Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 23 Jun 1999

Vol. 506 No. 6

International Agreements: Motion.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food (Mr. N. O'Keeffe)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the terms of the economic partnership, political co-ordination and co-operation agreement between the European Community and its member states, of the one part, and the United States of Mexico, of the other part, a copy of which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 3 June 1999.

That Dáil Éireann approves the terms of the Euro-Mediterranean agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their member states, of the one part, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, of the other part, a copy of which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 3 June 1999.

That Dáil Éireann approves the terms of the framework agreement for trade and co-operation between the European Community and its member states, on the one hand, and the Republic of Korea, on the other hand, a copy of which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 3 June 1999.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to present to the House, on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, motions relating to the trade and co-operation agreements concluded by the European Union with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, the Republic of Korea and the United Mexican States, respectively. These agreements have been approved by the Government and require approval of the House before they can be deemed ratified.

In general terms, the agreements in question incorporate wide-ranging provisions for the progressive development of trade relations and other forms of co-operation between the European Union and each of the three partner countries. The agreements are comprehensive in scope and include provisions for co-operation in areas as diverse as transport, culture, agriculture, science and technology, the environment and combating trafficking in drugs and money laundering. Because the agreements were negotiated separately their terms and content will differ. Provision is made in each, however, for social co-operation and human rights and democracy. It is intended that these agreements will enter into force when they have been ratified by the member states of the European Union and the partner countries according to the respective constitutional procedures of each.

The agreement with Jordan stems from the European Union's desire to strengthen its relations with the countries of the Mediterranean basin. The Essen European Council of December 1994 reiterated the European Union's willingness to support the Mediterranean countries in their efforts to transform the region into a zone of peace, stability and prosperity. The Euro-Mediterranean conference held in Barcelona in November 1995 established a comprehensive partnership known as the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership between the European Union and its Mediterranean partners, namely, Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey and the Palestinian Authority, through strengthened and regular political dialogue, the development of economic and financial co-operation and greater emphasis on the social, cultural and human dimension of their relations.

A central pillar in the economic and financial architecture envisaged in the Barcelona declaration is the creation by 2010 of a free trade area for the Mediterranean region. An essential feature in preparation for the free trade area is the conclusion by the European Union of Euro-Mediterranean association agreements with each of the countries of the region. The agreement with Jordan forms part of this process.

The objectives of the agreement are: to provide an appropriate framework for political dialogue allowing the development of close political relations between the parties; to establish the conditions for the progressive liberalisation of trade in goods, services and capital; to foster the development of balanced economic and social relations between the parties through dialogue and co-operation; to improve living and employment conditions and enhance productivity and financial stability; to encourage regional co-operation with a view to the consolidation of peaceful co-existence and economic and political stability and to promote co-operation in other areas of reciprocal interest.

Relations between the parties are to be based on democratic principles and respect for human rights which are stipulated as essential elements of the agreement. The agreement will establish a free trade zone between the European Union and Jordan progressively within 12 years from the entry into force of the agreement.

In the case of the Republic of Korea, the objectives of the agreement include the development of economic relations between the member states of the European Union and the Republic of Korea by increasing trade between the two sides, furthering scientific and technological co-operation and facilitating business co-operation. It also provides for co-operation in the field of development in favour of third countries and for the establishment of a regular political dialogue between the European Union and the Republic of Korea.

The Republic of Korea is the twelfth largest trading nation in the world. It was Ireland's thirteenth trading partner in 1997 and thirteenth largest export market. Irish exports to the Republic of Korea more than doubled to over £500 million in 1997 giving Ireland for the first time a favourable trade balance with the Republic of Korea. Exports in 1997 reached almost 100 times their level in 1984. Imports from the Republic of Korea, which had been rising steadily, jumped by 55 per cent in 1997. In the wake of the 1997 financial crisis in Asia, however, exports from the Republic of Korea decreased markedly and figures for the first ten months of 1998 were down by 37 per cent.

In spite of the difficult situation brought about by that crisis, the Republic of Korea remains a major international trading country. The economic outlook there has been improving steadily since the end of 1998. The Korean currency, the won, is recovering its value, its stock market was the best performing in Asia in 1998 and foreign currency reserves are being rebuilt. Interest rates are back to single figures, 8 per cent, and industrial production is showing decreasing rates of decline. This agreement will serve to strengthen and build on Ireland's already excellent bilateral relations with the Republic of Korea.

The third of these agreements is what is known as the global agreement with Mexico. The agreement is designed to advance the interests of the European Union and Mexico in the areas of trade and co-operation and will be of considerable benefit to Ireland in developing its bilateral relations with Mexico. Mexico is Ireland's most important trading partner in Latin America and Ireland has enjoyed a surplus in its trade with Mexico in recent years. In 1996 total trade was valued at £165 million, of which Irish exports accounted for over £100 million. The figures for 1997 show a small decrease in the total volume of trade at £159 million but with Irish exports rising to almost £107 million. As the House will be aware, the Government recently decided to establish at an early date a resident embassy in Mexico city.

The objective of the agreement is to consolidate existing relations between the parties on the basis of reciprocity and mutual interest. To this end, the agreement aims to institutionalise political dialogue, strengthen commercial and economic relations by means of trade liberalisation in conformity with the rules of the WTO and reinforce and broaden the areas for co-operation. Relations between the parties are to be based on democratic principles and respect for human rights which are essential elements of the agree ment. The agreement will be conditional on the observance of human rights and the European Union and Mexico are committed to this conditionality.

The agreement provides for the establishment of frameworks to encourage the development and liberalisation of trade in goods and services. It envisages co-operation in investment promotion, financial services, small and medium-sized enterprises, customs, information technology, education, communications and the environment. Sectors such as agriculture, mining, energy, transport, tourism, fisheries and statistics are covered. The agreement provides for co-operation against money laundering, drug trafficking and chemical precursors. Co-operation on the social front focuses on refugee assistance, human rights and democracy, poverty and health care.

I hope this summary outline of the objectives and main provisions of these important agreements will be helpful to Deputies. Ireland maintains excellent relations with the three partner countries mentioned. Acceptance of the agreements in each case will serve to further develop Ireland's relations with them. In approving these agreements, the House will also be endorsing a substantial step forward by the European Union in strengthening and developing its relations with those countries. I commend the agreements to the House for its approval.

Mr. G. Mitchell

While we can agree to the motions, I want to raise a number of points specific to the EU agreements touched on by the Minister of State. When Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, I had occasion to visit Jordan, as part of a troika, and raise with its Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government, the banning of beef exports to Jordan. Although the level of trade in beef with Jordan is not very high, the ban had catastrophic implications for trade and jobs in Ireland. The response was neither direct nor the sort of response one would expect from a Head of Government. Unusually, I was referred to someone in a more senior position. However, we again received platitudes and an understanding that the ban had been lifted. My recollection is that it was not lifted.

I am raising this issue because friendship, trade and cultural contacts demand that when discussions take place between governments, each should consider the other's difficulties, be straightforward in their dealings and answers and not imply events which will not take place. I contrast this response with the manner in which we were received in Lebanon on the same issue where it was addressed in a matter of fact manner. The relevant people in Jordan could have been more helpful. There was no risk to health nor was there a large amount of trade involved, but this matter caused difficulties for us. I hope the EU and the Government will make it clear to the Jordanian authorities that such unilateral action is unacceptable and that we expect trade agreements to be adhered to.

I welcome the development of more structured relations with Mexico. The Minister of State noted that Mexico is our most important trading partner in Latin America and I am glad that we will soon appoint a resident ambassador to Mexico City. However, this issue has been ongoing for some time and the Minister of State should make the appointment. Mexico is growing, particularly in its role and influence in the North American Free Trade Association. People in Mexico have noted that the NAFTA agreement is working well, so Mexico is growing in importance and we should urgently develop relations with it.

When appointing an ambassador to Mexico, which I hope will happen sooner rather than later, consideration should be given to accrediting the ambassador to Cuba. It is time to improve relations with Cuba and this opportunity should be taken to do so. I do not mean this as a snub to anyone. However, we must examine our own foreign policy and an ambassador to Cuba could be based in Mexico.

These agreements, particularly the agreement with Mexico, show how the global economy is being regionalised. The EU is doing business with Korea, Jordan and Mexico. Last year I published a policy document seeking the creation of a transatlantic EU-North American foundation to be located in Dublin. I argued that Dublin could be to EU-North American relations what Geneva is to UN conventions and Helsinki is to security. Dublin is the natural centre for developing such relations. As the global economy regionalises, relations between the EU and North America, which in time may be between the EU and NAFTA, will become more important. In time these relations could be between the EU and MERCOSUR or the EU and ASEAN. Forty million Americans and 3 million Canadians claim to be of Irish origin. Ireland is the nearest English speaking country in the EU to the US and has developed traditional contacts and experience of negotiating at a high level in the US. As a result, we should be seeking to make Dublin the centre for negotiations and developing cultural, trade, scientific and other relations. I suggested setting up the EU-North American foundation in Dublin with a North American chairman and a European, I hope, an Irish, secretary general, and that the State should fund the estimated £2 million cost for the first two years. Thereafter, the foundation could be funded by governments which benefit from its research which could be carried out by a panel of Irish and American business people, academics, trade unionists and others so that we develop relations on a structured basis across the various strata of society.

Such a development would present Ireland with a golden opportunity, not least because 40 million Americans consider themselves to be of Irish origin. The opportunities of this development would also relate to the fact that, as the EU enlarges eastward, Ireland is becoming even more geographically peripheral as the centre of the Union moves towards central Europe. Therefore, Ireland should carve out a new role for itself. EU-North American relations will develop, an intention specifically referred to in many agreements between the EU and the US and Canada. As this occurs Dublin should be the centre for promoting that co-operation. Any studies carried out should be available to the Irish, US and Canadian Governments and Legislatures, but also to those of EU member states. We should confer this role on ourselves as the work needs to be done and no one is better equipped to do it than us. The will is there if we can wake up to the opportunity.

The Minister was interested in this idea and suggested that I come back to him on it, which I did. At some stage could the Minister outline what measures have been taken to advance this idea? I have set out why I believe it will work in the document which I made available to the Minister.

It is good to see EU agreements develop. Our primary concern should be to develop the agreements with applicant states waiting to join the EU so as to prepare them for membership as soon as possible. This issue cannot be put on the long finger. Sometimes we tend to look at enlargement in the context of the challenges it presents. If one adds together the population of the 11 or 12 applicant states – one cannot be sure if Malta is in or out of that group – it amounts to approximately 105 million people, yet the combined GNP of those states amounts to that of one medium-sized EU member state such as the Netherlands or Belgium.

The extent of the challenge is clear. However, it is a big opportunity to extend the current EU market of 350 million people to almost half a billion. Ireland, being a small open economy, can benefit greatly from that because it has developed the tools to do so. Even more important, the reason we need enlargement and to put it on a fast forward basis is that events in Yugoslavia are a timely reminder of the purpose of the European Union. The forerunner to what is now the European Union was founded shortly after the end of the Second World War with the sole objective of creating peace and stability in Europe so there would be no more war. Peace and stability are the essential prerequisites for prosperity.

Sixty million Europeans lost their lives in the first half of this century. As I have said time and again – I repeat it because it must be said – the purpose of the European Union is to prevent a recurrence of that terrible mayhem and to ensure that our children will not go out and kill French children and French children will not go out and kill German children. Think of the 60 million people who died – most of them were little more than children. We need to accept the applicant states in the European Union as much as they need to be part of the Union. Ireland and the European Union need peace and stability on the continent of Europe so that prosperity can continue and to ensure that countries are not sucked into a third world war which could commence, as the first two did, in Europe.

Ireland should not let others set the pattern for this process. It should adopt a leadership role. For too long we have simply reacted to the views of others. Let us put our view forward. Our view should be that enlargement should be fast tracked. Look at what has happened in Bulgaria. That country made great efforts to reform its economy, to put down the roots of democracy, to establish a market economy and to reform itself. However, the war in Yugoslavia has caused enormous problems and set Bulgaria back to a great extent. The lack of access across the Danube is a particularly large problem. Unless Ireland can ensure that the people of Bulgaria and the other applicant countries see a clear and reasonable entry date for their joining the EU, many of them will return to their old ways. That does not augur well for the rest of Europe.

I welcome these agreements but I urge the Government to advance as a priority the essential agreements which we need with the applicant states of the European Union.

Proinsias De Rossa

I do not have much to say about these agreements other than to observe that it is important that the European Union establish such agreements with non-member states.

The agreement between the European Union and Jordan is intended to create a free trade area. That is important but I must enter a caveat. We should seek to ensure that the goods Ireland buys from these countries are produced in humane circumstances. We should ensure that agreements under the International Labour Organisation are being complied with. I am not suggesting there are breaches, particularly in Mexico, but I am not sure about the situation in Jordan or Korea.

I note from the background material provided by the Department on the agreement with Korea that there is no certainty that the crisis which occurred there some time ago has yet been resolved. It is important that we ensure, in so far as Ireland can do so within the European Union, that anything we do would assist these countries to overcome their difficulties. There is little point having trade agreements with countries if they are on their knees economically.

There is concern in a number of Asian countries that the urgency which existed when the crisis occurred in the first instance appears to have disappeared and that the restructuring being proposed in the context of World Bank aid and under the IMF criteria is no longer there. We must be conscious of these matters. It is all well and good to have agreements on trade but if the country with which we seek to trade is not in a position to do so or uses labour conditions which are inimical to the people involved in production, we should be wary about conducting such trade.

I welcome the fact that the European Union is engaged in making agreements such as these. However, there is a need to ensure that not only economic criteria but also social criteria, particularly with regard to labour conditions, are being applied in countries with which we have trade agreements.

Mr. Barrett

I have no difficulty supporting these agreements. However, I wish to avail of this opportunity to mention the comprehensive partnership known as the Euro-Mediterranean partnership between the EU and its Mediterranean partners, which include countries such as Israel, Lebanon and Syria.

The purpose of this Euro-Mediterranean partnership was not only to increase trade between the EU and the Mediterranean partners but also to try to establish peace and stability in the region. Despite this, there have been continuous attacks on Irish troops who have been stationed in Lebanon in a peace keeping role for more than 20 years. In the recent past, we have seen the unfortunate death of one Irish soldier and serious injury to another. If these agreements are to have real meaning, all parties to them must accept responsibilities. Responsibility for these continuous attacks rests in Israel, Lebanon and Syria.

It is not good enough to pass motions ratifying agreements when there are serious attacks on people involved in peace keeping without some arrangement being put in place under which the EU makes clear its disgust and non-acceptance of the continuation of these attacks. The Defence Forces have lost many soldiers during their 21 years in Lebanon. These soldiers are there in a peace keeping capacity. I had the honour and pleasure of visiting that region on three occasions when I was Minister and I witnessed their work at first hand. Our troops are the greatest ambassadors we could have in terms of performing the role of real peace keepers. They do not go around armed with heavy equipment and ammunition. They involve themselves in the community, with orphanages and in other community activities and have done so for many years.

This occasion should not be allowed to pass without reminding people that agreements operate in two directions. When certain events occur, we should not lose the opportunity of reminding parties to agreements primarily set up to establish peace and stability in a zone or region of their responsibility under those agreements.

I saw the violent attack on the Fijian compound some years ago by Israeli troops which was nothing short of a scandal. A blue flag was flying representing the United Nations, yet mortars were lobbed into the centre of a United Nations compound. There was little outrage about this. I was pleased to see the Minister for Defence sending a reminder to people that they have obligations and that, no matter who they are pursuing, such attacks as I mentioned are made from within their region or country and that the people involved more or less have a free hand. I support Ireland's role in peacekeeping and there is much more we can do in future. At the same time, people must respect both the person who wears the blue beret and the role he or she plays.

I also welcome the establishment of the agreement with the Republic of Korea. It is interesting when we have short debates such as this that certain statistics are produced which often show what none of us realised, namely, the value of the trade we have with these countries. I noticed our trade with Korea doubled to more than £500 million in 1997. Our trade in the similar period with Mexico was £100 million. If I were asked with what country we did more trade, I would say Mexico. It is fascinating to see the opportunities available in places such as the Republic of Korea.

I had responsibility at one stage for marine matters. We have considerable exports of processed fish to Korea and there are tremendous opportunities to increase this trade in future. It brings home to us the need for the development of a secondary fish processing industry capable of processing the raw material to a point where it not alone has added value but creates jobs in areas where it is difficult to obtain employment. That certainly fits into a regional policy of encouraging people to remain in areas such as the west which have suffered rapid depopulation. We have opportunities to develop the fish processing industry to increase trade to places such as the Republic of Korea. Debates on agreements such as this give us the opportunity to re-examine what we are doing in terms of developing regional policy in this country to avail of growing markets in countries such as Korea.

Like the rest of Asia, Korea went through a rocky patch in past years but, as the Minister rightly said, progress was made during 1998. Its stock market was the best performing in 1998. This is a country with which it is in our interests to develop trade. We should examine the various opportunities and develop the type of businesses which will increase further our markets in places such as Korea.

I am pleased that, as part of the agreement with Mexico, mention is made of co-operation in working against money laundering and drug trafficking. Of all the scourges facing the country, even during the era of the Celtic tiger, drugs and drug trafficking are the worst. I welcome any agreement which prevents this terrible disease spreading further. I hope these agreements mean something in terms of dealing with this terrible problem of drug trafficking. It was obvious during the course of research conducted during the European elections – I congratulate Deputy De Rossa on his election to the European Parliament – that one of the key issues and among the top three items of major concern to the people is drugs. We sometimes spend a great deal of time debating issues, some more important than others, but we do not spend sufficient time informing the public as to what steps we are taking to deal with this ongoing horrible problem. If this agreement reduces the illegal importation of drugs into Ireland by one ounce, it is worthwhile. For that reason alone, I support it.

I am glad to have the opportunity afforded by these agreements to express my views. We have no difficulty in supporting them.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food (Mr. N. O'Keeffe)

I join with Deputy Barrett in congratulating Deputy De Rossa on his election to the European Parliament. He is no stranger to it, having been elected once before.

I am grateful for the opportunity to present on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs the Government's position on these important EU agreements. I appreciate the courteous hearing I received from my Dáil colleagues for my opening remarks. I listened with close attention to the views expressed by those Deputies who contributed to the debate and am grateful for them. Much of what they had to say was relevant to the Government's position on the agreements and will be noted with care on this side of the House. There has been a worthwhile exchange of views on a subject of considerable importance, namely, the process of further developing the European Union's contractual economic relations with these third countries.

The agreements will come into force when they have been ratified by all parties concerned. By approving the three motions related to these agreements, the House will make its contribution to the evolution of this process. The advantages conferred by agreements of this nature are considerable. They were negotiated in detail by the Commission acting on behalf of EU member states. Negotiations can take several years to conclude. Their objectives and terms are, therefore, elaborate for clarity and precision. The scope of the agreements tends to be comprehensive, covering a wide range of economic, social and, as appropriate, developmental sectors. They provide a framework for more intensive relations with third country partners from which tangible benefits will flow to both sides. These agreements can confer real benefits on small European Union member states. The potential for Ireland in terms of increased trade will become clear. Each of the agreements we have considered today contains a human rights clause to which the Government attaches great importance. The clauses send out the correct political signals to all parties concerned.

I wish to comment on some of the remarks made. It is true that Irish trade with Jordan is relatively modest. It includes some Irish dairy products, but beef has been banned from Jordan for BSE reasons. There has been contact between Irish and Jordanian authorities with a view to resolving this difficulty and there was a ministerial visit to the country some weeks ago. Total trade in 1997 was worth £14 million, of which our exports account for £13 million, so we are doing reasonably well. The Government will open an embassy in Mexico at an early date. I note Deputy Gay Mitchell's comments in respect of Cuba.

With regard to the possible establishment of a transatlantic EU-North American foundation in Dublin, I understand the Minister for Foreign Affairs has already replied to parliamentary questions on this issue. I will be glad, however, to report Deputy Mitchell's remarks to the Minister. I listened with interest to the Deputy's comments about the serious problems that affect the economic and social life of some of the applicant countries for European Union membership.

With regard to humane standards of production in the workplace, I draw Deputy De Rossa's attention to the human rights dimension of these agreements which will be monitored at European Union and national level. The Government is conscious of the problem to which the Deputy referred.

I readily join with Deputy Barrett in condemning all attacks on Irish military personnel in the Lebanon and elsewhere. The Government has already raised its concerns about these attacks with the Israeli authorities. The House will be aware that the Minister for Defence, Deputy Smith, visited the Middle East in recent days. Deputy Barrett will appreciate that the issue of UN peacekeeping falls outside the scope of this debate and is really a matter for the Department of Defence.

I must inform Deputy Barrett that our trade with Korea amounts to £500 million while our trade with Mexico amounts to £107 million. The Government is confident that, with the opening of an embassy in Mexico, the prospects for further improvement in our trade flow will be enhanced. I welcome and fully support the Deputy's remarks on strengthening Ireland's trade relations with Korea. Everyone endorses his comments about the need to intensify the fight against the international scourges of money laundering and drug trafficking.

I thank the Deputies who participated in the debate on this motion, the substance of which is very important to Ireland and the European Union.

Question put and agreed to.