Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 25 Jun 2003

Vol. 569 No. 4

European Council: Statements

The Taoiseach

I attended the European Council meeting in Thessalonika on 19 and 20 June. I was accompanied by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Brian Cowen. The Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dick Roche, also attended. The Conclusions of the European Council have been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. The meeting was a major success for the European Union. It marked a further milestone in the enlargement of the European Union with the Heads of State or Government of the ten accession states attending as observers; it warmly welcomed the outcome of the European Convention and it accepted the work of the Convention as a good basis for the start of the Intergovernmental Conference. It set out a detailed work programme in the area of justice and home affairs; and it approved the appointment of a new Governor of the European Central Bank.

The main item on the agenda of the meeting was the European Convention. The President of the Convention, Valery Giscard d'Estaing, presented the Convention's report and, in the presence of the President of the European Parliament, Pat Cox, the members of the European Council had an initial debate. All the members of the European Council welcomed the successful outcome of the Convention and expressed their gratitude to President Giscard and all the members of the Convention for the work they accomplished. At the Laeken European Council in December 2001, we set the Convention a daunting task. We asked it to pave the way for the upcoming Intergovernmental Conference by considering the key issues arising for the Union's future development and to try to identify possible responses. At the same time, we asked the convention, in the face of new challenges confronting the Union, to work towards making the European Union more democratic, more transparent and more efficient. We asked it to consider ways to bring citizens closer to the European Union; to consider how an enlarged Union should be organised and how it should develop as a stable model in a new, multi-polar world.

The European Convention started its work in February 2002 and will conclude in mid-July following some additional technical work. It is fair to say the outcome of the European Convention has exceeded the expectations of most. The draft constitutional treaty that has been produced would help to make the Union more democratic, transparent and accessible. It represents the balance between the member states and the Union. It sets out in a clear way the competences of the European Union and distinguishes these competences from those of the member states. It simplifies the Union's instruments and reduces their number. It would increase the democratic legitimacy and transparency of the Union in a wide variety of ways, including by strengthening the institutions of the Union and enhancing their effectiveness. The Charter of Fundamental Rights would be incorporated in a way that ensures legal clarity and certainty. Furthermore, the convention has produced a draft constitutional treaty that is written in a simple, clear and legible style and this is very welcome. The report of the European Convention is a real achievement for the European Union. It proves, once again, that when people of good will in the European Union put their minds together they can achieve real progress that can be of tangible benefit to all.

I take this opportunity to thank all the Irish representatives for their positive and constructive input to the European Convention. Deputies Dick Roche, John Bruton, Proinsias de Rossa, Pat Carey and John Gormley, and Bobby McDonagh from the Civil Service, and their teams, conducted the work of the convention in a constructive and positive manner. I have said many times when Deputy Bruton was at meetings in Europe I would particularly like to thank him. Not alone was he in the convention but he was in the presidium which was a group that drove the entire work for the past 16 months. I appreciate not only the work he undertook in that but the courtesy he showed at all times to the Government and to the officials. He was extremely helpful and I am grateful for that. It is fair to say the work of the presidium and the compromises that were reached led us to this successful outcome. From an Irish perspective it would be unreasonable of me not to say Deputy John Bruton did an outstanding job in that and we are very grateful to him.

Mr. J. Bruton

I thank the Taoiseach.

The Taoiseach

In Thessaloniki, we decided that the Intergovernmental Conference would convene this October and complete its work as soon as possible and in any event before the European Parliament elections next June. The likelihood at this stage is that the Intergovernmental Conference will continue into our Presidency of the EU. We will be prepared for that. We agreed that the report of the Convention is a good basis to start the Intergovernmental Conference. At the meeting, I indicated that Ireland had some concerns that would be pursued in the Intergovernmental Conference. These concerns include unanimity in taxation, some issues in criminal law and in the security and defence areas. I was not alone in this and other members of the European Council also indicated the issues that they will pursue.

In Thessaloniki, I proposed that at the end of the Intergovernmental Conference the constitutional treaty could be signed in turn by each member state in a ceremony in its own country, starting with the member state holding the Presidency when negotiations are concluded and culminating in Rome. In summing up the debate, the President of the European Council indicated that this proposal was adopted by all. I am pleased that this proposal was welcomed so warmly because the constitutional treaty is designed to serve our citizens for a generation or more. It is appropriate that, after the Intergovernmental Conference, each member state brings the treaty home to its citizens for signature. Signature in each member state will allow everyone to claim ownership of the constitutional treaty. It is also appropriate that given the Italian Government's role as the depository of the treaties, the final ceremony will be held in Rome.

During the course of the European Council, we discussed a paper on security strategy prepared by Javier Solana, the European Union's High Representative. This is a very interesting report and it reflects our view that the Union pursue a holistic approach to security and that security has economic, political and development dimensions. The report sets out in an easily accessible way some of the global realities with which we in the European Union are faced. The European Union will soon have 25 states, 450 million people and a quarter of the world's GNP. We are, therefore, global players. As global players, we have the responsibility to address the global challenges that face us. These challenges come from a variety of sources and each must be addressed in a variety of ways.

For example, the European Union in Thessaloniki called for a substantial contribution to the financing of the global fund to fight HIV-Aids, TB and malaria. These scourges killed more than six million people last year, largely in low-income countries, mostly in Africa. This call for support for the global fund is in line with Irish policy and practice in this area. Low-income countries face particular economic, political and security challenges. The European Union and the member states are the biggest providers of official development assistance. We are playing, and will continue to play, a critical role through our development assistance, our trade and our missions in, for example, Congo.

As the report points out, the rule of law has to be expanded. The multilateral system, and the United Nations in particular, has to be strengthened. The fundamental framework for international relations is the United Nations Charter. Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, international terrorism and organised cross-border crime require global frameworks and a mix of responses. The conclusions of the European Council underline that the European Union will support conflict prevention, promote justice and sustainable development, help secure peace and defend stability in our region and globally. This is an area to which the European Council will return in December. In the meantime, High Representative Solana has been asked to bring the work forward taking into account member states' interests and citizens' priorities. The aim is to foster debate.

The European Council also welcomed progress in the area of European Security and Defence Policy, including on capabilities and operations. An EU police mission has been in place in Bosnia-Herzegovina since January of this year, while military missions are under way in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. On this basis, and although somewhat limited and constrained by certain shortfalls, the European Council has determined that the Union has operational capability across the full range of Petersberg Tasks. In addition, we endorsed an annual report on the implementation of the EU programme for the prevention of violent conflicts, as well as a report on the contribution of EU Common Foreign and Security Policy to the fight against terrorism.

We also issued a declaration on non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The basic principles have now been established and work continues on the development and implementation of an action plan. Ireland attaches great importance to disarmament and non-proliferation and I welcome this work. Key aspects on the strategy are a focus on the multilateral system and fostering the role of the Security Council and the mainstreaming of non-proliferation issues in EU contacts with third countries.

The European Council also had a session devoted to immigration and asylum issues. There were a number of ideas discussed. This is a complex area and there are no simple solutions. The European Union is growing and its borders are expanding. We need more co-operation and resources to ensure that the policies that we agree together work well.

Significant progress has been made in the area. Under the Greek Presidency, for example, we have agreed to develop a visa information system. However, we must reinforce our efforts and bring greater harmony to all our systems. We agreed that we had to reinforce our co-operation to ensure that immigrants are integrated into our societies. We also agreed that we should ensure that our asylum systems were not exploited and undermined for those who genuinely required asylum. We need greater co-operation with third countries, for example, to combat illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings.

Other issues we discussed and which are covered in our conclusions include enlargement, the follow-up to the spring European Council and a range of external relations issues. In particular, we discussed the situation in the Middle East. We underlined the historic opportunity provided by the acceptance of the quartet's road map by the Palestinian Authority and Israel and the outcome of the Aqaba summit, including the personal engagement of President Bush. We underlined the readiness of the EU to contribute to a lasting, just and peaceful settlement, including through setting up a credible and effective monitoring mechanism.

On Iraq, we had a constructive discussion. We welcomed the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483 and the engagement of the United Nations through the appointment of the special representative. We looked forward to the formation, as soon as possible, of a representative Iraqi Government. We noted that the United Nations has unique experience in post-conflict nation-building.

We also discussed developments in Iran and expressed concern about some elements in Iran's nuclear programme. We called on Iran to be fully co-operative with the International Atomic Energy Agency in all its nuclear activities. We urged it to sign, ratify and implement an additional protocol to its safeguards agreement as a confidence-building measure.

While in Thessaloniki, I had a meeting with President Papadopoulos of Cyprus. The President briefed me in detail on the current state of play in Cyprus. I indicated that my colleagues in the European Union and myself are united in our support for the continuation of the United Nations Secretary General's mission of good office and for negotiations on the basis of his proposals. In that context, I said to the President that Ireland looked forward to Cyprus becoming a member state during our Presidency on 1 May next year. I indicated that we continued to hope that a united island of Cyprus would accede to the European Union next May and that we would be ready to assist in whatever way we could.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs represented Ireland at the EU-western Balkans summit on 21 June. The summit brought together the political leaders of the European Union, the accession countries, the candidate countries and the five states of the western Balkans. It adopted a joint declaration confirming the central role of the EU in working with the countries of the region towards the ultimate objective of their integration into European structures. The countries of the western Balkans are potential candidates for membership of the European Union. The summit adopted an agenda for co-operation focused on the implementation of the political and economic reforms essential to consolidating and increasing the political stability of the past three years. That agenda will provide a framework for Ireland's Presidency, during which relations with the western Balkans will remain high on the agenda.

On the margins of the European Council meeting, I met the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair. The meeting with the Prime Minister followed the meeting between the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Murphy, in Dublin on Wednesday, 18 June. I will meet Gerry Adams later this week and also hope to have an early opportunity to meet David Trimble and Mark Durkan. We also need to revisit and resolve the two key outstanding issues that were not dealt with satisfactorily in March, namely, ending paramilitarism and ensuring the stability of the institutions. Obviously we want to intensify the contacts with a view to ensuring that there is the best possible environment in which elections can take place in the autumn. I think that everyone recognises the need for the maximum amount of calm and restraint during the marching season. A good number of people are trying to assure that, and I commend them for their efforts. A calm and restrained marching season will also help us go into the autumn on a positive note.

In my meeting with the Prime Minister, I emphasised, as I have been doing from the outset and as I did again in the Dáil last week, the absolute necessity for elections to take place in the autumn. Both Governments remain determined to move ahead with the implementation, in so far as we can, of our Joint Declaration. That declaration is our common agenda. Some aspects of the declaration remain dependent on acts of completion by others. However, we can, and must, push forward in areas such as policing, criminal justice, equality and rights issues.

The Minister, Deputy Cowen, and Secretary of State, Mr. Murphy, will meet again at the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference on 2 July. That meeting will be dedicated to reviewing progress on the implementation of the Joint Declaration. I plan to meet Prime Minister Blair again in London on 2 July. I believe that we can regain momentum in our efforts. That will require the full engagement and commitment, not just of the two Governments, but of all the parties committed to the Agreement.

The Thessaloniki European Council was a very successful meeting. I thank the Greek Presidency for the organisation of the event. We are now little over six months away from Ireland's Presidency of the European Union. The issues with which we dealt in Thessaloniki are very likely to remain on the agenda of the European Union during our Presidency.

For the first six months of next year, we will work to ensure that enlargement will be a success, as the accession countries move from observers to full members of the Union. We will work to advance the agenda in the justice and home affairs area. If the Intergovernmental Conference continues into our Presidency, as seems likely, we will work to ensure a successful outcome. We will also carry forward the agenda in external relations, where the Presidency represents the Union on the world stage.

There will be many more tasks to be done and we will seek to carry them out efficiently and effectively.

Mr. Kenny

With the permission of the Acting Chairman, I would like to share my time with Deputy John Bruton.

Acting Chairman (Mr. McGinley)

Agreed.

Mr. Kenny

I thank the Taoiseach for his response. I am glad to know that he met the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, on the margins of the European summit. It is critical at this juncture in the evolution of the peace process in Northern Ireland that we do not allow a hiatus to develop. I am glad the Taoiseach is meeting Mr. Adams, Mr. Trimble and Mr. Durkan. It is very important that Sinn Féin faces up to its responsibilities regarding the policing arrangements in Northern Ireland. I believe that the PSNI has the capacity to be an acceptable form of policing for all its communities, but it cannot work if young Nationalists are not encouraged and seen to join. I hope that when the Taoiseach meets Gerry Adams, he makes that point to him. Everyone knows that the Unionist parties have their own internal difficulties, but I hope that when the Taoiseach meets David Trimble he will impress upon him the importance of their understanding that the institutions in Northern Ireland must be allowed to work permanently.

There are many reasons to call last week's summit a success for the European Union. It proved an excellent opportunity to repair and restore important relationships damaged and fractured by the war in Iraq. Fifteen member states managed to consign their differences to the past, looking instead to a better and brighter future facilitated by what I trust will be a coherent and effective common security policy.

The last Gulf War taught the EU a bitter but valuable lesson. No common security policy meant no common voice and therefore no European role in promoting a more enlightened, yet complex, view of the global interest. A common European defence is now inevitable, and Fine Gael is convinced that Ireland should become part of that defence structure, with the proviso that it can opt in and out of missions as Dáil Éireann sees fit. I very much hope that the new cohesion achieved at the summit in Greece will help make such development a reality. As I told a party forum in Dublin last night, like it or not, this country is no longer neutral. We are merely unaligned. We have been very forthright with the electorate on this matter. We believe passionately that with rights come responsibilities and that the security of all the members of the European Union lies in recognising our interdependence and exercising our mutual obligations.

Our neutrality served us well in the State's infancy, but now that we have reached a new level of maturity we can do things differently. I would like to see our relationships in Europe characterised as much by new behaviour as by old history. In that context, I would like clarity from the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Minister for Foreign Affairs on this matter. We have had comments from Mr. Andrews, the Member of the European Parliament, and other soundings from members of the Government parties on the issue of a common defence alliance in Europe. It is time the Government made a clear statement in that regard.

On the eve of the European Council meeting, I attended a meeting of the leaders of the European People's Party in Thessaloniki, where several Prime Ministers from member states and applicant countries were gathered. I pointed out to them how pleased Fine Gael is with the outcome of the work of the Convention on the Future of Europe. The draft treaty presented by the Convention represents a balanced and fair compromise which will result in the European Union becoming more accessible to the public and more efficient in its operations. It also provides a balanced approach to the rights of larger and smaller countries regarding representation in the institutions, and I am particularly happy that the draft constitutional treaty provides for equal representation for all member states in the European Commission.

It is appropriate, as the Taoiseach has already done, to thank the Oireachtas Members who represented us on the Convention, the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Roche, Proinsias De Rossa, MEP, and Deputies Carey and Gormley, together with the civil servants for their hard work and dedication during the past 16 months. In particular, I pay special tribute to my colleague, Deputy John Bruton, a former Taoiseach, who is not just a member of the convention but also a member of the praesidium. He has made a magnificent contribution to the work of the convention. His reputation within the European Peoples' Party in which there are ten Prime Ministers is second to none. It is also important to say to the Taoiseach that this was an open public forum for discussion. It allowed this party, in Opposition, to have a real say at the centre of all the drafting unlike the Intergovernmental Conference which is conducted behind closed doors and in secret. The Labour Party had Proinsias De Rossa at the discussions. This is important in bringing this matter before the people in a European sense. In that context, this convention exercise has been historic in bringing together member states and their national parliaments. Its public deliberations meant that the peoples of Europe could follow the negotiations under various draft documents. It also provided for the involvement of parties, including Opposition parties.

I believe strongly that the Heads of Government should not attempt to unravel or fundamentally change the provisions of the draft constitution treaty during the Intergovernmental Conference which is due to start in October. To do so would undermine public confidence and support. Each of the member states' Governments was represented on the convention in order that each had a direct input into its outcome.

I am pleased the Heads of Government who belong to the European Peoples' Party gave a positive reaction to the draft constitutional treaty. I am equally pleased it received a similar positive reaction at the subsequent European Council summit.

I urge the Taoiseach and the Government to begin planning the widespread public debate which is necessary in order that the Irish people are fully informed about the significance of the draft treaty. If we learned one lesson last year as politicians, it was on the occasion of the second referendum on Nice that if one wants to bring the people with one on a complex issue, one must empathise with them, listen to them, engage and consult with them and give them their say in order that they feel part of the political process. That resulted in up to 500,000 more people voting on Nice II as against Nice I, which the people rejected on the basis of lack of information.

If the draft is approved with major changes by the Intergovernmental Conference and is followed by proper public debate and proper public information, it will be possible to secure the support of the Irish public in its ratification by constitutional referendum.

Mr. J. Bruton

I thank my party leader for allowing me contribute to this debate and the Taoiseach for his especially kind and warm remarks in regard to my work in the convention. I thank Deputy Kenny's predecessor, Deputy Noonan, for placing his confidence in me and appointing me to represent the party on the convention. I commend the Taoiseach, in particular, on being the only leader of any European country to have appointed two Opposition politicians to the two principal positions representing the national Parliament. I know of no other country where that was done. It established a very good working relationship from which the Government will gain. I should say how much of a difference the presence of the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, made to the work of the convention, both from Ireland's point of view and from the point of view of representing the interests of smaller countries. It has been an entirely positive contribution on his part.

The summit received the report of the Convention on the Future of Europe but it did so against a background of deep strategic unease about Europe's relationship with the United States and the parallel concern about Prime Minister Blair's inability to take a clear political direction on British entry into the euro. No country has more to lose from these two developments than Ireland. We depend more than anyone else on the United States investment here for job creation and on maintaining a stable currency relationship with Britain. Both will be put at risk if the gap between continental Europeans and the so-called Anglo-Saxon powers widens.

The new military doctrine of the current US Administration, that of accepting unilaterally decided pre-emptive or preventive wars, is radically different from the multilateral, no-first strike philosophy of European countries, including Britain. The US believes in unbridled freedom of action. Europeans believe in international rules. No one dares admit it but there can be no continuing basis for an EU-US alliance as long as the philosophical gap remains as wide as it is currently.

The United States is no longer a status quo power; it wants to remake the world. Furthermore as Philip Stephens in his article in the Financial Times of 23 May 2003 states: “Amongst the most important geopolitical shifts in the past two years has been the US administration's judgment that its interest now lies in dividing rather than uniting Europe.” A close study of the voluminous avalanche of economic data given to present an economic case for New Labour's continuing indecision on Britain's euro membership can be boiled down to one thing – the fear that euro zone interest rates will be too low to keep inflation in check in Britain because of a certain structural proclivity to inflation in Britain arising from the way it finances housing at variable rate mortgages rather than fixed rate mortgages.

There is no substance to this economic case. The difference between sterling and euro interest rates is too little to make the difference that Chancellor Gordon Brown fears. The real problem about British euro membership is a political one. After 30 years of EU membership, Britain is still not ready to commit itself to the project of a politically and economically united Europe. It still wants to keep its options open. Perhaps, if France and Germany once and for all successfully implement vitally necessary and overdue economic liberalisation and pension reform measures, Britain's view will change but then it may find some other problem, such as the entry rate being too high or too low.

Against this difficult background on these two vital issues from an Irish point of view, how should we judge the outcome of the convention and of the summit in Thessalonika? I commend the Foreign Ministers for at last agreeing a common EU policy on weapons of mass destruction. It is a pity we did not have such a common policy a year ago. I commend the commitment to solving the deep problems of the western Balkans, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo and Albania. If the EU cannot establish a viable democratic settlement in its own backyard, there is no point in talking about a common foreign and security policy further afield. I commend the progress on asylum and immigration, a matter that will be aided by the majority voting recommended by the convention. In regard to the convention's draft constitutional treaty, the summit was positive. I find that very encouraging. I hope Governments will not think they can easily upset the political balance struck in the convention's draft, as distinct from the detail.

Irish Ministers and Departments should also recognise that unanimous voting is non-viable in a Union of 25 or 30 countries. Vetoes mean paralysis. Ireland needs a Europe that works and Departments should wake up to that. On most issues, the European Union's interests and the Irish national interest are identical, not divergent.

The proposed single Foreign Minister recommended by the convention will be very important. The European Council chair will be better than rotating Presidencies. The protocol on consulting national parliaments will radically open up the EU legislative process, politicising decisions more and taking matters out of official channels. That is good. Ministers who are accustomed to getting a brief, on which they must make decisions, to read for the first time as they get on to the aeroplane on the way to a key Council meeting will now have to make political choices much earlier in the EU legislative process thanks to national parliaments being involved. This will give elected politicians more power and that is more democratic and a wholly good thing.

I admit to being disappointed about two aspects of the Convention outcome. We have not come up with a sufficiently radical proposal to engage European public opinion in the EU process. There will be no EU presidential election, either by popular suffrage or an electoral college. There will be no steps to create a truly European demos and thus no democratic glue to keep Europe together in the event of a real crisis.

The decision to retain unanimity on how the EU is financed will lead to big problems when the next six year budget has to be settled in 2006. Unanimity will mean a continuance of the policy of special rebates to keep some happy, like a British rebate, or of pork barrel politics to keep others happy, like what the Spanish want to get, all in order to buy off the undeserving. This is bad business and gives the European Union a bad name.

Mr. Rabbitte

Given that this was such a historically and politically important European Council, it is somewhat surprising that it did not receive more media attention. It was politically important for the reason that it raised the starter's flag on the Intergovernmental Conference process that it is proposed, according to the official communiqué, to have convened by October next and to have completed its work before June 2004 at the latest.

It seems clear it is intended to have the Intergovernmental Conference's work done and dusted well before June. The language of the communiqué states that "the conference should complete its work as soon as possible and in time for it to become known to European citizens before the June 2004 elections for the European Parliament." The communiqué also talks of member states signing the constitutional treaty as soon as possible after 1 May of next year.

The latest Commission eurobarometer opinion poll, published earlier in the month, confirms again that the convention did not catch the public attention, but that is not to take away in any respect from the convention process itself. The convention worked well. Its members approached their task with real vigour and the process was conducted in the most open and transparent way. I join in the congratulations of the Taoiseach and Deputy Kenny to our representatives on the convention, to Deputy John Bruton as an outstanding member of the presidium and the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Roche, whose involvement, once the Government changed its attitude to the convention, certainly made a difference.

Despite this, most people have not read the draft that has come from the convention and at best only in the most vague of terms are aware of its content. The draft that has emerged from the convention is not the draft that we will have to vote on and we know nothing about the draft that we shall be asked by way of amendment to our Constitution to ratify because it does not yet exist. Further, we do not yet have from the Government a coherent, comprehensive, reasoned opinion on the convention draft with which we will all have to become more familiar in the coming months.

The new eurobarometer poll conducted for the Commission shows that during the past six months support for a constitutional treaty for the EU has fallen marginally throughout the Union. However, it has fallen sharply in Ireland since December last. Just 54% of those polled in Ireland supported a constitutional treaty for the EU, down seven points on six months ago. There have also been sharp reductions in support levels in Denmark, Finland and France. Nonetheless, there is broad support, although what citizens favour is a construction that is cautious, even conservative, on institutional matters generally.

For example, citizens do not want the national principle in respect of the appointment of Commissioners changed, even though that is what has been decided. They are also in favour of retaining a significant national right of veto, even though that is to be reduced in the convention draft. On the other hand they favour popular election of the president of the Commission, something that is not proposed. They are also somewhat less positive than they were on enlargement and favour development of a common foreign policy and common defence. On foreign policy, Ireland is a strong supporter of a common position and an EU foreign Minister. On defence, the Irish position is somewhat more confused. I hope the EU has learned from the mistakes of the past and that the forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference will be far removed from the closed shop conclaves of history.

What is the view of the Government on the need for an open and transparent Intergovernmental Conference? I hope that the Taoiseach, his Foreign Minister and the "experts" from Iveagh House do not plan to secretly horse-trade through the winter and in the spring return home on the new jet to tell us it is all done and now we must all vote "Yes" and do so in a hurry. Given that the closing stages of the Intergovernmental Conference will occur during an Irish Presidency, I am sure the Taoiseach will strive not to use it as an exercise in self-promotion and the cult of the leader in the context of local government and European elections. That could lead us into being confronted with a constitutional proposal that will be presented as requiring to be accepted without question and quickly.

The Government must now think with some care and act democratically. Brief mention of some undefined role for the European Parliament does not amount to much. Domestically, the Taoiseach must tell us how he intends to communicate to the people in respect of the Intergovernmental Conference negotiations. One method would be for the Presidency, Irish and Italian, to report to the plenary sessions of the European Parliament each month in public on the progress of the Intergovernmental Conference. This would facilitate dialogue and scrutiny at both EU and national level. We need ready access to the convention draft. We need a Green Paper immediately and a White Paper in the autumn. The Labour Party believes that the Forum on Europe should be retained and sufficiently resourced to allow it to continue with its communications exercise. Both the forum and the Oireachtas require to be brought fully into the picture and the Houses of the Oireachtas require to be properly resourced to scrutinise the Intergovernmental Conference work over the next nine months or so.

The Intergovernmental Conference is not simply an exercise in international relations and, as such, under the Constitution, a matter that is the preserve of the Government. This context, to my mind, calls for a high degree of openness and transparency in the work of the Intergovernmental Conference, not to mention communication to our citizens by the Government and the provision of reasoned opinions for proposals being supported.

There is another argument in favour of transparency and openness. It is that the European Council and the Council of Ministers are peculiar entities. They are gatherings of elected representatives who wield executive power at home and yet, in the context of the Community and the Union, have something of the character of a representative body, even assembly. This is so in that the Commission, in the character of an unelected executive power, makes legislative proposals but it is the Council, something in the character of an elected chamber, that decides to accept, reject or modify the legislative proposals that come before it. The Council has something of the character of an upper house in a bicameral parliament, but an upper house that is the decisive house, arguably reflecting a balance of power between the Union and member states, based on the weight given historically to national sovereignty. This is not the usual way of looking at the Council but it is not inaccurate and suggests that the Council, or a sub-committee of the Council, which is what the Intergovernmental Conference is in effect, should be open and transparent in the conduct of its business. Up to now it has not been thus, in so far as the Council currently conducts itself, in respect of the work of the various Councils of Ministers, or historically, as regards the work of Intergovernmental Conferences.

It is interesting to note that the Council of Ministers does not have a high level of trust among European voters, according to the June eurobarometer opinion poll, and that throughout the EU national Governments are largely distrusted – indeed they are more distrusted than are national Parliaments – a sign of the times perhaps.

Mr. J. Bruton

That is why we are getting the benchmarking awards, obviously.

Mr. Rabbitte

We will show productivity for them, including the Taoiseach who will be back in the House four days a week. Otherwise the 75% will not be paid out.

The Taoiseach

I will harmonise the time I spend here and at the EU.

Mr. Rabbitte

I agree the Taoiseach will earn his money next year – there is no doubt about that. The Government has given no indication that it intends to embark on this process other than by the normal rules of Intergovernmental Conferences to date, i.e. the rules of secret international diplomacy. If that is its intention and the intention of the Council, it is not appropriate. This Intergovernmental Conference is not like previous Intergovernmental Conferences. We have had the innovation of the convention, with all its openness of procedure, precisely because the secret diplomacy formulation had come to be seen as lacking democratic legitimacy. To dispose of the work of the convention in seven short paragraphs, communicates to me an unacceptable desire to revert to type. Conclaves, COREPER and cronyism may strike Heads of Government and Brussels bureaucrats as businesslike. However, they are actually a recipe for a re-run of Nice and this time it will not be all down to Ireland.

To judge from the Presidency conclusions in the official communiqué, the Council had a full and very important agenda. It included consideration of the convention draft but significant consideration seems also to have been given to issues that come under the two broad headings, namely, justice and home affairs and foreign, security and defence policy. The principal items discussed under justice and home affairs were immigration, asylum and issues arising thereof. Much of the discussion of foreign, security and defence policy seems to have centred on international terrorism, religious extremism and alleged weapons of mass destruction.

In regard to the JHA issue of asylum seekers, refugees and an EU interior ministry, on one reading, since 11 September, there appears to have been an unfortunate tendency to link asylum seekers and refugees with the issue of terrorism and to use this as a justification for the establishment of a good old-fashioned EU interior ministry, imbued with a strong internal security culture and a philosophy in respect of the individual and the state that cuts against the grain of what this party stands for in the area of human rights. This might be said to be a somewhat pessimistic view. However, we have to be vigilant in ensuring that the European Union does not develop an authoritarian tendency in the field of justice and home affairs. This was controversial territory at the convention in respect of the provisions that might be included in the constitutional treaty.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, has posed questions and promised vigilance, although he would also appear to have acted against the spirit of his own position on Committee Stage of the Criminal Justice (Temporary Release of Prisoners) Bill and the Immigration Bill. The Labour Party also has certain concerns as regards the proposed constitution from a distinctly civil liberties standpoint.

The communiqué suggests that the new world view in Washington DC has found some support within the institutions of the EU. Annex 1 of the communiqué tells us that the Council of Foreign Ministers has set up a group of advisors to examine, "extreme fundamentalism and terrorism". The group has reported and that report will now be discussed by the Council. What are the findings, views, conclusions and recommendations of this group of advisors?

Given the appalling events in the Middle East in recent weeks, I am surprised that the situation there did not receive more focus of attention in Thessaloniki. I wish some of those europhiles like Deputy John Bruton would tell me how to pronounce "Thessaloniki".

Mr. J. Bruton

The Deputy can call it Salonika. Many Irish people died there.

Mr. Rabbitte

I believe that there should be a strong role for the EU in trying to halt the terrible cycle of violence that has taken so many Palestinian and Israeli lives over the recent depressing months. The international community cannot stand aside and allow the terrible loss of life to continue. Neither suicide bombings nor assassinations from the sky should be acceptable to any democrat. The legacy of these tactics is not just the dead and broken bodies, but also the embitterment of yet another generation of people in the region.

The road map proposals which had offered some hope of a breakthrough were drawn up by a quartet made up of the United Nations, the US, Russia and the EU. The joint ownership by the four parties of this proposal must now be reasserted. All of the participants must become actively involved in the search for a peaceful way forward. There is a planned meeting of the quartet at the weekend and the EU must move to reassert its role in the process. Clearly, the United States on its own does not have the required standing or authority to broker a solution and we may now be paying a price for the US-inspired marginalisation of Yasser Arafat. If we are to make any progress, there must be continuous and deep involvement by the United Nations, the EU and Russia.

Too many lives have been lost so far and the peoples of Israel and Palestine deserve the opportunity to live their lives in peace and security. Ireland can and must play a role in ensuring that this happens. I know Ireland is about the join the troika on 1 July, six months in advance of assuming the EU Presidency. I also note that the Minister for Foreign Affairs is due to visit the region this weekend and I wish him well in his discussions with the various interests. In this regard, it is unacceptable that Israeli Government Ministers are apparently refusing to meet the Minister because he will also be meeting President Arafat.

In regard to the link between defence and foreign policy, there is reference in the communiqué to something called ECAP and ECAP project groups. I have tried to find out something about ECAP. There was a meeting of Defence Mini sters in Brussels on 19 May, although the information on the meeting on the EU website suggests that it may have been a meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council. The meeting resulted in a declaration on EU military capabilities. Progress on the development of a European military capability action plan, ECAP, was welcomed. The group seems to have embarked on exploring a remarkable series of military, development and research options prepared by 19 project groups established under the plan. The project groups have produced papers on options including special operations forces, the development of unmanned aerial vehicles and space-based assets. Future research includes attack helicopters, cruise missiles and strategic sea-lift.

What was the status of this meeting? Was the Government represented and by whom? What is the Government's attitude to ECAP and the ECAP project groups?

Ms Harkin

I wish to share time with Deputies Sargent and Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.

Acting Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Ms Harkin

After 15 months of the Convention, closed doors at the praesidium and open session in the convention itself and after consultation, negotiation, networking, draft documents and re-drafted documents, EU leaders have finally agreed the terms under which the forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference would complete that task that it started 15 months ago. That task is the drawing up of an EU constitution. Successive treaties have created a mass of over-lapping legal texts and there was a real sense that a single text was needed, which would encompass previous treaties and give some clear definition of what the European Union really is.

However, for many Irish people, the very mention of the term "European constitution" rings alarm bells and many are genuinely concerned about the possibility of an ever-more powerful Europe that is encroaching on national sovereignty. Therefore, an important question for many Irish people is whether this is a treaty between states or a constitution for a single state. Due to time constraints, I cannot deal with the document in any detail. However, the two central features of a state – the ability to raise taxes and to go to war – remain with national governments and outside the control of the EU. Therefore, I do not see the outcome as a plan for a superstate, although some may have wished it so. Rather, I see it as a treaty between states because all constitutional changes will still have to be made by unanimous agreement of all countries in the EU. There is, and will continue to be, a tension between cohesion and subsidiarity, but a reasonable balance has been struck. In this context, I commend the work of the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Roche, who was very much involved in an alliance between the smaller states to help to promote our interests and the best interests of a wider Europe. I also congratulate our representative at the praesidium, Deputy John Bruton, as well as all other members of the convention. As a member of the European affairs committee, I have seen the extent of their work. It is not always visible to the public, but it is of enormous benefit and deserves to be commended.

Debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.