I congratulate you, Sir, on your appointment and wish you well in your duties as Leas Cheann-Comhairle. The Amsterdam EU Council Meeting was a very important event of the European Union. I am pleased the House is now afforded the opportunity of hearing statements on the outcome of the Council.
I am in the unusual position of reporting to the House on the Council, which was attended by my predecessor, Deputy John Bruton, and the then Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Spring, accompanied by the then Minister for Finance, Deputy Quinn, and the then Minister for State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for European Affairs, Deputy Gay Mitchell.
As the House will note, the outcome of the Council was very satisfactory from an Irish viewpoint. This was due in no small measure to the negotiating skills of the Government lead by Deputy John Bruton leading up to the Council. I salute their performance in this regard. I am also grateful to the previous Government for the briefing we received prior to the Council on the issues arising in Amsterdam.
I have paid tribute to the achievements of the previous Government in the area of European affairs. This was perhaps most exemplified by the successful Irish Presidency of the EU during the second half of 1996. The Irish Presidency gave a major impetus to the EU and in such key areas as the Intergovernmental Conference and economic and monetary union. Perhaps most importantly from an Irish viewpoint, the efficiency and effectiveness of the Presidency, as indeed of the previous Irish Presidency in 1990, testify to the ability of a small member state in general, and Ireland specifically, to run a successful Presidency.
The Amsterdam Council was billed in advance as the council to conclude the Intergovernmental Conference and this was its main achievement. The Council also addressed other issues, albeit briefly, and these are detailed in conclusions to the council. Copies have been placed in the Oireachtas Library.
Before dealing with the Intergovernmental Conference outcome I acknowledge the contribution of Deputy Spring throughout the negotiations at ministerial level on the Intergovernmental Conference. I also express on behalf of the House the appreciation of the outstanding work done by Mr. Noel Dorr, Ireland's representative on the Intergovernmental Conference negotiating group. Apart from most effectively and constructively representing Ireland's interests, Mr. Dorr made a major contribution to the successful outcome of the Intergovernmental Conference in his period as chair of the negotiating group during the Irish Presidency.
The initial reaction to the outcome of the Intergovernmental Conference, as reflected in the Treaty of Amsterdam, was somewhat muted. Reaction centred on the assertion that the outcome does not represent a great leap forward towards further European integration. This response ignores the real advances in the Treaty of Amsterdam. Unrealistic ambition would have meant there would not have been agreement in Amsterdam and the consequences of such a failure would have been most serious for the EU with regard to economic and monetary union and future enlargement. It was important for the momentum of these two major projects that the EU leaders were able to demonstrate at Amsterdam the political will to agree on a wide range of issues and, thereby, conclude the Intergovernmental Conference. The Dutch Presidency and, particularly, Prime Minister Kok also deserve praise for this outcome.
From the viewpoint of strategic Irish interests, the outcome of the Intergovernmental Conference has been most satisfactory. Four areas were of particular concern: institutional issues, especially the retention of the right to nominate a full member of the European Commission; common foreign and security policy issues; a strengthening of provisions in the justice and home affairs area, including the fight against crime, while still protecting the common travel area with the UK and assisting the EU in addressing the real concerns of its citizens more effectively.
With regard to the institutional issues the outcome ensures Ireland will maintain the right to nominate a full member of the European Commission. This was a priority objective shared by all sides in this House and I am pleased it was realised. The treaty provides for a future review of institutional arrangements, including the composition of the Commission. The outcome of such a future review is not prejudged and, specifically, there has not been a decision to limit the size of the Commission in the future to 20 or any other definite number of Commissioners. In effect, the larger member states have agreed, in the context of the first round of the next enlargement, to give up their right to nominate a second Commissioner provided that before this there is a limited reweighting of votes in the Council acceptable to all member states.
More generally with regard to the institutions, the significant extension of the co-decision power of the European Parliament will mean greater democracy in the decision-making procedure of the EU. The treaty contains the new provisions on flexibility which allow certain member states, in strictly defined circumstances, to co-operate more closely using the institutions of the EU. Sufficient safeguards are included to prevent this development leading to a two tier Europe.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs will deal in greater detail with common foreign and security policy issues in his contribution. I am satisfied Ireland's best interests have been served by what was agreed, especially with regard to defence, as it protects our position of military neutrality, while allowing us to contribute constructively to peacekeeping and humanitarian tasks with our European partners. I am glad to see a distinctive European contribution developing along these lines rather than by an integration of the EU and Western European Union. I welcome the opportunity for Ireland to continue on a case by case basis, under EU auspices, the peacekeeping work we have done for many years under UN auspices.
The treaty includes strengthened provisions in the area of justice and home affairs, most notably by equipping the EU to act more effectively at Community level in the fight against organised crime. With regard to the issues of freedom of movement, asylum and immigration, as well as the incorporation of the Schengen Agreement into the Treaty on European Union, Ireland's overriding concern was the preservation of the common travel area with the UK. This concern is fully met by a separate Protocol in the treaty. We are also concerned, however, to continue to play as full a part as possible, compatible with the preservation of the common travel area, in developments at EU level in the area of justice and home affairs. The Treaty of Amsterdam acknowledges this by providing that Ireland may opt in to some or all of the Schengen arrangements and the new Title on Freedom of Movement.
A key aspect in this regard is the decision-making procedure for Ireland exercising its right to opt in. As Deputy John Bruton is aware, Ireland believes what was agreed at Amsterdam was that Ireland and the UK could opt in to some or all of the Schengen arrangements unless a qualified majority of those countries participating in Schengen objected. The text of the treaty circulated after the Amsterdam Council states that unanimity would be required to approve such an opt in. Deputy Bruton has written to me on this issue and I am aware of his strong views on the matter. We are seeking to resolve the matter in a way satisfactory to every member state. I have no doubt that with goodwill it will be possible to resolve these issues. It is important that we have the facility to opt in to some or all of the Schengen Agreement and the new treaty arrangements on freedom of movement while protecting the common travel area. We will carefully monitor developments to see how our interests can be best served in the future by seeking to exercise our right to a partial or full opt in.
Perhaps the most innovative aspect of the Treaty of Amsterdam is the concentration on issues of real concern to the EU's citizens. The treaty will allow Europe to address more effectively the most direct concerns of citizens about employment, crime, the environment, public health, consumer protection, social exclusion and non-discrimination. Nobody is under the illusion that the new Employment Chapter in the treaty will of itself solve Europe's unacceptably high level of unemployment. It will, however, underpin and advance policy co-operation between member states with regard to employment policy. It also contains a new provision for some limited EU funding in this area.
With regard to social issues, the provisions on social exclusion and the incorporation of the Maastricht social Protocol are welcome, especially from an Irish viewpoint. The social exclusion provision was promoted by Ireland and I am aware that the former Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy De Rossa, was a particularly strong advocate. The provision will allow the EU to develop programmes to the benefit of the most needy and socially excluded in European society. The incorporation of the social Protocol will allow for a single coherent legal basis for action by the 15 members on social issues. Perhaps more importantly from an Irish viewpoint, the UK's acceptance of the social Protocol will ensure a level playing field in this area between Ireland and Britain.
The Treaty of Amsterdam will enable more effective action at the EU level in combating international crime. It is particularly important that the provisions in the treaty facilitating greater co-operation in the fight against organised crime and drug trafficking are fully utilised. Ireland will work to ensure this through the Justice and Home Affairs Council. It should also be noted that on foot of an initiative taken during the Irish Presidency, an action plan on organised crime was endorsed by the Amsterdam Council. The Justice and Home Affairs Council has been mandated to implement the plan and will report on progress to the European Council in June 1998. There is also a welcome provision in the treaty, again proposed by Ireland, in the health area, providing for the Community to complement member states' action in reducing drugsrelated health damage.
I welcome the fact that the treaty provision which allows every citizen of the EU to write to the EU's institutions and have an answer in the same language will now also apply to the Irish language.
The conclusions of the Amsterdam Council state the treaty will be formally signed in Amsterdam in October next. While the formal legal advice of the Attorney General in the matter is awaited, it is the expectation of the Government that the treaty will be put to the people for approval in a referendum with the support of practically all parties in this House. I also anticipate that the Government will produce a White Paper on the treaty for the information of the public in advance of the referendum. The White Paper and the conduct of the referendum will take account of the McKenna judgment and the Government will assess the position in the light of the advice of the Attorney General.
Overall, I am satisfied the Treaty of Amsterdam represents an outcome which is good for Ireland and for Europe. Membership of the European Union is overwhelmingly in Ireland's national interest and this remains the view of the vast majority of the Irish people.
At Amsterdam the European Council took decisive steps towards EMU. It agreed the detailed legislation to give effect to the Stability and Growth Pact, the main elements of which had been agreed already at the Dublin European Council at the end of the Irish Presidency. The pact is designed to ensure budgetary discipline in the third stage of EMU and is vital to ensure coherent European economic policies in the future. The agreement on the Stability and Growth Pact was complemented at Amsterdam by the adoption of a European Council resolution on growth and employment. This resolution, together with the proposed new Title on Employment in the treaty, is evidence of the firm commitment to place employment at the top of the EU's political agenda. The European Council also adopted a resolution which lays down the principles and fundamental elements of the new exchange rate mechanism, ERM2, to be established on 1 January 1999. This resolution will ensure that member states outside the euro area which participate in the mechanism orient their policies to stability and foster convergence.
The Amsterdam European Council endorsed the design of the common face for euro coins. Together with the euro banknotes, this gives tangible evidence to citizens of preparations for the euro. Some outstanding aspects of the legal framework for the euro were also agreed and the Council decided that the text of the relevant regulations should be published to ensure maximum certainty for the markets in their preparations for EMU.
Europe remains on course for the introduction of the single currency on 1 January 1999. Member states have once again confirmed their commitment to the commencement of EMU, in accordance with the provisions of the Maastricht Treaty and the timetable agreed by the European Council in Madrid in December 1995. The Government believes EMU will commence on time and Ireland will be a member from the outset. The successful transition to economic and monetary union is a key challenge facing the Government. As stated in An Action Programme for the New Millennium, a major task is to ensure the Irish economy copes successfully with the challenges of entry into EMU, in accordance with the provisions in the Maastricht Treaty, particularly in the initial absence of Britain. The Government's action programme also identifies a number of requirements for successful EMU entry, including tighter fiscal discipline and support for the Maastricht criteria across Europe and support for Europe wide employment measures. This approach is fully consistent with the conclusions of the Amsterdam Council.
I have already touched on the employment issue in my comments on the Intergovernmental Conference and on EMU. The Amsterdam Council decided to convene an extraordinary meeting of the European Council under the Luxembourg Presidency, to review and maintain the momentum in the fight against European unemployment. Ireland's employment performance has been well above the European average in recent years. A stable macro-economic policy allied to the social partnership approach are the keys to this success and the new partnership Government will continue to support this national consensus.
The completion of the Single Market is of great relevance to the employment problem. The Amsterdam Council considered the Commission's action plan for the single market and endorsed its overall objective of a better functioning internal market. Ireland fully supports measures to make the Single Market deliver to the full its employment creation potential. The Commission has tabled proposals to reform regional aid guidelines in the context of the Single Market action plan. Discussions on these proposals are ongoing between the Commission and member states and we will be vigilant to ensure Ireland's interests are protected in this regard. The Amsterdam Council also adopted conclusions on a range of EU external issues, and these will be dealt with by the Minister for Foreign Affairs in his statement.
Negotiations for enlargement, which is one of the Agenda 2000 items, will begin as soon as possible after December 1997. The others include the future financial framework of the EU beyond 1999 and CAP reform. The Commission is expected to unveil its outline view on these issues in a paper to be circulated on 16 July next. I stress that these will be Commission proposals. Decisions on them will be for the European Council in the final analysis. Agenda 2000 has major implications for Ireland. The outcome of the negotiations on future funding, especially Structural and Cohesion Funds, and the implications of CAP reform will significantly influence Irish economic and social development into the next millennium. Ireland has made impressive economic strides over the relatively recent past. Notwithstanding this, Ireland still has major infrastructural needs, an unacceptably high level of unemployment, urban and rural deprivation and a growing labour force. There must be full recognition of these factors in the Agenda 2000 negotiations. It is my intention to ensure a comprehensive and co-ordinated Irish negotiating position on these crucial issues. The Ministers and secretaries group on EU policy, which I chair, will formulate and oversee implementation of this position.
The Amsterdam European Council was a success. The Intergovernmental Conference was concluded, thereby paving the way for the EU to move on to its next business. Economic and monetary union remains firmly on target. The Amsterdam Council signalled the highest priority in the fight against unemployment. The EU has a series of crucial decisions to take before the year 2000. The objective must be that the EU should arrive at the next millennium as a cohesive, unified entity, delivering prosperity and security in Europe, and with an ever more influential political and economic voice in the world. The EU has much to be proud of in its first 40 years of existence. We can also be justly proud of our contribution to Europe during the 25 years of membership. I look forward to this mutually beneficial relationship continuing and intensifying into the next century.
I am in the unusual position of presenting the report to the House but I acknowledge the work of my predecessor, Deputy Bruton, the ongoing work over the past four and a half years of the former Tánaiste, Deputy Spring, and that of the former Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Gay Mitchell. As a nation we can be very proud of the contribution which Ireland made in implementing change over the past number of years, particularly during its Presidency and the achievements in Amsterdam.