Gay Mitchell
Question:4 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the agenda for consideration by the December 1997 Luxembourg European Council summit meeting. [22493/97]
Other Questions. - European Council Summit.
Discussions at the European Council in Luxembourg on the 12 and 13 December are expected to focus on two central topics, Agenda 2000, especially the issue of future enlargement, and preparation for the third stage of EMU.
As regards future enlargement, and with a view to enabling the actual opening of negotiations as soon as possible next year, the European Council will have the task of taking the necessary decisions on the management of the overall enlargement process, including practical arrangements for the initial phase of negotiations and the reinforcement of the European Union's pre-accession strategy as well as other possible means to strengthen co-operation between the EU and all applicant countries.
There is also likely to be some discussion of the non-enlargement aspects of Agenda 2000, notably the development of EU policies and the question of the future financial framework. However, the outcome of the European Council on these issues is expected to be procedural rather than substantive. The Commission may be mandated to complete various elements of the dossier in 1998.
The other core item for this weekend's European Council summit concerns preparations for Stage 3 of EMU, in particular, arrangements for enhanced economic co-ordination. In addition, the Minister for Foreign Affairs will consider certain foreign policy issues over dinner on Friday night. I may report on my meetings with various prominent politicians in Algeria over the past few days.
A meeting between the members of the European Council and heads of Government and foreign Ministers of the associated countries of Central and Eastern Europe and of Cyprus, at which the Presidency will present the outcome of the European Council, is also planned for Saturday. A similar presentation by the Presidency to the Turkish Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of the outcome of the European Council is also planned for Saturday evening.
Will the Minister confirm that 1 January 1999 remains the date for the irrevocable locking of exchange rates in the third stage of EMU, that this will go ahead on schedule and that all the necessary preparations are in place across the EU for that? The Minister mentioned Agenda 2000. Does he share my concern in relation to the comments of Commissioner Wulf-Mathies regarding the idea of subdividing the country for future EU funding purposes? I would be particularly concerned that the Dublin region would not lose out as a result of any proposed subdivisions. Will the Minister avail of the European Council meeting to discuss the issue with other foreign Ministers to ensure that if there is any proposal to subdivide Ireland for regional funding or other structural and cohesion funding it will be strongly resisted? The Dublin region must continue to get its fair share of funds as much infrastructural renewal needs to be done, particularly in the inner city.
The third stage of EMU will come into effect on 1 January 1999. This means that the exchange rates of currencies of the participating member states will be locked. The new currency will be called the euro.
The Deputy raised the issue of structural, cohesion and Objective 1 status funds. I want to make it clear that this Government will be very vigilant in relation to retaining these.
Commissioner Wulf-Mathies recently commented on transitional arrangements, particularly on reduced receipts for structural funds for Ireland. In its Agenda 2000 proposal, the European Commission recognises that transitional arrangements will be necessary for regions such as Ireland which will have passed the 75 per cent threshold for eligibility for Objective 1 status. Such transitional arrangements are necessary in order that Ireland's recent economic progress, in which structural funds have played a significant part, is not put at risk by any abrupt scaling back of structural funds. The Government will insist that transitional arrangements are adequate in content and duration to continue to meet our infrastructural needs, investment and human resource requirements and to tackle regional underdevelopment.
Has the Government submitted its views on how best to proceed with the enlargement process? Practical arrangements must be put in place for the opening negotiations and the accession arrangements. Has the Government expressed a preference yet about the number of countries to be included in the first tranche of enlargement and what countries should join subsequently or has it been left to other countries to make the running on this issue?
Will the Minister clarify how he envisages the negotiations for the accession of Cyprus being conducted? Is there a likely prospect of a united team from the island, representing both the Cypriot and the Turkish communities, or has that been agreed yet by the Commission?
Ireland has taken a view on the process of enlargement. There are two tranches of countries seeking accession, five countries plus Cyprus and a second group of five plus, possibly, Turkey. Hungary, Poland, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Cyprus were given a positive opinion in relation to their eligibility for membership of the EU and arrangements will be made to include them in the greater European Union over the next four to six years. The second tranche consists of Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria and, possibly, Turkey. I use the word "possibly" advisedly because the Deputy is aware of the problems in relation to Turkey. There will be a European conference which will encapsulate discussions on a basis which will be inclusive of these countries.
The accession of Cyprus is a fundamentally important question. Cyprus applied for membership of the European Union in 1990. In March 1995, the EU Council of Ministers decided that accession negotiations with Cyprus would commence six months after the conclusion of the Intergovernmental Conference, taking its results into account. It is anticipated that the forthcoming European Council at Luxembourg will reconfirm this commitment. Accession negotiations with the Government of Cyprus, which is the sole Government of Cyprus recognised by the UN and the international community, are expected to open in April 1998.
Ireland, along with other EU members, would also wish to see representatives of the Turkish Cypriot community participate in the accession negotiations, particularly in view of the clear benefits accession would bring to that community. We hope the parties involved can, and with the necessary political will they will, agree on a formula to allow such representation. However, such a formula cannot extend to a recognition of the so called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. The European Union and the wider international community wish to see an agreed political solution and a united Cyprus within the bi-zonal, bi-communal federal state approach proposed by the United Nations. We will continue to lend encouragement and support to the efforts of the UN to achieve this objective within the direct talks process which it has convened between the two leaders.
We hope to see a resumption of the UN direct talks process as envisaged by the UN early in 1998.
Given the likelihood that the European Union will be taking in countries which will need major support to reach European standards of living, does the Minister agree that the European Union budget as proposed under Agenda 2000 is grossly inadequate? Will he seek to have that issue raised not just at the forthcoming summit but at every other summit? If the European Union is serious in its intent to maintain the Union, it must grasp this serious problem.
I accept the Deputy's point. The opportunity has been presented in the past and will be presented in the future to raise this matter. The Deputy can be assured that I will pursue it to its proper conclusion.
Is it the case that the Commission can review its recommendations about the countries to be negotiated with in advance of others based on the performance of the applicant states? If the position in Slovakia, for example, were to improve with regard to the democratisation process, Slovakia could be admitted and the same could apply to other applicant states. If the economic ability of applicant states to take on the acquis were to improve, does the Minister agree that the Commission could make further reports which could change the current line up of applicant states?
I was a noted critic of the Department of Justice for many years, particularly when I was Opposition spokesman on justice. Does the Minister agree that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform did exceptionally well during the Irish Presidency? Does he further agree that the Dublin II European Council meeting made substantial progress in the area of tackling crime on a European basis and will he seek to ensure that the Luxembourg European Council meeting maintains that momentum? The Dublin II meeting set up a group, set it tasks and gave it a tight reporting date. That approach and momentum, for which great credit is due to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, needs to be maintained. Will the Minister push that point strongly at the European Council meeting this weekend?
I note the Deputy's comments and I appreciate his remarks about the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Deputy was a critic of the Department — it is not for me to judge whether he was fair or unfair — and I will take serious note of his contribution.
I assume the Deputy was referring to including countries from the second tranche in the event of their economies improving. The Commission would take note of any improvements, whether they be in the economic or democratic context, and would include such countries in the process if they measured up to the positive opinion which was given to the first tranche of five countries plus Cyprus.
The Minister must be aware of the deep sense of grievance in Lithuania that it is not part of the opening round of negotiations. Why has the Commission not recommended that Lithuania, which has similar economic circumstances to Estonia, be included in the first tranche of five countries plus Cyprus?
I am not aware of the reason for Lithuania not being included. However, I can forward the Deputy a note on the matter.