Vol. 559 No. 3
3 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Defence his views on the proposals contained in the Barnier report of the working group on Defence for the Convention on the Future Europe, in particular, section 49, which raises the concept of EU states agreeing a percentage of their GNP to be devoted to their national defence budgets and that a certain proportion of the defence budget be spent on equipment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26215/02]
The Defence working group of the Convention on the Future of Europe has been considering the Union's role in the field of security and defence and, in particular, whether there is support for developing this role beyond the arrangements agreed at Amsterdam. The Government is not represented on this group. Deputy Gormley and Proinsias de Rossa MEP participate as parliamentary representatives on the group.
The draft report of the chairman of working group VIII on Defence, Michel Barnier, presents the group's discussions and sets out recommendations for the convention. The various and wide ranging recommendations contained in the report will be presented at a plenary session of the convention later this month, on which occasion the members of the convention will have the opportunity to consider its content.
The Government believes the outcome of the convention will be very influential and, as the Minister for Foreign Minister has informed the House, it is approaching the convention, and will approach the eventual intergovernmental council, in a positive and constructive manner. We recognise the need for debate and reform if the European Union is to rise to the new challenges ahead and if it is to sustain and develop public support across the member states.
I am aware of the suggestion that member states agree a percentage of their GNP to be devoted to their defence budgets. This is one of the many suggestions for further consideration contained in the draft report from the working group on defence. The House will no doubt agree that defence and defence policy is a fundamental expression of national sovereignty.
Similarly, defence spending is also a fundamental expression of national sovereignty which is undertaken in the context of ever increasing and competing demands for invariably limited national resources. Defence spending has, therefore, to be undertaken in a prudent and balanced fashion having regard to the prevailing national socio-economic environment and it is a decision solely for national Governments.
The Government's approach to the range of proposals being considered in the context of the defence working group will, of course, take full account of the White Paper on Defence, published in 2000. This reflects the importance which the Government attaches to having a soundly based approach to defence.
Additional informationIt sets out the Government's medium term strategies to give effect to its policies on defence. These policies are consistent with broader Government objectives on foreign and security policy at national and international levels. The concept, as referred to in the Deputy's question, does not appear to take account of these essential national considerations.
I understand the Deputy has indicated, in his own written comments to the working group on the draft report, that the concept would not be acceptable to him.
I am glad to hear the Minister considers the convention to be very influential. How closely has his Department followed the proceedings of the working group on defence? Has the Minister been briefed on the working group? Has he liaised with the Department of Foreign Affairs on this matter? Why is it that neither the Minister's Department nor the Department of Foreign Affairs has submitted a written proposal to the working group as other countries have done? Will he agree that the progress report from Mr. Barnier has profound implications for Ireland? Specifically, what is the Minister's attitude to the Franco-German proposal for enhanced co-operation in the area of defence and does he support it? Does he accept that Ireland, which has the lowest military spending in the EU, will come under intense pressure to increase it?
While the Minister stated that this is a matter for national Governments, surely he realises there is an effort to move this competence into a Union competence so that expenditure of 0.75% of GDP on defence will be expected to increase substantially. Does the Minister agree with the assessment of former commandant Gerry McMahon who said that if you are in the club, you are expected to pay your sub? That is the attitude of many within the European Union.
Of course I keep in touch with the deliberations of the convention. The special Cabinet sub-committee and the interdepartmental group meet regularly. In view of the speed with which things are happening, meetings will take place every two weeks where everything will be thrashed out and decisions taken on the appropriate stance we should adopt. The Deputy need have no fears. We are keeping a close watch on developments as is the Department of Foreign Affairs, which is the primary Department in this area.
If the Deputy cares to look at the budgets right across the EU he will see whether the response is of the nature he has outlined in terms of massive increases in defence expenditure. That is not happening and it is not likely to happen because of competing considerations. Given that the Deputy is a member of the committee, I hope there is nothing in the report that I cannot accept. I wish the Deputy well at his work. It is a good experience to see the diversity of opinion but in the final analysis the convention will make recommendations which will then go to the Intergovernmental Conference for decisions. The convention will be a major influencing factor. To achieve what we want there are checks and balances – on defence, with some neutral States, on taxation with the British. It is an exercise in which we have to be careful to keep our friends to ensure the best result. I assure the House we are not getting involved in joint military procurement or in any of the suggestions made. It involves the Exchequer. It is a sovereign decision and it will be kept there.
The time is exhausted.
I asked why a written submission has not been made. I asked also the Minister's attitude to enhanced co-operation in the area of defence.
Briefly, Minister.
Not all Governments have shown their hand at this stage. Some have made submissions and some have not. We will choose our time to do so. So far as enhanced co-operation is concerned, we are listening to all the proposals and taking our own stance. I do not think we will go too far down that road but we will not get into a position of saying "no" to different proposals. It is a collegiate issue. We will work as well we can to get the best result.
