Jim O'Keeffe
Question:2 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the agenda for the meeting of EU Heads of Government in Corfu; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - EU Heads of Government Meeting.
As the Deputy will be aware, it is a matter for Greece, as the member state currently holding the Presidency of the European Union, to propose the subjects for discussion at the next European Council, which will be held in Corfu on 24-25 June. While the Greek Presidency has not yet finalised its proposals in this regard, it has indicated that the main subject for discussion at Corfu will be follow-up to the European Commission's White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment. The Presidency has also referred to the need to designate a new President of the European Commission at the Corfu Summit. The Deputy may also wish to note that it is intended that the Treaty of Accession to the European Union by Austria, Norway, Sweden and Finland will be signed at Corfu on 24 June, immediately before the commencement of the European Council.
Ireland's main interest is in whether we can secure the Presidency of the European Commission, despite the worst efforts of the Government. Does the Taoiseach agree that this issue has been badly mishandled by the Government? Does he accept that his response to me when I first raised this issue and put forward the name of Peter Sutherland was misleading? He spoke of having had a meeting with Mr. Sutherland, who had no interest in the job. It now transpires that the issue was not raised at all.
I fail to understand the connection with the subject matter of this question.
One of the issues on the agenda is the Presidency of the Commission. Will the Taoiseach agree, even at this late stage, to put the national interest first and propose Mr. Sutherland? Will he accept that there is a fair chance there will be no agreement in Corfu on a candidate and that this substantially increases the possibility of our being successful in getting agreement on a compromise candidate for the Presidency?
The question before me refers to the agenda for this meeting.
It is on the agenda.
That may be so but we must not personalise the matter.
Let me first dissuade Deputy O'Keeffe and the House from the idea that I misled the House on any conversation I had with anybody. I did no such thing. As to the states mentioned in this House last week, I found no trace of any support on the part of the three states mentioned by Deputy McDowell's leader. Deputy O'Keeffe's leader, Deputy Bruton, will be attending a very important meeting before the summit and I am sure the Christian Democrats will have much influence in the decision about who the next President of the European Commission will be.
Is that a recognition of our strength in the European Parliament?
Fine Gael always claims its strength. Put it to the test and we will find out how strong Fine Gael is if it wants to pursue its own candidate. There is much speculation as to the possibility of Mr. Sutherland being a candidate but I have not found support for that in any countries.
Like the Taoiseach, I did not raise this issue with Mr. Sutherland before mentioning it in the Dáil. Will the Taoiseach not accept that there is a possible historic opportunity for Ireland to secure the Presidency, that this office commands great power and prestige and would be of great moment if this country could secure it, that the only name mentioned as a possible candidate is that of Peter Sutherland and that even if we on the Opposition side try to secure support, it is essential that the Government should at least put his name forward? Let me make a fair offer to the Taoiseach. If he is prepared to do his part, we on the Opposition side will certainly not be found wanting but will do our part. If the Taoiseach's concern is for the present appointee in Brussels he can reappoint Commissioner Flynn to his position as Commissioner if Mr. Sutherland is not accepted for the Presidency.
We are extending this question quite considerably in dealing with a candidate for the Presidency of the European Union.
Deputy Flynn is doing an excellent job in his very important role in Europe and it is the intention of the Government to renominate him to his portfolio when the time comes. If Deputy O'Keeffe and his party have so many authoritative sources of support for the candidate they speak about, I cannot find it anywhere, except I read it occasionally in a foreign newespaper. However, when we check out the suggestions made in this House last week, we find there is no trace of any basis for such a claim. Let us not cod ourselves into thinking that the Presidency is there for the taking. No country has yet come forward in support of the candidate of whom the Deputy speaks.
Is a compromise candidate not, by definition, somebody for whom nobody is rooting as their first choice? Is it not very easy to make a split bid for the European Commission? Is the Taoiseach not aware that Holland is putting forward its Prime Minister, Mr. Lubbers, for the Presidency but that Mr. Lubbers has no interest whatever in becoming an ordinary member of the Commission? Could the same not apply here? The Government can have all the faith it likes in Commissioner Flynn and still say that if, in the last analysis, there were a compromise available in the candidancy of Mr. Sutherland, Ireland's interests would be best served by supporting him for the purpose of the Presidency only. There would be no dishonour to Mr. Flynn in such a scenario.
I would like to find out where all this support is coming from. I have checked it out and there is not the slightest basis for the claim that there is any support. There is no sense in pretending that there is huge support for somebody when there is not. There is support for Mr. Lubbers and for Mr. Duhaene from Belgium, and I presume the British are supporting their own candidate. To name those countries as supporting a candidate who is not even in the field is unrealistic.
That is a compromise candidate.
Will Deputies come back down to earth and deal with reality? There is no guarantee that there will be a crisis in Corfu, that we will not agree on somebody. I am not prepared to show my hand until I know who is in the field. That is the way I will play it.
The Taoiseach is showing his hand already. He is saying Commissioner Flynn will be reappointed.
Commissioner Pádraig Flynn will be reappointed by the Government and let nobody have any doubt about that. If all these countries want Mr. Sutherland to be appointed there are ways in which they can do it. They can have two nominations for the Commission if they wish. Let us stop this nonsense of running up a fig leaf which when removed reveals that there is nothing there, and let us get down to reality.
Have the Taoiseach's partners in Government indicated that they would be satisfied with a Christian Democrat President of the Commission or do they consider nationality to be the important criterion?
The Deputy should be well aware that the best interests of this country lie in having a President of the European Commission from one of the smaller states to protect the interests of the smaller countries.
What about here?
We are one of the smaller states.
Would it not be appropriate that that smaller State should be Ireland?
The only person who has a possibility of being appointed is Peter Sutherland. If there is a chance of him being appointed, would the Taoiseach, in the national interest, at this stage put his name forward, or at least be prepared to propose him as a compromise candidate?
We are having a lot of repetition.
I admire Deputy O'Keeffe's resilience in this matter. If he keeps it up, that resilience will probably result in his transfer from the back bench to the Front Bench.