Vol. 462 No. 7
4 Mr. R. Burke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views regarding reported proposals from the European Commission to extend majority voting in the Council of Ministers; and the implications, if any, such changes will have for Ireland's authority within the European Union. [5334/96]
28 Mr. S. Brennan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs whether the projected enlargement of the EU will dilute Ireland's existing level of representation within the European Commission and European Parliament; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4540/96]
30 Mr. Briscoe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the action, if any, he intends to take following the publication of proposals from the European Commission to remove the automatic right to a Commissioner from member states and to make the appointment of Commissioners a matter for the European Commission President; and the way in which he intends to voice his opposition to such initiatives. [5294/96]
35 Mr. E. Byrne asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the European Commission proposals, due to be laid before the Intergovernmental Conference, to, inter alia, extend majority voting, abolish the automatic right of smaller member states to nominate a Commissioner and merge the Western European Union with the EU; the support, if any he believes these proposals are likely to receive from other member states in view of the fact that they closely resemble proposals put forward by the German Christian Democrats two years ago; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5270/96]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 4, 28, 30 and 35 together.
The Intergovernmental Conference which will consider amendments to the European Union Treaties is due to be launched by Heads of State or Government in Turin on 29 March.
On 28 February the European Commission adopted its opinion on the convening of the Intergovernmental Conference. I welcome the Commission's opinion which represents an important contribution to the work of the conference. I have no doubt that many of the Commission's ideas will receive considerable support from other member states also. Each member state will, of course, be free to bring forward its own proposals at the Intergovernmental Conference and any Treaty amendments will require the unanimous agreement of all member states.
The forthcoming White Paper on Irish foreign policy will set out the broad approach which the Government intend to take in the Intergovernmental Conference negotiations.
The composition of the European Commission is one of the issues which will arise at the Intergovernmental Conference and indeed may fall for reexamination from time to time. I have made clear on previous occasions and reiterate now the Government's firm view that further enlargement of the Union should not have any implications for the right of every member state to nominate a full member of the European Commission. To deprive member states of the automatic right to nominate a Commissioner, far from making the Commission more efficient, would in our view, make it less efficient in its essential role of protecting the common interest and retaining public support for its central role, which Ireland fully supports, in the process of European integration. We consider that it would, however, be appropriate for the large member states to agree, in the context of further enlargement, to nominate only one member of the Commission and I, therefore, welcome the view expressed by the Commission in its opinion that, in the context of enlargement, the number of its members should be reduced to one per member state.
As regards the method of appointment of Commissioners, the Commission has suggested in its opinion that its members should be designated by common agreement between the President and the respective Governments of the member states. This largely reflects the present arrangement. Ireland will consider positively proposals which would enhance the efficiency and collegiality of the Commission.
On the question of the extension of majority voting in the Council of Ministers, the Government attach importance to enhancing the efficiency of decision-making in the Union and we, therefore, favour the extension of qualified majority voting to several additional areas as regards both traditional Community business and in the justice and home affairs area. Qualified majority voting has worked to Ireland's advantage in many areas. We recognise, however, as do many of our partners, that there are a number of sensitive areas in which decisions should continue to require the unanimous agreement of all member states.
As regards the European Parliament, there is a broad view emerging that a ceiling should be placed on the membership of the Parliament and that the Parliament cannot be allowed to grow with each successive enlargement. A figure of 700 members has been mentioned as appropriate. This approach is likely to mean a reduction in the number of MEPs from each existing member state. We will insist that the smaller member states continue to have an adequate level of representation in the Parliament and we, therefore, welcome the recognition in the Commission's opinion that the distribution of seats should continue to ensure what in purely demographic terms is the over-representation of the less populated member states.
On the proposed EU/WEU merger, I refer Deputy Byrne to my reply to Question No. 5 which deals with this aspect of his question.
The Minister again referred to the publication of the White Paper. When will it be published?
At this stage the Deputy would need to ask the printers.
I assume it will be published some day next week.
The Deputy should not make any assumptions.
A person would not make any assumptions around here.
I welcome the comprehensive reply given by the Minister. My party shares the views expressed and has published them in its foreign policy document, Our Place in the World. It is essential that each member state should nominate a Commissioner even if larger member states must reduce the number of Commissioners they nominate to one. It is essential for efficiency and collegiality that each member state has one Commissioner. While I share the view on the ceiling on the parliament, we must preserve the position as regards smaller member states like Ireland. Has there been any response yet from the other member states as to the views expressed in that document? Has it been discussed informally?
There has been no opportunity to discuss this since that opinion was furnished. However, I am sure it will be discussed in Turin or at the General Affairs Council before that. As the Deputy will be aware, informal discussions would take place on most of these issues between foreign ministers.
Informal discussions were what I had in mind.
Obviously, over recent years, and while the reflection group was sitting, there were many discussions. When bilateral meetings take place with me and the Ministers of State, these issues are discussed. The White Paper will be published this month and I will look for a debate in the House with plenty of time available for Members to contribute.
While I generally agree with what the Minister said — the thrust of his reply was probably correct as far as this country is concerned — does he realise some of the difficulties which exist, particularly if the situation suggested in relation to Commissionerships arises? Does the Minister believe it is fair or democratic that Germany, with a population in excess of 80 million, should have the same representation in the Europe Union at Commission level as Malta, which has a population of 240,000 or, as we are constantly reminded, half the size of Cork?
The Deputy does not need to alert me to the difficulties. I am probably aware of all the difficulties which face us down the line in relation to enlargement and the Intergovernmental Conference and we are preparing to deal with them. The Deputy must be aware that we have a parliament and a Council of Ministers. We have been well served by the institutional balance struck by the European Union and we want to see it continue. Questions need to be addressed such as that raised by the Deputy. Obviously, these are matters for negotiation and we have set out the principle which we want respected, that is, our entitlement as a member state to appoint a Commissioner, a point which I believe will be accepted by our fellow member states.
As regards the extension of majority voting, will the Minister ensure that decisions cannot be made by the Foreign Affairs Council affecting our neutrality?
As I said there are a number of sensitive areas, such as common foreign and security policy, to which I do not believe it would be appropriate to extend qualified majority voting.
Does the circulation of material by the Minister of State, Deputy Gay Mitchell, to schools under the Communicating Europe initiative — the Minister will recall that we started this together — supporting our membership of the Western European Union represent Government policy? One of the key recommendations of the Communicating Europe initiative was to educate and raise awareness among the public and students as regards European structures and issues. That should be done in a balanced way. I appreciate what the Minister told us about the White Paper. Will he confirm if that approach by the Minister of State, of which I have no doubt he was aware, was Government policy?
The Deputy is well positioned to know about the strategy, Communicating Europe, in which he was involved and on which he did good work. That good work is being continued by the Minister of State, Deputy Gay Mitchell. It is important that the public is well informed. I understand the document to which the Deputy referred has been circulated to many organisations and lobby groups and not only to schools. A mistake which we all saw in relation to the Maastricht Treaty was the lack of information available to the public. As far as I am concerned, the Minister of State was within his rights on behalf of the Communicating Europe strategy group to circulate information for discussion.
To push for Western European Union membership?
I look forward to elaborating on the point in the next question.
