Vol. 481 No. 2
5 Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Finance the representations, if any, he has made to the European Commission or the ECOFIN Council members requesting them to ensure that the Commission undertakes a study to analyse the impact upon employment and related matters of the abolition of duty free sales within the EU; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15763/97]
This matter was last raised by Ireland at ECOFIN by Deputy Quinn. At the November 1996 ECOFIN Council meeting, the Deputy called for an EU wide study to be undertaken by the Commission, but he had little support from our partners at that time. The Commission has consistently refused to undertake an EU wide study, a position it repeated at a conference on duty free held in Brussels on 24 September at which the Minister for Public Enterprise gave a keynote address.
Given the position of the Commission and the lack of support from our partners, it was decided that an independent study into the consequences for Ireland be undertaken by consultants who would report to the Minister for Finance. I am pleased to confirm that following the tender procedure the Deputy started, I awarded the contract to KPMG Management Consulting. This study should be completed by the end of the year. When I have studied the report from the consultants I will consider the most appropriate action to take. In the meantime, my colleague, the Minister for Public Enterprise, also intends to raise the awareness of the duty free issue with her colleagues on the Transport Council.
Do I take it from the Minister's reply that he has not formally contacted ECOFIN Council members?
I did not contact my colleagues at the ECOFIN Council. There was a formal meeting of the ECOFIN Council shortly after I took office and an informal one on 13 September.
Could the public reasonably believe it has been misled by the Minister for Public Enterprise in suggesting the Government was taking action on this point in the context of the Commission?
The public has not been misled. Since the November 1996 meeting, there has been a change of emphasis in many member states on this issue. As Deputy Quinn will know, this matter comes within the remit of the Commission. If changes are to be put forward, the Commission must put something on the table. A number of member states, including Ireland, are looking at this issue which gives some hope it may be raised again.
Deputy Quinn, as Minister, commissioned a consultancy report, with which I agree, to give further ammunition to the Irish Administration in pursuing this case. I appointed the consultants under the procedure outlined by Deputy Quinn and they will report by the end of the year when we will be in a better position to pursue our goals.
Does the Minister agree that the Minister for Public Enterprise may have inadvertently misled the public when she failed to draw attention to the fact that if the Taoiseach, as Minister for Finance, had exercised his veto in 1991 in respect of this matter, he would not face the problem which she has landed on his desk?
I do not accept that because matters have moved on since 1991. As the Deputy knows, there are various opinions on this issue. I hope my position will be strengthened when I get the consultancy study. Other member states are also looking at this issue in a wider context and perhaps some of the difficulties envisaged in 1991 are not those we face today. This matter is receiving more consideration.
The Commission has set its face against this. After the meeting in Brussels on 24 September, attended by the Minister for Public Enterprise, the commissioner in charge of taxation, Commissioner Monti, made strident remarks on the change in this area. I would not like to mislead anybody into thinking that changing the route pursued by the Commission will be easy. Other member states are looking at this issue and without being overly optimistic, I believe the matter will be revisited.
In light of the information he put on the record, will the Minister inform the Minister for Public Enterprise of the precise position and request her, on behalf of the Government, not to mislead workers in Aer Rianta and elsewhere on this matter in the interest of the constitutional obligation of collective Cabinet responsibility?
My colleague, the Minister for Public Enterprise, has not misled anybody on the matter.
She has.
The Minister for Public Enterprise set out the Government's position which each member of Government holds. The Minister knows it will be difficult to reverse this decision but we are not the only country revisiting this matter. With concerted pressure from a number of member states, I hope it will be possible for the ECOFIN Council to revisit this matter. This issue will have to be put forward by the Commission, the legal basis on which it may be done.
It would be madness if the decision was not reversed.
