line for the Presidency and that there has been a tradition of rotating the post from larger to smaller countries and back again? Will he agree that Ireland should lean in favour of a nominee from a smaller country, on this ocasion, particularly in view of medium-term fears about the voting position of smaller countries which, perhaps, should band together to protect their interest?
There is a belief that a system of rotation, to which Deputy Bruton refers, should prevail but that does not stop larger countries from putting forward nominees. Every country has that right if it wishes. The considerations to which Deputies Harney and Bruton referred will be uppermost in our minds when making a decision.
I want to bring these questions to finality. I call Deputy Jim Mitchell.
Will the Taoiseach agree that if Mr. Sutherland was a member of Fianna Fáil he would quote from every single newspaper article that praises Mr. Sutherland and support him for the job of commissioner? In the national interest, will the Taoiseach join the ranks of those trying to persuade Mr. Sutherland to become the President of the Commission?
Mr. Sutherland is quite capable of making up his own mind on where his future lies and I will not be persuading Micky Doherty to go for the post.
That is a shame.
The Taoiseach indicated that the Government would support the candidature of the person who would act in the best interests of Ireland and in the wider interests of the Community. As it is a matter of one's political perspective as to what is in the Irish interests will he agree that there is a need for a debate in this House on the matter, given the importance——
We have had this before, it is merely repetition.
The Taoiseach did not answer the question. I invite him to indicate if he will provide for a debate in view of the importance of this post and the need to relate European politics to what we do in this House.
I know that from time to time Deputy De Rossa has difficulty accepting that I answer questions. When we consider to whom we will give our support, it will not be on the sole criteria of political considerations. I have already stated clearly that European politics will not come into it as far as we are concerned.
Mayo West politics probably will.
The Taoiseach said he would wait until the candidates were announced before the Government would make known its views on who should be the next President of the Commission. As we have been a member of the Community for the past 20 years will he agree it is time we enhanced our prestige by putting forward a candidate in the race, irrespective of the personalities already mentioned in the House?
I cannot understand the Mitchell brothers trying to push a name, when the man himself says he will remain with GATT until the end of December.
For the first time the Mitchell brothers agree.
I asked the Taoiseach about an Irish candidate, irrespective of the personalities involved. Will the Taoiseach show respect for the House and answer the question? Does he believe it is in the Irish interest to have a candidate in the field?
We have already considered this matter and we will continue to look at the field and act in the best interests of the country.
The Taoiseach referred to Mr. Sutherland's commitment to GATT during the current year. However, the next President of the European Commission does not take over until New Year's Day, 1 January 1995 and the coincidence of dates might be of great interest if the Taoiseach was interested in promoting an Irish name for the Presidency. I urge him to take that course pro bono publico.
We are clearly having repetition.
I do not think Deputy O'Keeffe was listening attentively to me.
I was.
If the Deputy believes that the person who will take up the Presidency of Europe will not have been in office for a transitional period long before 31 December to see how the job is done, he is not in touch with reality.
Mr. Sutherland has been there before and he knows the scene.
