John Bruton
Question:2 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has to travel overseas on official business between now and the end of June 1998. [3063/98]
Ceisteanna—Questions. - Ministerial Travel.
John Bruton
Question:3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the Heads of Government or of State that will be visiting Ireland and meeting with him from now until 31 July 1998. [4696/98]
John Bruton
Question:4 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his attendance at the EU special European summit on enlargement negotiations in London on 12 March 1998. [4698/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 to 4, inclusive, together.
My confirmed international travel plans up to June 1998 are as follows: annual dinner of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, and a gala evening to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Copthorne Tara Hotel, London on 26 February 1998; the launch of the Irish Post's Business '98 publication in London on 27 February 1998; the European Conference on enlargement in London on 12 March 1998; a visit to Canada and the United States for St. Patrick's Day; the Asia Europe Summit in London on 3 and 4 April 1998; the Special European Council on Economic and Monetary Union in Brussels on 2 and 3 May 1998; and the June European Council in Cardiff on 15 and 16 June 1998.
There are no confirmed inward visits of Heads of State and Government in the period up to 31 July 1998.
As regards the European Conference, the initial meeting on 12 March next will bring together the member states of the Union and the European states aspiring to accede to it. The conference is not, formally speaking, part of the enlargement process but is complementary to it. The enlargement negotiations will be launched at the end of March.
Is the Taoiseach aware there is a specific invitation to him to visit Russia to discuss, among other things, Irish exports of beef to that country? Will he indicate whether he intends to intervene in regard to the possibility of enhancing Irish beef exports to Russia and Egypt? Does he propose to visit Egypt in pursuit of that matter? In regard to the Taoiseach's various EU meetings, has he specific plans to raise the issue of duty free sales, in view of the fact that their abolition from June of next year will not only increase transport costs into and out of Ireland but will substantially disadvantage many parts of Britain which are distant from the centre of Europe?
I am aware of the invitation to Russia, which has been in the Department for some time, and it is hoped that visit will take place in late summer. On the restoration of beef exports, all Ministers, particularly the Minister for Agriculture and Food, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and I will do everything possible when the opportunity arises to promote and achieve success on that issue with all third countries. In regard to duty free sales, I raised that issue at the European Council meeting at Christmas. Last night the Minister for Public Enterprise met Mr. John Prescott, the British Transport Secretary, and they will have further meetings. I will continue to raise the issue of duty free sales whenever I have an opportunity to do so.
Is the Taoiseach aware I availed of the opportunity at a recent meeting with Prime Minister Blair to raise the matter of duty free sales, in support of the case being made by the Government? Will the Taoiseach raise this matter with Prime Minister Blair, given that Britain holds the Presidency of the European Union and it has the capacity to influence the agenda of Council meetings in a way that is not open to non-Presidency countries?
I raised this issue a number of times with Prime Minister Blair and also in this House during our European Union Presidency, and I will continue to raise it at every opportunity. Deputy Bruton is aware of the difficulties for the ECOFIN Council and the Commission regarding this issue. I am not sure if Prime Minister Blair will be able to do any more on this issue than we did during our Presidency.
Does the Taoiseach accept his action as Minister for Finance in 1992, when he effectively sold the pass on duty free sales, was a mistake and does he regret it?
I was very proud in 1992 to achieve an extension of seven years for duty free sales. Unfortunately, when the Deputy was in a similar position at a later stage he was unable to do anything about the matter.
When I attempted to raise the matter I was told the opportunity to exercise the veto was in the then Minister's hands in 1992 and that when he acceded to the abolition of duty free sales at that time the game was over. The only achievement then was an extension of time. Will the Taoiseach inform the people of north Dublin and elsewhere that the person who could have made a difference in this matter was himself and that the Minister for Public Enterprise is currently engaged in a charade?
The Deputy is entirely wrong. He is either a political opportunist or he has a bad memory. The argument made in 1992, in co-operation with Aer Rianta and the Department of Transport, was that the time should be extended. Before attending that meeting I was asked to have duty free facilities extended to the end of 1995. I managed to have it extended until the end of 1999. Like other issues in Europe, it is our responsibility to put forward and argue our case. On the morning before the final European Council meeting I stated in the House that that item should be included in the Irish Presidency. However, I accept that those involved were not able to do anything about this. Far from criticising, the House should compliment me on having duty free facilities extended for a further seven years.
The Taoiseach must be joking.
Does the Taoiseach agree there were differences between the meetings in which he was involved and subsequent meetings in that he could have vetoed the abolition of duty free in 1992?
Correct.
Does he also agree that everyone who attended such meetings in the interim has been in a difficult position because in seeking changes they must also seek unanimity? Does the Taoiseach accept that his decision, as Minister for Finance, not to veto the abolition of duty free sales in 1992 is the origin of the problem?
Is the Taoiseach aware that Commissioner Kinnock is in favour of reopening the issue and that the Commission is the only body, by means of a proposal to the Council, which can propose to do so? Does he agree that one obstacle to reopening the issue is that Commissioner Flynn is not in favour of doing so? Given that Commissioner Flynn was a member of Fianna Fáil but was reappointed to the Commission by me, does the Taoiseach agree that an all-party approach might be made to him to reconsider this issue in conjunction with his colleagues?
I would welcome any efforts to resolve this matter. I do not accept Deputy Bruton's assertion about the veto because the original decision could have been reversed at any stage.
It could not.
There are many precedents of the Commission changing its decisions. The Commission initiates policy and it is our responsibility to encourage the Commission to change. I am aware that Commissioner Kinnock has a view on this matter and that a number of Ministers, other than Finance Ministers, in various member states are anxious to make changes, particularly in respect of ferries. The Minister for Public Enterprise spoke to the Secretary of State, Mr. John Prescott, about this matter last night and she will discuss it with the German authorities next week. The Government and the political parties should continue to force this issue. It will be costly for other countries but the cost to Ireland will be markedly greater. The Minister for Finance will shortly receive a comprehensive report which will add to the case we have put forward.
Does the Taoiseach agree with the point I made to the Secretaries of State for Wales and Scotland that if direct ferry routes between Ireland and the continent are discontinued because of the abolition of duty free sales damage to roads in both countries will increase due to the additional traffic involved? Does he also agree that this will benefit neither country and that both should support the Irish case for a suspension of the decision to abolish duty free sales? Will the Taoiseach consider lobbying not only at Westminster but also in Cardiff and Edinburgh with a view to gaining support? Will he also consider lobbying Portugal and Spain which are likely to lose tourist traffic from northern Europe because air fares to non-EU countries in North Africa will be more competitive than those to EU member states due to the abolition of duty free sales?
I have already lobbied in Spain and Portugal and in the Nordic countries where ferries are an important business. The case has been well put by the international group lobbying for duty free sales that airfares will increase substantially. The report will show that. We have already given a number of assessments, which I quoted at the European Council meeting in December. I am glad to co-operate in a campaign that is already in train. I assure the House that I have lobbied and will continue to lobby on this issue. Our case has merit and it stood up when I got a seven and a half year extension.
I would not revisit that.
It is a popular issue and if we got another extension——
Do not return to the scene of the crime.
The Deputy did not see fit to raise it at a European Council meeting. At least I have done so. I assure the House that we will continue at every opportunity to try to defend our position on duty free sales.
As Minister for Finance in 1992 did the Taoiseach have the power to exercise a veto in relation to the package of decisions before the ECOFIN meeting that would have ensured that the duty free status could have survived?
In 1992 I endeavoured, with the duty free sales lobby, the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications and Aer Rianta, to get a derogation as far into the future as possible. We succeeded in doing so on the basis that we should continue to put our case on the employment issues and on the value to the economy of duty free.
We have had a wide ranging discussion on this matter and we must proceed to Question No. 5.
This issue arises on every doorstep in Dublin North.
I will allow the Deputy a final brief supplementary question.
There are no questions tabled on this matter.
Will the Taoiseach tell Councillor Kennedy in Dublin North and the other Fianna Fáil canvassers in that constituency that the decision——
Is the Deputy worried about the by-election?
——to end duty free sales was made by Deputy Bertie Ahern as Minister for Finance when he was in Government with the Progressive Democrats?
The Deputy should confine his remarks to putting a short supplementary question. We must take Question No. 5.
The Deputy should explain to the voters why, when he was chairman of ECOFIN, he made no attempt to assist.
That is a lie.
I have called Question No. 5.
On a point of order, the Taoiseach has just asserted that as Minister for Finance at ECOFIN I made no attempt to raise this issue. He knows that to be a lie and I would like him to withdraw it.
I endorse what Deputy Quinn has said. As Minister for Finance he did raise this issue. The pass was sold when it could have been blocked by the Taoiseach.
What did he do about it?
He made no attempt at the European Council in Dublin to change it.
Uncharacteristically, the Taoiseach has asserted that as Minister for Finance I made no attempt to reverse the decision that had been made.
Deputy Quinn did not achieve much.
If that is a correction I will happily accept it. I want the Taoiseach to withdraw formally the assertion that I made no attempt. He knows that is not true.
I have no evidence that the Deputy tried to change the decision on this issue. All I know is that at the European Council no effort was made to change it and there is no record to show that an attempt was made to change it.
An allegation has been made by the Taoiseach that as Minister for Finance I made no attempt to have the decision on this matter reversed. He and the Minister for Finance know that to be contrary to the truth. I do not want the Taoiseach in the heat of an exchange to mislead the House inadvertently. However, he has done so and I invite him to withdraw his statement that I made no attempt to change the decision on this matter. He knows that is not the case and I will not let the record stand on that basis.
Deputy Quinn seems to have no difficulty giving a totally inaccurate assessment of what happened in 1992. I argued the case in 1992 and got a seven year derogation.
The Taoiseach did not use his veto.
If Deputy Quinn wishes to tell the House what he did during the European Council meeting in December 1996, I am prepared to listen but I have no knowledge of what happened to change this decision.
The Taoiseach did not say he had no knowledge, he said Deputy Quinn had not done anything.
That is not good enough.
(Dublin West): Could this be debated in north Dublin so that we can proceed with business?
Duty free sales are important.
I have called Question No. 5 and we must proceed with business. Deputy Quinn must find another way of addressing the matter but Question Time cannot be taken up with it.
The Taoiseach has knowingly made an assertion in the heat of debate which he knows to be untrue and he is not prepared to withdraw it.
The Deputy has made that point. The Chair has called Question No. 5 and I ask the Taoiseach to reply.
Will the Taoiseach withdraw the lie he put on the record of the House?
I have given the Deputy an opportunity to state what he did and if the Deputy——
Is the Taoiseach saying he does not know or that Deputy Quinn did nothing? He cannot have it both ways.
I stated three times I do not know.
He either does not know or he does.
I said I do not know. It has not been publicly recorded that the Deputy did anything.
He claims I did nothing in the past which means he knows and, therefore, he is lying.
Order, please. We cannot have such accusations across the floor. The remarks are disorderly.
Deputy Quinn did something. If the Taoiseach checks the record, he will know he did.
The Taoiseach sold the pass in 1992 and is now trying to cover up.
Commission a study on the matter. The Taoiseach is wrong.
We must proceed with Question Time
On a point of order——
The Deputy has made a point of order on a number of occasions. We cannot hold up the business of the House.
Deputy Quinn rose.
When the Chair is on its feet the Deputy must resume his seat. I have called over and over again for Question No. 5 to be answered. I now ask the Taoiseach to reply.
I will return to this matter. An allegation has been made.
The Deputy will have to find another way.
I want to serve notice to you now.
The Taoiseach has lied on the record of the House. I have offered him an opportunity——
Withdraw that.
The Taoiseach is challenging Deputy Quinn to bring in his evidence.
Deputy Quinn should not use the term "lie". I have said over and over again the Deputy is out of order. I call on the Taoiseach to answer Question No. 5.
The Taoiseach should withdraw the comment. It is as simple as that.
A Cheann Comhairle, it is unusual for the Taoiseach to be accused of telling lies. You should not let that pass.
What the Taoiseach said was not true. That is a fact.
The Deputy should withdraw the word "lie". That is totally out of order.
Also, it is on file. If the Taoiseach checked the file he would know what Deputy Quinn did.
Nothing happened.
I will check the file. If it was done in December 1996, I will accept that.
The Taoiseach said Deputy Quinn did nothing. He raised the matter at ECOFIN as a result of which a study was commissioned.
I have no knowledge but I will look at the files for December 1996.
There is no evidence.
The Taoiseach should do so again before he makes——
If he is not sure, he should withdraw the comment.
Is the Deputy withdrawing the word "lie"?
No.
I must ask the Deputy to leave the House if he is not prepared to withdraw the word "lie".
Sir, the Taoiseach changed in midflight. He said I was lying. He then said he did not know what I did.
There cannot be any further discussion on the matter. The Deputy either withdraws the word "lie" or leaves the House. Will the Deputy withdraw the word?
The Taoiseach deliberately said I did nothing.
The Deputy is letting himself down.
I stated three times in defence of what happened in 1992 that I had no knowledge of any defence that the Minister——
That is not what the Taoiseach said first.
Does the Deputy want to listen to what I have to say or does he just want to make noise? I have no knowledge. If there is something on the record, I will listen, but I did not lie and I expect Deputy Quinn to withdraw that remark.
Will the Deputy withdraw the word "lie"?
No, Sir, I cannot.
It is the first time in this House.
We have no option then but to name him.
Deputy Quinn is the one being offended against and not the one offending.
The Taoiseach said I did not do something and then said he did not know whether I had done something. The problem does not lie with me, it lies with the Taoiseach.
The Deputy is letting down himself and his party.
I am prepared to accept the Taoiseach inadvertently misled the House. If he is prepared to accept he could have inadvertently misled the House, I will withdraw my remark.
It should be withdrawn.
I clarified the position four times. I am saying I had no record of what Deputy Quinn did.
Therefore, the Taoiseach could not know what I did.
If the Deputy states he moved heaven and earth and it is on the record, I will accept it.
Thank you.