Vol. 481 No. 7
2 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the discussions, if any, he has had with the British Prime Minister on the possibility of Ireland participating in the British Government initiative to set up a National Grid for Learning, franchised as a public and private partnership to help teachers update their skills and assist in the development of information technology in schools in view of the discussions by his predecessor on the matter. [16852/97]
3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the progress, if any, which has been made on establishing a structure of co-operation between the Irish Food Safety Authority and the Independent Food Standards Agency proposed to be established by the new British Government in view of discussions by his predecessor with Prime Minister Blair on the matter and in view of the level of official contacts that have taken place in this regard. [16853/97]
4 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his recent meeting at the Council of Europe with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair. [16857/97]
5 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the discussions, if any, he has had with the British Prime Minister regarding the content of the British legislation to implement the recommendations of the Independent Review of Parades and Marches in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16992/97]
6 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting on 14 October 1997 with the Bloody Sunday Relatives Committee; the response, if any, he has received to the submission made by the previous Government to the British authorities; if not, when a response will be received ; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16993/97]
7 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the issues discussed at his recent meeting with the Bloody Sunday Relatives Committee. [17046/97]
8 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will give details of his meeting in Strasbourg with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair. [17047/97]
9 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the meetings he had with political leaders on his visit to Derry on Friday, 10 October 1997. [17050/97]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 to 9, inclusive, together.
A diverse group of questions.
I will take supplementary questions. I met with Prime Minister Blair on Friday, 10 October in the margins of the Council of Europe Summit meeting in Strasbourg. In the course of a useful discussion we reviewed progress on the talks, which we both agreed was satisfactory. In addition to discussing the talks, I raised a number of issues including the proposed legislation on parades where I reiterated the Irish Government's position. The public processions legislation, which was published on Friday last, reflects the concerns the Government had and, as I indicated last Friday, I welcome it in broad principle.
On Friday, I also expressed satisfaction that sporting fixtures of all kinds, including Gaelic games, had been specifically excluded from the legislation. In applying the legislation, it would be vitally important to distinguish legitimate expressions of cultural identity on different sides of the community which did not impinge on the rights of others from activities likely to give rise to intercommunal strife.
I also raised the issue of Bloody Sunday at my meeting with the Prime Minister, and am satisfied a response to the Government assessment of the new material forwarded to the British Government will be forthcoming in the near future. I met the relatives of the victims of Bloody Sunday last Tuesday. I stressed my support for them and their campaign. The Widgery report must be repudiated and the truth of Bloody Sunday must be clearly established. On my way back to Ireland from Strasbourg, I met John Hume in Derry and reviewed with him progress on the talks and related issues.
In our discussions on the talks, the Prime Minister and I agreed on the importance of the East-West dimension in its own right and in the context of the three stranded process. A number of issues were raised such as social partnership, trade union recognition and minimum wage provision. There may be benefit in having further discussions with the British Government on those issues.
On the specific questions about East-West co-operation, Deputies will be aware the issue of British-Irish relations was raised at my meeting with the Prime Minister on 3 July. At that time, it was agreed to seek to develop, as appropriate, the programme of co-operation agreed in December 1995, together with initiatives covered by the joint statement issued on 23 May 1997.
Concerning the possibility of Ireland participating in the national grid for learning, this project is still at a very early stage. In earlier discussions between the relevant Departments on this issue, it was agreed contact would be maintained as this project was developed. A document outlining potential areas of co-operation was recently prepared by IT experts in the Department of Education and Science and was forwarded to the Department for Education and Employment in the UK for consideration.
A further meeting of appropriate officials from both sides is planned in the next few weeks to consider these proposals. In addition, the Minister for Education and Science will meet his counterpart, the Secretary of State for Education and Employment, at an early date to examine the possibilities for co-operation between our respective education sectors, having regard to the national grid for learning and the development of information and communications technologies in schools.
Concerning progress in co-operation on food safety, the opportunity naturally arises for co-operation in areas of common interest in this field as both Administrations are currently involved in similar operations in the interests of food safety. As the proposed UK food standards agency is unlikely to be established before mid-1999, the formation of a formalised structure of co-operation is not a realistic option at this point. I am pleased, however, that contacts at official level are ongoing. As recently as last week, senior Irish and UK officials met in Dublin to discuss matters of mutual concern — both sides agreed the most productive area of co-operation at this point would be the sharing of scientific data in the field of food safety.
Will the Taoiseach agree the only satisfactory outcome to the representations made by the previous Government to the British in regard to Bloody Sunday is a new inquiry to establish the full facts, and that anything short of that would be unsatisfactory? Did the Taoiseach obtain any assurances from his British counterpart that this would be the outcome of the current consideration of the issue?
I stated the view of the Government in that matter. I have also outlined that view on a number of other occasions. The position of the British Prime Minister is that he hopes the British assessment of the material will be concluded within a matter of weeks. There was some delay because they were engaged in many other matters in regard to starting the talks process and preparing the legislation for the current programme. However, the Secretary of State, Mo Mowlam, the British Prime Minister and some of the officials involved have assured me they will try to complete that assessment within the next few weeks and will report back at that stage.
In fairness to them, I agreed not to comment on any detailed discussions we had until they make that position clear. However, they did not give me an insight into any comprehensive assessment they have made at this stage. I think it will go before their Northern Ireland committee before they brief any member of the Irish Government.
On the parades legislation, is the Taoiseach concerned that a number of groups in Northern Ireland are already seeking to undermine the credibility of the commission by making false charges against it? Will he indicate that he is satisfied with the make up of the commission, as it will have an important role in ensuring peaceful parades next year? Given the British Government's welcome decision to exclude the GAA from the remit of this commission and the Taoiseach's close involvement with the association, will he ask it to offer a quid pro quo by dropping rule 21, which prevents members of the Northern Ireland police force from joining the GAA?
I broadly welcome the public processions legislation. It will be debated in the normal way in the Houses of Parliament and may be amended but I praise its composition and the work which has gone into it. I wish it well and we will do anything we can to promote its worth. It is wrong to prejudge the effect of the legislation or those who will be on the commission. There have been arguments on past issues but the legislation should be taken in the spirit in which it is introduced.
I am glad the Bill has been amended because that provision would have affected the GAA and other sporting groups. At the GAA congress two years ago it was stated that the issues surrounding membership by RUC officers would be debated in a few years — I think it will arise at the next congress and any decision will be a matter for the association.
Will the Taoiseach ask the GAA to drop that rule?
I am on record as saying that in time, as the position improves and we move away from past difficulties, it will be far easier to do that. It is a matter for people involved in the GAA in those areas to make that assessment. A considerable number of resolutions were put down by GAA clubs suggesting that was the direction in which the association should move.
Given the Taoiseach's direct involvement in the Northern Ireland peace process, would it not be a major confidence building measure for the GAA to do that? Would he welcome such a move in the near future?
I would welcome it in the future. As to the timing, when one starts considering the issue I do not agree with getting into the area of the quid pro quo and what one sporting body should do as against another. I think that, with the passage of time, it is a move the GAA should make.
What timeframe has the Taoiseach in mind for linking Irish schools to the British national grid for learning? Given that the language in both areas is similar there are immense possibilities for North-South co-operation between schools if compatible computer equipment is used. Does he agree it is important that he takes a personal interest in ensuring Ireland is linked to the national grid for learning and, further, that Ireland has an input into it, so that if it is to be a common grid the policy will be determined jointly by Irish and British policy makers, rather than having the policy drawn up by the British with Ireland offered an opportunity to co-operate on British terms and standards?
I agree. There has already been contact at official level and there will be contact between the Secretary of State for Education and Employment and the Minister for Education and Science. The "Schoolnet" component of the schools' IT 2000 programme in Ireland envisages a virtual meeting place, which I strongly support. The British national grid for learning sets out a number of points which include on-line versions of the curriculum operating in various parts of the UK, a virtual teachers' centre focusing on the professional development of teachers and information enabling pupils to participate remotely in, for example, science experiments involving space technology which would be too expensive otherwise. We can co-operate in these areas and thus be involved at a far lower cost than if we were trying to do so alone. Mutual support and advancement possibilities and complementary activities in this area have been identified by the Department of Education and Science. These matters have been communicated in an East-West discussion document which is being considered by the UK authorities and will be discussed further at a meeting in the near future between the Minister and the Secretary of State.
With regard to the matter of east-west co-operation and discussions, has the Taoiseach raised the issue of Sellafield with the Prime Minister given that, after Northern Ireland, it is one of the issues of greatest contention between the two states? What response has he had from the Prime Minister on that matter? Is the matter being discussed in the context of the east-west discussion document?
I have not had other than brief discussions on that matter which have led to meetings set up by a number of my Government colleagues, the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources in particular. A working liaison group has been set up to deal with issues concerning the Irish Sea which is a useful development.
The management of the Irish Sea, including the issues of Sellafield, dumping in the Irish Sea and the use of that sea by the British for submarine exercises, could usefully be discussed on an east-west basis with a view to establishing an understanding of the purposes for which the Irish Sea should be used, given our equal concerns about the sea environment.
With regard to Bloody Sunday, does the Taoiseach agree that an independent inquiry into the events of that day is needed and that the best way that can be effected is through an international body such as the UN?
An independent inquiry is required. I have stated my view on the Widgery Tribunal many times. The new information which was put together by the good work of the last Government in a detailed assessment of the events requires that the matter be dealt with by an inquiry. I am conscious that the relatives would far prefer that it was carried out by an international figure, not somebody from the UK. That is a matter of which the British Government is aware and we await its assessment of the issues.
With regard to the Deputy's first point, it is a matter that is being dealt with on an East-West basis. In their co-operation with our Departments the British Government Departments have been very open. On taking office the British Government made us aware of details that had not been in the public domain previously with regard to dumping in the Irish Sea. It has agreed the setting up of the liaison group with the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and a convention has been signed in the recent past. I detect that the British are extremely anxious to co-operate on these matters, particularly on the important issue of dumping which took place in the past.
I appreciate the progress made, but we are discussing co-operation between two Governments on a voluntary basis. If we are to get to grips with the problems that have arisen in the past with the Irish Sea regarding the discharge of waste from Sellafield and other issues that may arise in future, some form of institutional arrangement to jointly manage the Irish Sea will be needed. That would be a fruitful issue for East-West negotiations.
I would not rule that out. A report setting out what has been discussed already as well as new information will be ready before Christmas. Perhaps then further co-operation can be considered. This issue has been raised by different groups with me and other Ministers. I have found no reluctance on the part of the British Government to co-operate in these matters and we will try to develop that. The report due before Christmas will highlight the difficulties and problems that will have to be addressed.
In view of recent speculation in the Financial Times regarding the British Government's attitude to entering Economic and Monetary Union earlier than expected, did the Taoiseach raise this matter with the Prime Minister?
No. My last meeting was concerned with Northern matters. I have had no discussion of EMU since my earlier meeting with the Prime Minister. Events have moved significantly since that earlier discussion.
Having regard to the certainty that we will join EMU on 1 January 1999 and the United Kingdom will not, what arrangements on the Irish side of the relationship between Dublin and London are being made to minimise any difficulties that may arise?
Although this is straying from the question, it is vitally important that we co-operate.
That is why I asked the question.
I have discussed this, and the British Government position was not very certain. Our Department of Finance and Central Bank, through the Economic Monetary Institute, will form the basis of co-operation, but we must have firm understanding, in so far as is possible, with the British Government on what will happen after we join.
The Taoiseach has expressed his beliefs. What action does he propose to convert that belief into action?
I do not want to take over EMU from the Minister for Finance, though I am capable of doing so. I assure Deputy Quinn that assessments done by the Department of Finance and the Central Bank have worked out strategically what would happen if Britain went in or stayed out in the short-term. That data can come into play at any time. We now have a clear idea of the direction the British Government will take in future. It appears it may not join until 2004 or 2005, which allows concrete decisions to be made by the Department of Finance and the Central Bank in coming to an understanding, if they can, with the British Government. I am conscious the Minister for Finance is very anxious to do that.
