Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 7 Feb 2007

Vol. 631 No. 1

European Council: Statements.

The Taoiseach

I attended the European Council in Brussels on 14 and 15 December. I was accompanied by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern. The conclusions of the European Council have been laid before the Houses.

The Council represented the culmination of a successful Finnish Presidency. Earlier during its term, there had been speculation that it would not succeed in forging agreement on the sensitive issue of Turkish accession negotiations where some member states held strong and opposing views. It is a tribute to Prime Minister Vanhanen and his team that agreement was reached before the European Council met.

The Council itself, like the Finnish Presidency, was a successful one, agreeing conclusions on enlargement, including Turkey's accession negotiations, on the area of freedom, security and justice, and on innovation, energy and climate change. It also adopted a number of important conclusions and declarations concerning the external relations area.

Prior to the Council meeting, we had an exchange of views with the outgoing President of the European Parliament, Mr. Josep Borrell. The Council took the opportunity to thank President Borrell for his valuable work in leading the European Parliament over the last two and a half years. I would like to reiterate that appreciation today. As the House knows, I met President Borrell both in Brussels and Dublin in late November. I would particularly like to thank him for his assistance in achieving official and working status for the Irish language. As Members know, Irish has had that status since 1 January and already a number of Government Ministers have availed of the facility of being able to address Ministerial Councils in our national language.

The Council welcomed the accession of Bulgaria and Romania as full members of the European Union on 1 January 2007, thereby completing the fifth round of enlargement. Ireland's Presidency played a key role in these negotiations and I know that our assistance both during the Presidency and throughout the accession process is deeply appreciated in Budapest and Sofia. For my part, I also welcome very much their accession and have expressed my hope that they will benefit as much from the Union's enlargement as Ireland did over three decades. I look forward to working with my Bulgarian and Romanian counterparts in the Council.

The European Council endorsed the conclusions adopted by foreign ministers earlier that week concerning the partial suspension of negotiations on Turkey's accession. The suspension was unfortunate but unavoidable. It resulted from Turkey's continuing failure to fulfil its obligations and commitments to the European Union under the Ankara protocol. We consider the decision taken was appropriate and proportionate, allowing the negotiations to continue in some areas but making clear to Turkey that it could not be business as usual until it meets its obligations.

While clearly this development marks a set-back for Turkey's accession process, I remain confident that this accession will take place in due course. Nobody is predicting an early conclusion to the process. However, having met the Turkish leadership and having visited the country, I am convinced that Turkey has a true European vocation and is making the economic and political progress necessary for accession. Turkish accession in accordance with the requirements for membership, which must be met by every applicant and every existing member state, will not only be in Turkey's interest but the interest of Europe and the wider region.

The Council also held a useful, general debate on the future enlargement of the Union which built on the Commission's communication on the enlargement strategy as well as its report on the EU's capacity to integrate new members. In the lead-up to the Council, the issue of enlargement capacity had become topical with a differing emphasis being placed on its significance by various member states.

The Council agreed that the principles of consolidation, conditionality and communication, together with the issue of the Union's capacity, would underpin the Union's approach to future enlargements, while at the same time repeating that the Union would honour its commitments to those countries in the enlargement process. We also endorsed the position of the foreign ministers on Croatia and agreed conclusions concerning countries in the western Balkans, where we encouraged Serbia to co-operate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

The discussion took place in a positive atmosphere. The contribution of enlargement to the Union's success and its contribution to peace and prosperity was not in dispute. At the same time, member states stressed the importance of acceding countries being ready to accept the responsibilities of membership.

On the freedom, security and justice agenda, we had received a report on the implementation of the Hague programme for closer co-operation in the fields of justice and security prior to the meeting. The Council noted that good progress was being made but clearly there is more to do. We agreed, in particular, that the challenges posed by illegal migration needed to be addressed urgently and agreed a comprehensive migration policy. This policy will include improved co-operation among member states and with third countries in the fight against illegal immigration, improved management of the European Union's external borders and the putting in place of a common European asylum system by 2010.

There is, as the House is aware, a large number of European instruments and measures in the asylum area. These measures, such as the Dublin Conventions and EURODAC, have proved invaluable in ensuring the Irish asylum process is fair and free from abuses such as asylum shopping. We will continue to press at EU level for efficient and fair asylum procedures.

While there was some discussion in relation to the use of the passerelle in existing treaties in order to have more majority voting on police and judicial co-operation, there was a general view that a greater understanding of the implications of such a move is required. Ireland believes the best way to enhance our decision making in this field is to adopt the European constitution.

We received a short report by Prime Minister Vanhanen on Finland's consultations with member states on the European constitution. Chancellor Merkel then explained how Germany intends to take that area forward towards presenting a report to the European Council in June. She briefed the Council about her plans to invite heads of state or government to Berlin to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome in March.

Since the European Council, the German Presidency has held a first round of consultations with officials from the member states on the way forward. Irish officials at these consultations have made clear our strong attachment to the constitution as negotiated in 2004, our willingness to consider proposals for changes or additions to the constitutional treaty which would not upset the delicate balances within the text, and our intention to proceed with ratification when there is clarity as to the way forward.

The Council also adopted conclusions on energy, climate change and innovation, where we agreed to the establishment of the European institution of technology. These conclusions generally should be seen as building blocks towards more significant conclusions at the spring European Council, preparations for which are already underway with the Commission having recently published a comprehensive position on energy, including climate change. The issues of energy and climate change will feature on the Council's agenda for the foreseeable future.

On the external relations front, the December European Council adopted a number of important declarations, including on the Middle East peace process and on the situation in Lebanon. Following the crises in the region last year, there is strong agreement that a comprehensive settlement to the interlinked problems of the Middle East is more urgently needed now than at any time in the past 60 years. At its heart must be a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I set out clearly the Government's overall approach on the political problems in the Middle East in my address in Riyadh on 15 January. The Minister for Foreign Affairs visited Israel, Palestine, Egypt and Lebanon last week. Along with our EU partners, we are ready to work closely with the different parties to try to promote real progress over the coming months. It is important the current violence between different Palestinian groups ends definitively.

The revival of a credible political process with the clear aim of achieving a negotiated two-state solution would have a positive effect across the region. In this context, the situation in Lebanon is particularly fragile at the moment. The EU strongly supports the full implementation of Security Council resolution 1737, which ended last year's conflict in Lebanon, and continues to give its full support to the Lebanese Prime Minister. Ireland is playing its part politically and through the involvement of over 150 members of the Defence Forces in the strengthened UNIFIL mission. The Government's practical support was emphasised on 25 January at the international conference on Lebanon, where we pledged an additional €2 million in assistance, bringing Ireland's total aid to over €5 million since the conflict. It is essential now that the political crisis in Lebanon be resolved through national political dialogue and that all states demonstrate clearly their commitment to the sovereignty and independence of Lebanon.

The European Council also addressed growing international concerns regarding Iran's nuclear programme and adopted a declaration reiterating its full support for efforts to find a negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. The declaration deplored Iran's failure to take the steps required by the International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors and the United Nations Security Council. The European Council agreed that the failure could only have negative consequences for relations between Iran and the EU. Following the European Council meeting, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1737 on 23 December 2006, which imposed sanctions with regard to the Iranian nuclear programme and requested the IAEA Director General to report on Iran's compliance to the Security Council within 60 days.

Turning to relations with Africa, the European Council welcomed the first annual progress report on the EU-Africa strategy, initially adopted at the December 2005 Council. We reaffirmed the Union's commitment to continue working to transform this strategy into a joint EU-Africa strategy which might be adopted at the second EU-Africa summit. It is hoped this second summit can take place under the Portuguese Presidency in the second half of this year. The European Council agreed conclusions on a number of African countries.

The situation in Darfur is particularly alarming. The European Council called on the Government of Sudan to agree unequivocally to the UN three-phase support plan for the African Union mission in Sudan. A substantially strengthened international peacekeeping presence is clearly required to improve the situation on the ground. Following on this European Council discussion, on 22 January EU Foreign Ministers noted the EU's willingness to take further measures against those who obstruct implementation of UN support for the African Union mission.

In recognition of the serious concerns shared by EU partners regarding the situation there, the European Council reaffirmed the Union's commitment to the people and Government of Afghanistan and highlighted the key role already played by the EU in that country. It pointed to the clear interdependence of security and development. The EU will continue to examine ways to strengthen its engagement with Afghanistan, including considering the possibility and conditions for a potential civilian ESDP mission in the field of policing. The Council declaration followed substantial conclusions on Afghanistan adopted by EU Foreign Ministers on 11 December. These sought to provide greater focus for the EU's support for that country, as well as greater EU visibility.

The December European Council was an appropriate end to a successful Finnish Presidency. Looking forward, the next year will be an especially important one. In particular, we need, as Europeans, to find a way forward on the constitutional challenge facing the Union. I am confident, as we approach the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome next month, we will overcome our present difficulties on this issue and set the scene for many more years of progress.

Mr. Kenny

The report by the Taoiseach in respect of the Council meeting on 14 and 15 December is welcome and accurate. I attended the meeting of European People's Party leaders on the day prior to the summit, where many of the issues referred to by the Taoiseach were addressed. Obviously, the question of Turkish accession to the European Union is of considerable importance to a great number of people. There was a strong feeling at the EPP meeting, for what it is worth, that unless the Cypriot question is dealt with, it will not be easy for Turkey to proceed. As we discussed during Question Time earlier today, negotiations have been suspended while waiting for Turkey to measure up in terms of the criteria for entrance to membership of the Union. It is only right and proper that these guidelines are set, that they are adhered to and seen to be so and that the required monitoring takes place.

Agus mé ag féachaint ar an teilifís, chonaic mé baill de chuid Pharlaimint na hEorpa as an tír seo ag labhairt as Gaeilge. Thug Baill anseo gach cabhar go mbeadh an Ghaeilge ina teanga aitheanta ina mbeidís in ann a gcuid oibre a dhéanamh i bParlaimint na hEorpa. Is maith an rud é agus tugaim buíochas don Rialtas as ucht na hoibre a rinne sé leis na blianta anuas. Is maith an rud é dóibh siúd ag freastal ann, tá siad in ann anois ráitis a eisiúint as Gaeilge. I hope the situation will also improve here as a consequence. If we send our people to speak in Irish to the Europeans, perhaps we should also examine what we do in our school system.

Reference was made to the constitutional treaty. Chancellor Merkel has taken this on board to a point where she hopes the intervention of the German Parliament, with all the other members, will at least bring about a common position. The Taoiseach stated today that there is now a view within European countries that we should get back to business on the constitution and that European enlargement and the Europe of the future cannot proceed without having the constitution enacted.

Perhaps some of the elements of the constitution will be, if not watered down, referred to differently by way of declaration, which might make it more conducive to countries which currently have a difficulty in passing it. While we may be one of the few countries which must deal with this by way of referendum, I believe that the Irish people, when this is presented to them in a fully thought out and properly discussed fashion, will see its value in terms of how we proceed in Europe. When they have the opportunity, they will endorse the constitution.

There will be another two presidential elections in the United States in the next ten years, with the associated impact related to whether the American people elect a Republican or a Democrat, and what this will mean in terms of foreign relations, the conclusion or otherwise of difficulties in Iraq and the relationship with Iran, North Korea and other countries. I share the view that central to all of this is the solution of the Palestine-Israel problem. I also share the view that there should be negotiations for a two-state outcome to the problem. The issue gives a foundation to much terrorist activity in the Middle East, where it is in some cases used as an excuse. The authority of the European Union and the impact of international politics should be brought to focus on the issue of Palestine-Israel, as well as Lebanon and other countries, in whatever way is possible.

Many of the economic indicators suggest there will be a new order in the world within 20 years, with the big economies of China, India, Russia, Brazil, Japan and South Africa coming to the fore. With climate change, climate control and carbon dioxide emissions having moved centre stage in many European countries and a growing number of states in the United States, the fact that Russia has such huge reserves of oil and gas in a way leads to a new focus on international politics, given that energy is so critical for industry and normal life. These are issues on which Europe will have to focus increasingly in the future.

Chancellor Merkel stated:

We're defending this constitutional treaty although we take note that others have rejected it. . . . We have to search for compromises but we will not take a minimalist approach... We can't re-start the discussion from scratch. To all those who are always afraid of too much Europe, we have to tell them that on many points it is the rights of the member states that are strengthened. But we need to have more order on the question of where Europe is not allowed to interfere and where it can act.

It is important that we set out, on a continual basis and with a structure in mind, to communicate the idea of Europe to our people. We must engage them increasingly in debates on what it means to be European. We must give them a sense of Europe as being a real, relevant presence in their lives, not some remote, bureaucratic monolith.

I recently attended a school debate at which Europe was the issue. As a Parliament and a political process, we have failed to get across to young people in particular the value and potential of Europe and what it means and can mean. We must consider ways to make it more relevant. Ireland's MEPs do the best they can and the European affairs office and the Institute of European Affairs make valiant efforts to get the message across. We are a small, but important, element of a European Union which faces serious challenges from emerging economic powers, particularly in the Far East, such as India and China, and existing powers such as the United States. It is important that Europe is as strong as these countries. I like to think that the Lisbon Agenda, which we discussed here, will be revised and examined to see which of its aspirations we can implement.

Some concern has been expressed by the chief executives of major multinational companies here with regard to the unit cost of production and the impact of globalisation on a country like Ireland. I listened to the remarks of the chief executives of Microsoft and Intel on the cost base they must contend with here compared to that in other countries. It might be appropriate for the Taoiseach and the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to interact with these multinational chief executives to discover what the country must do in the European context to keep our cost and unit cost base down. This issue has implications for us as other countries can offer much lower unit costs for manufacture. We need to look carefully at the situation in order to anticipate future research, development and technology requirements.

The Council confirmed that the future of the western Balkans lies within the European Union, but reiterated that each country's progress towards membership depended on its individual efforts to comply with the Copenhagen criteria. It is worth noting these criteria: Membership requires that candidate countries have achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy; the rule of law and human rights and respect for and protection of minorities; and the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union. Membership presupposes the candidate country's ability to take on the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union. In this regard, the Prime Ministers and leaders of various parties from the new eastern countries and the Balkan states look to Europe as their future and make no bones about stating this.

Chancellor Merkel has said there is no case for expansion of the European Union without a constitution that will be able to take that structure. This is the reason I support strongly the Forum on Europe and the allocation of resources to it. I support programmes from government and other agencies that spread the interest and understanding of Europe and what it offers.

I wish to point out to the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs that the issue of migration and illegal immigration into the European Union was the subject of much discussion by some of the Prime Ministers and leaders of different European groups. Two years ago 17,000 people were sent back to their home countries from Holland, which caused serious trouble in Holland. France has had serious social problems in terms of integration. Last year the Greek Government arrested 25,000 people trying to enter the country illegally. Malta has had a similar problem with illegal immigrants because of its position. The Zapatero government in Spain has legalised 100,000 persons, most of whom were from the African Continent.

The point being made by EU member states is that the African population is due to double in the next 20 to 25 years. If just 10% of that population decides to emigrate or move, no one European country could withstand that challenge or pressure. The point, therefore, is that we need a fair, transparent and accountable system. For this to happen we must have international co-operation and dialogue with Third World countries of transit or origin of persons who want to move. This will involve improvement of the management of the European Union's external borders. The situation is of particular interest to EU member states. I do not know what happened at the European Council, but I am sure resourcing for this was discussed along with ideas for bringing about a fair and transparent process.

The Council also made declarations in respect of Iran, Afghanistan and African issues. With regard to Africa, Europe's position should be one of helping Africa to help itself. Corrupt regimes, serious difficulties with regard to human rights, and international politics being played in many countries of Africa mean Europe has a part to play in allowing African nations to develop as best they can. Our influence in this regard may mean we also have an impact on the movement of persons from there.

The Taoiseach referred to the issue of energy which will always be central to Council discussions. I note the most recent announcement in respect of emissions from cars. While welcome, it is a reduction on the target set originally. Ireland, as one of the biggest producers per head of carbon dioxide emissions, did not face its responsibilities or the options open to it when it decided to buy credits at €270 million per year for five years. That amounts to over €1 billion, which could have been better spent. This issue should be addressed in a different manner.

In general the Council meeting was productive and was conducted in a healthy fashion that allowed clarity and focus on some of the issues facing us. What 2007 and 2008 will hold, after Prime Minister Blair — I almost said Prime Minister Ahern — and the impact of what will happen in the United States and other countries, remains to be seen. We support the Government in the main on these issues, which are important not just for Ireland but for the Union of which we are members.

Mr. Costello

I thank the Taoiseach for presenting his views on what transpired at the European Union summit on 14 and 15 December. However, my assessment of what transpired there is not nearly as sanguine as that of the Taoiseach. While he presented the summit as a great success, that is not my opinion.

In recent years, European Council summits have tended to be statements of collective aspiration rather than celebrations of achievement and progress. The great European project is becalmed. The Dutch and French torpedoing of the constitutional treaty has damaged the great ship which is moving around in circles, rudderless and in need of urgent repair to give it new direction.

At the European Council meeting on 15 and 16 June 2006, it was clear that none of the 25 Heads of State present had the answer. When they could not decide what to do next, they decided to do nothing other than to officially extend the period of reflection into a period of analysis. The buck did not stop with anyone, but was gingerly passed on to the Finnish Presidency which with equal alacrity passed it on to the German Presidency which is now endeavouring to grapple with the problem in the first six months of 2007. The Germans are cleverly sharing the burden by bringing the Portuguese and Slovenians on board in a kind of troika of presidencies to seek to resolve the constitutional treaty debacle over the next 18 months.

Nobody suggested that France and the Netherlands should face the stark but simple choice faced by Ireland after it rejected the Nice treaty in 2002. A second vote was Ireland's only option, but it has never even been considered for the two states in question, which were members of the original group of six countries. The 25 Heads of State were content, on 14 and 15 December 2006, to tiptoe around the issue. It was agreed that the Finnish Presidency should pass on its assessment of consultations with member states regarding the constitutional treaty to the German Presidency. The German Presidency in turn will invite European affairs Ministers, including Ireland's Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, for separate and secret talks to try to narrow the differences on the constitutional issue. The German Presidency hopes to produce a report at the end of its tenure in June 2007 that functions as a roadmap for resolving the crisis in future presidencies and before the European Parliament elections in 2009.

However, a group of 18 countries that have ratified the constitution, including Ireland and Portugal, met on 26 January in Madrid to promote the treaty and discuss other revisions to the text that might accommodate the concerns of France and the Netherlands. A further meeting is planned for Luxembourg in February. Clearly, the European Union risks a rapid division into two camps, one consisting of friends and promoters of the constitution, the other sceptical and revisionist. That is a real danger if the German Presidency cannot make progress in the near future.

The constitutional conundrum can be resolved in only one way, namely, through enhancing the constitutional treaty, and certainly not by delusion. Cherry-picking the current constitutional proposals can only end in tears and confusion. If, however, major new initiatives are grafted onto the treaty, they will expand and enhance its value and significance. The new added value might be acceptable to those countries that have already ratified it and to those, like Ireland, that have refrained from doing so thus far, despite being in favour.

One such added-value component was proposed by the leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Rabbitte, when he addressed the National Forum on Europe on 21 December 2006 following the summit. He argued that the treaty should contain additional provisions on energy and the environment and that, in view of the urgent action required on climate control and the United States' failure to take seriously the Kyoto Protocol, the EU should firmly grasp world leadership on the issue. The same point was echoed by Deputy Sargent, leader of the Green Party, who addressed the forum on 1 February, calling for an energy revolution led by the EU.

While climate control and global warming are clearly the issues of the day, there are others that might well add value to an enhanced treaty. Global poverty is the scandal of our times. It is the product of natural disasters, bad economics, mismanagement, ignorance and a lack of leadership. It need not be so in a world of plenty, however. The EU should take a central role in eliminating world poverty. Those two protocols alone could lend fresh momentum and focus to the constitutional treaty and would not in any way infringe basic trust in it.

The December 2006 European Council reaffirmed the importance of commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome to confirm the values of the European integration process. What better way to do so than by restating the principles of the founding fathers in a new set of modern, idealistic objectives? Regarding enlargement, a major part of summit discussions, the Commission President, José Manuel Barroso, commented as follows:

Enlargement makes Europe stronger on the world stage. Enlargement is the most important tool to bring peace and stability on our continent. Ours will remain an open house.

The summit leaders welcomed the accession of Romania and Bulgaria, which joined on 1 January 2007 in the fifth enlargement of the EU. However, most of the wealthier EU states, including Ireland and Britain, had already closed their labour markets to the 30 million newcomers for the immediate future. Enlargement was quietly put on the back burner as summit leaders pledged to consider the EU's ability to maintain and deepen its own development before admitting new members. That will require the European Commission to undertake impact assessments of how a candidate state's membership would affect the Union's key policies. Stricter conditions will be applied to future enlargements, and the EU will refrain from setting target dates for accession until talks are close to completion.

That will almost certainly mean that no new members will be admitted before the EU's institutions have been reformed, that is, until the question of the constitutional treaty has been resolved. The new gospel of "integration capacity" agreed at the summit will have a negative impact on the Balkan states, which had been hoping to accede within a few years, and that is most unfortunate. Furthermore, a partial suspension of negotiations with Turkey has put its accession prospects firmly on the long finger. That was all agreed at a summit proclaimed a great success.

The area of freedom, security and justice was also accorded a great deal of time at the summit, with discussions on the constant and growing expectations of citizens who wish to see concrete results in matters such as cross-border crime and terrorism, as well as immigration — I am paraphrasing the bumf issued following the summit discussions. There was agreement that existing co-operative measures were not satisfactory. Cross-border crime, drug-trafficking, money-laundering, trafficking in children and women and illegal immigration, it was thought, were not being tackled effectively by existing controls, structures and policies. Everyone agreed with that contention at the summit.

The Finnish Presidency proceeded to seek to eliminate the national veto on decision-making in the area of justice and police co-operation, but European leaders resisted any change and jealously guarded national sovereignty on the matter. However, they pledged to move towards a comprehensive European migration policy and closer co-operation on immigration. Member states were determined they retain control of their external borders and resisted the concept of a common EU immigration policy.

Crime and immigration are of critical concern to citizens throughout the EU. The removal of national borders has greatly increased the capacity for transnational illegal activity. However, there has been corresponding enhancement of border controls or policing. Co-operative policing covering different jurisdictions has been unsatisfactory and ineffective, and the states meeting at the summit were well aware of that.

The EU international comparative crime survey published this week showed Ireland at the top of the comparative league of crimes in European states. There is a very significant EU transnational aspect to the figures. Virtually all illegal drugs are imported into Ireland, as there is no indigenous source. Most of our drug barons are ensconced in bolt-holes in Spain, the Netherlands and Britain. Police forces in those countries are not seriously engaged in bringing such criminals to justice, and we know how famously loath policemen are to share confidential information on criminals. Consequently, they export their deadly products to Ireland from safe havens in those countries.

A failure to address those issues causes widespread resentment and tarnishes the benefits of EU membership. There must be a common EU approach to such issues; the citizens of Europe are crying out for that. Clearly, rejection of the constitutional treaty by France and the Netherlands has stopped the EU in its stride. Hard decisions are no longer being taken at summits. Let us compare Ireland's Presidency and the summit of June 2004 with those since. There is no comparison; Ireland's tenure was one of progress, excitement and achievement, while recent summits have been little more than talking shops. It is time to move on. The European Union must be either relevant or redundant.

I will comment on Fianna Fáil before I finish and I am sure the Minister will be glad I am not leaving it out of the equation. Fianna Fáil's membership of the right wing Union for Europe of the Nations, UEN, political grouping in Europe has received some adverse comment and the Taoiseach was questioned on the issue at the summit by journalists. The Italian Northern League and the League of Polish Families, who have recently joined the group, are ultraconservative, racist and homophobic, as is the Danish membership. The apparent reason for the increase in numbers is to boost the group's membership to 44, past the magic number of 41 that allows a group a vice-presidency. These are uneasy bedfellows for an Irish democratic party and perks, privileges and power are not appropriate grounds for sharing membership with those who have no respect or time for democracy.

Fianna Fáil should urgently reconsider its position as it is an embarrassment that the Taoiseach of this country, head of the main Government party, is associated with such a political grouping. Fianna Fáil and the Taoiseach have no option but to leave the UEN and join a proper democratic grouping.

Mr. Gormley

I wish to share time with Deputies Connolly and Ó Snodaigh.

Acting Chairman (Dr. Cowley)

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Gormley

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the issue. I also welcome the recent visit by the Minister for Foreign Affairs to Palestine, where he held a meeting with the Israeli Foreign Minister. This issue was debated at the summit but we require some clarity on the matter at European level. As has been stated by previous speakers, dealing with the Palestinian problem is the way forward for tackling all problems in the Middle East.

This has been recognised by British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, although one would have to ask if his support for US President George W. Bush and the policies of the White House is leading in that direction. Similarly, one would have to ask whether our support for the US in Shannon is leading in the right direction, as it is rightly perceived in the Middle East that we are staunch supporters of George W. Bush, whom the Taoiseach referred to as a great man.

I wonder if we could get clarity, particularly on the Israeli wall. The issue has been raised and I know when the point was put to the Israeli Foreign Minister she became quite irate. We should be clear that the wall is a land grab and does not go along with the 1967 borders, but instead takes in many settlements. That should be unacceptable and our Minister for Foreign Affairs should state clearly where he stands on that issue. There can be no lasting peace, or the two state solution referred to by the Taoiseach, if we allow this wall to continue in that way. We should at least have a solution based on the 1967 borders.

As a member of the European Union we should be clear that the military build-up in the Persian Gulf targeting Iran will also lead to further destabilisation. We have seen destabilisation in Iraq, failures in Afghanistan and Gaza going up in flames. Are we going to compound all of this by supporting the US in a possible air strike in Iran? That seems to be very much on the cards at this stage. Did the Minister or the Taoiseach raise this possibility at the summit?

I refer to the question of climate change, probably to the irritation and disappointment of the Taoiseach, as this is the third time the Green Party has raised the issue in the House today. Our record on climate change is appalling, so do the Taoiseach or Minister for Foreign Affairs have any sense of shame when they go to summits and present it?

We are currently running at 23% above 1990 emission levels and have the worst record in Europe. There seems to be no prospect in sight that this Government is prepared to offer leadership on climate change. The people determining our climate change strategy are those in the Galway tent providing funds for the Fianna Fáil Party. This results in substandard buildings, bad insulation and very poor planning, the root causes of our poor record on climate change.

Deputy Kenny stated that Angela Merkel was calling for "more Europe", yet when it was put to her that we need "more Europe" in tackling CO2 emissions from cars, she rejected it out of hand. It would appear that Angela Merkel has very good friends in Government, as it is only too delighted to have its Ministers driving around in Mercedes cars. The Mercedes cars favoured by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his colleagues are among the worst emitters of CO2. The EU target is supposed to be between 120 g and 130 g of CO2 emissions per kilometre. The Mercedes E-Class has been the transport of choice for most Ministers, with seven Ministers still using them. Those cars produce 240 g of CO2 per kilometre, whereas the new car chosen by the Taoiseach produces 250 g of CO2 per kilometre.

If the Green Party is lucky enough to ever be in Government, we will be saying goodbye to the Mercedes. I do not care if Angela Merkel is annoyed by it.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Is trua go bhfuil an tAontas Eorpach ag díriú ar an bhunreacht athuair. Cad is fiú iad na rialacha? Tá siad scríofa, agus tugadh le fios, dá mba rud é go ndúirt aon tír "No" leis an bhunreacht nó aon chonradh eile, chuirfeadh sé sin deireadh leis, agus chuirfí ar leataobh é. Ar ndóigh, tuigimid sa tír seo nach fíor sin, agus ní gá ach smaoineamh siar ar a ndearna an tír seo go maslach maidir le Conradh Nice.

Sin go díreach an rud atá á dhéanamh arís leis an bhunreacht, agus tá an tír seo arís ag tabhairt tacaíochta d'iarrachtaí an Aontais conradh nó bunreacht nach ritheann le pobal an Aontais a chur chun cinn. Ní maith leo í, agus tá siad sásta cur ina coinne. Tá an tír seo sásta í a bhrú chun tosaigh, áfach. Is masla don daonlathas é sin, ach ní dúirt aon duine ariamh gur chlub daonlathach é an tAontas Eorpach. Ní gá ach féachaint ar an tslí a gcaitheann an tAontas lena bhaill ar fad. De ghnáth i gclub, nuair a shíníonn daoine suas, glactar leo mar bhaill iomlána — muna bhfuil sé leagtha síos go bhfuil dhá ghrád de bhallraíocht ann. Ba é an rud a dúradh le gach tír a lorg ballraíocht san Aontas ná go mbeidís in ann teacht isteach mar bhaill iomlána agus go mbeadh gach rud a bhaineann leis an Aontas ag dul dóibh.

Is léir, áfach, go bhfuil ballraíocht den darna grád á hofráil — agus tugtha sa chás seo — don Rómáin agus don Bhulgáir. Is trua é an seasamh a ghlac an Rialtas maidir le ballraíocht den dá thír sin. Bhí an tír seo láidir agus ceannródaíoch nuair a tháinig na deich dtír eile isteach san Aontas tamall beag roimhe sin. In áit díriú ar an bhunreacht a diúltaíodh athuair, ba chóir go mbeimis ag díriú ar conas is féidir linn déileáil le fadhbanna taobh istigh den Aontas. Seachas díriú ar straitéis Liospóine, straitéis a bhfuil teipthe uirthi, ba chóir polasaithe a chumadh ar féidir leo déileáil leis an fhás i míchothromas ioncaim ó 2000 ar aghaidh. Bhí milliún duine breise dífhostaithe idir 2000 agus 2005. Tá breis agus 5 milliún ar chonarthaí téarmaí ceangailte agus 1 milliún gafa i bpoist pháirt-aimseartha san Aontas. Tugadh tús áite i gcónaí do straitéis Liospóine, ag cur príobháidithe agus liobrálachais sa mhargadh chun cinn. Ba é an toradh a bhí air ná ionsaí ar choinníollacha oibre, pá, sláinte, pinsin agus, as láthair, leasú sóisialta.

Caithfidh polasaí an Aontais a athrú má tá sé chun déileáil le fás eacnamúil inmharthanach, le bochtanas agus dífhostaíocht. Caithfidh meon nua a chothú agus athdháileadh a chur ar ais ar an chlár polaitiúil. Ba chóir é a cheangal isteach leis an tosaíocht timpeallachta agus athrú aeráide a luaigh an Teachta Gormley. Is ceist don Aire é sin, ach cén seasamh atá glactha ag toscaireacht na tíre seo maidir le cumhacht núicléach? Caithfidh Éire agus an tAontas Eorpach ina iomláine díriú isteach ar conas is féidir déileáil leis agus fuinneamh inathnuaite a úsáid agus a chur chun cinn, chomh maith le úsáid níos éifeachtaí a dhéanamh den fhuinneamh atá againn cheana féin.

Tá a lán eile ann. Cuirim fáilte roimh an chéim chun tosaigh a glacadh don Ghaeilge ar 1 Eanáir. Tá súil agam gur spreag sí daoine sa Teach seo Gaeilge a úsáid. Bheimis in ann Gaeilge a chloisint i bParlaimint na hEorpa agus ag cruinnithe, mar a phléigh muid anseo.

Mr. Connolly

The recent European Council meeting coincided with the end of the Finnish EU Presidency and I am happy to note that it adopted a welcoming attitude to the issue of further EU enlargement and described enlargement as a key priority for an open union like the EU.

I also note that the Commission was asked to assess how possible EU membership to the acceding countries would affect the European Union's functioning. In this regard it intends to keep its commitments to the acceding countries, with particular reference to the western Balkans which have much to contribute within the EU. I am also pleased to note that the application of Croatia has regained momentum after some difficulties in 2005 and this may lead to the sixth enlargement of the Union, along with Turkey, by 2009.

A comprehensive European migration policy, along with concrete action to achieve this, was another issue on which there was agreement at the Council. The flow of international migration affects all member states of the European Union and a co-ordinated approach that takes account of the economic and demographic position of the EU will be instrumental in the better management of migration flows.

Large numbers of both legal and illegal migrants have continued to come to the EU in spite of restrictive immigration policies that have been put in place for decades. Smuggling and trafficking networks have taken hold across the EU with the sole objective of taking advantage of persons looking for a better life. This has resulted in the deployment of considerable resources to fight illegal migration and particularly to target smugglers and traffickers.

Human trafficking is a trade of human misery that affects 15,000 people in the EU annually, and affects approximately eight times that number worldwide. Poverty, corruption and social breakdown are the circumstances in which this odious trade thrives, with the lure of an apparently better life and work opportunities in the EU. Since they may have entered the country illegally, they are afraid, unwilling or unable at times to seek help from the Garda or police. In such situations the need to protect, rather than punish, victims is paramount and all forms of human trafficking such as illegal adoptions and selling human organs must be outlawed.

However, it should be recognised that the EU needs migrants in certain sectors and regions to deal with the economic and demographic needs. This was the pretext for the adoption at the European Council meeting at Tampere in Finland in 1999 of a new approach to EU immigration policy with the setting out of elements for a common EU immigration policy. This was further confirmed with the adoption in 2004 of the Hague programme setting out the objective of strengthening freedom, security and justice in the EU for the period 2005-10. These are the logical steps towards an ultimate new order, with a vast European space of between 25 and 35 countries with joint immigration planning and joint external borders.

Generally, the eastern EU border controls function fairly well, thanks to the different training and EU harmonisation, but the southern sea borders are more in focus at present. Transit movements through Albania to other EU countries in rubber boats have been temporarily brought to a halt, but the transit flows from Lebanon, Morocco and Libya are growing and there is a particular difficulty with these countries at present. Libya has become the people smuggling hub, with over 1.5 million sub-Saharan migrants in the country. Through Morocco and across the Straits of Gibraltar, the boats bring hundreds of thousands over to Spain. They have been brought to the Canary Islands as well and quite a number of lives are lost each year in this trade. In the past ten years the Spanish authorities have counted over 6,000 dead migrant bodies on their shores. This is how many of these are detected.

Acting Chairman

There will now be questions to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern.

Mr. Costello

I am delighted to see the Minister for Foreign Affairs here. How to deal with the constitutional treaty is the central issue overshadowing every EU summit and meeting and, indeed, every meeting of the National Forum on Europe these days as the various party leaders have made their contributions on their vision for Europe. I saw nothing in the Taoiseach's speech to indicate a road map for a way forward. I presume no bilateral meeting has yet taken place between the German Presidency and the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Treacy, but there must be some preparations being made for it on how to respond on the issue of progressing the constitutional treaty. Could the Minister elaborate on the thinking within Government on how we might resolve this crux and move forward? There has been the period of reflection and the period of analysis, and the German Presidency has indicated, seemingly quite firmly, that the buck would stop to some degree with the Presidency in terms of whatever road map would be put together for others to follow in finalising a new dispensation on the constitutional treaty. What is Government thinking on this matter?

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern)

Discussions have been ongoing. In fact, the Taoiseach was with the German Chancellor before Germany took on the Presidency. Since then there have been discussions at official level. I was due to meet the German Foreign Minister next week but that has been postponed mainly owing to problems with my diary. I will see him at the General Affairs and External Relations Council, GAERC, and hope to renew discussions with him on this issue.

The Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Treacy, and his officials have been in constant contact with the Germans on this matter and I met the Spanish Foreign Minister yesterday on the same subject. I do not disagree with what Deputy Costello said in his opening statement regarding the need to keep the core of the constitution. It is sometimes forgotten that many member states have ratified this, something I discussed with the Spanish Foreign Minister, some by way of referendum. We have a duty to the people in those countries to sustain the principles set out in the constitution to which those people gave their assent. We are not in favour of part ratification and we oppose the cherry-picking mentioned by Deputy Costello because we believe, having been involved in negotiations towards the end of drafting of the constitution, if one cherry-picks on one side people will wish to add or remove elements from the other side.

I agree with Deputy Costello that we must examine issues such as climate change and energy matters as they affect Europe in particular. Some additions could be made to the constitution in this regard without taking from the main issues on which a compromise was reached between all member states.

Deputy Costello referred to enlargement and that must be examined carefully. Given that we do not have the tools to allow enlargement to take place, it is generally accepted that we need to change the structures of the EU to allow it to work better given that it has expanded dramatically in recent years.

It is unfair to criticise the Finns as there was a period of reflection and it was accepted they would liaise with all the member states and then hand over to the Germans, with substantive work being done during the German Presidency. It is generally accepted that this cannot go on forever and that a conclusion must be reached on the matter within the next year or so.

Mr. Gormley

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, once again mentioned climate change and, while I dealt with a number of issues in my opening remarks, I would like to return to this topic. What is the position of the Government on the Commission proposal to set a mandatory limit on CO2 emissions of 130 g per kilometre on all new cars from 2012? Does the Government support this sensible proposal or join the Germans, who have major concerns about it, in rejecting it? Is the Minister prepared to lead by example if he is so concerned about climate change? As I asked in my opening speech, is the Government prepared to use cars with lower CO2 emission values? Will the Minister explain why the Toyota Prius family car, the most fuel efficient car, has been rejected by Ministers on the grounds of it being "insufficient for the needs of a Minister"? What does that mean? Are Ministers on a higher plane than the rest of us that allows them to ignore EU directives?

Mr. D. Ahern

My party is not a party of gestures but of delivery and, I think it is fair to say, even some of our most ardent critics would accept the Government has made great strides on eco-friendly policies.

Mr. Gormley

Nobody would say that.

Mr. D. Ahern

This country has far exceeded EU recommendations on recycling levels. In the recent budget we introduced a new tax break of 50% on vehicle registration tax for electric cars, which builds on last year's initiative for hybrid cars. We have abolished excise duty for kerosene and liquified petroleum gas used in home heating and introduced an enhanced rural environment protection scheme. We brought in new support for bio-energy crops and a continuation of bio-fuels relief. Additional funding, amounting to €20 million, will be introduced between now and 2009 for the very popular green homes initiative. Thankfully, thousands of people, including myself, have applied for that grant. I do not believe in gestures but, rather, live my life this way because we all have a personal responsibility, not just in this House, but also outside.

Mr. Gormley

The Government has a responsibility.

Mr. D. Ahern

Thankfully the Government introduced a significant grant scheme and I am delighted to inform the Deputy that well over 11,000 people have applied for that grant. The Government introduced it because we do not believe in gestures but rather in delivery regarding these issues. In the recent budget we introduced corporation tax relief for investment in renewable energy and it is being extended for five years. The list goes on.

The Government is moving on the issue of climate change but there is a balance to be struck. People such as Deputy Gormley should acknowledge that we find it gravely difficult to adhere to some of these targets because we have one of the most successful economies in the world. Every time we have year on year growth rates of 6% and 7% it becomes more difficult for us to meet those targets.

The Government is very willing to engage on this issue as it goes to the core of our policies. Yesterday we had a Cabinet committee meeting on the issue of new targets for climate change and this will continue.

I do not subscribe to the types of view expressed in an amazing quote that I was given, made by Mary White, deputy leader of the Green Party.

Mr. Gormley

It is completely untrue.

Mr. D. Ahern

I have not given the quote yet so how does the Deputy know what I am going to say?

Mr. Gormley

I know because the Minister has said it before and it is in his stock literature.

Mr. D. Ahern

Does the Deputy know what it is because I cannot believe it?

Mr. Gormley

It is handed around all the time and it is not true.

Mr. D. Ahern

I cannot believe it. Perhaps it is not the quote the Deputy is thinking of because his party comes out with such weird statements from time to time.

Mr. Gormley

It is nonsense.

Mr. D. Ahern

I frequently do not disagree with you but, unfortunately, some of your statements, like this one, are off the wall.

Mr. Gormley

The statement is untrue.

Acting Chairman

The Minister should address his comments through the Chair.

Mr. D. Ahern

I am not sure if this quote is the same one that the Deputy is heckling me about. Perhaps he does not like to hear a response to it, but this is a direct quote from Mary White, deputy leader of the Green Party: "I would welcome the collapse of the Irish economy because it would mean the Irish Government could no longer afford to build roads".

Mr. Gormley

That is nonsense.

Mr. D. Ahern

Will that be in the Green Party's election literature?

Mr. Gormley

It is nonsense. It is completely untrue and the Minister should withdraw that.

Mr. D. Ahern

Regarding Ministers' cars, a number of my colleagues have moved towards the hybrid car to show an example to others.

Mr. Gormley

Is that a gesture?

Mr. D. Ahern

It is a gesture. I have moved from a large car to a small car, in my personal life, to show an example. There is no domestic bin collection from my house. I recycle everything. In my home town and in Drogheda in my constituency we have an excellent recycling facility, provided through Government funds on a public private partnership basis. The Deputy should have a look at it some day.

Mr. Gormley

I did recently.

Mr. D. Ahern

The Deputy did not acknowledge that it was funded by the Government. I have applied for and am awaiting a grant for a wood-burning stove, which is currently in my house. I have even taken advice on solar panels from the Deputy's deputy leader, who was a little equivocal on their long-term benefits, and I hope to receive a substantial grant from the Government to install one.

The Green Party is all talk and I wonder——

Mr. Gormley

Wait until we get into power. When we do, we will deliver a lot more.

Mr. D. Ahern

——whether the Deputy, like me, is implementing his own policies.

Mr. Gormley

Absolutely.

Mr. Crawford

I hate to interrupt such an interesting combat. Is it the Government's or taxpayers' money that is paying for all this? The Government has the job of dispensing taxpayers' money.

My question may not be totally relevant because I was not present for the full debate and I therefore ask the Minister to forgive me. Where stands the Government regarding a possible referendum on new rules to govern the European Union? Having spent time in the voluntary sector, I realise enlargement cannot proceed indefinitely without the introduction of more rigorous structures. The Minister stated that most countries have already agreed to the structures that were put in place. How many countries require a referendum? Are there any plans for one in Ireland in the foreseeable future?

Mr. D. Ahern

I cannot say off the top of my head how many other countries require a referendum. Two have already had them and they were obviously successful. There are no plans at present for us to have a referendum on this matter because the discussions at EU level are not finished. As I stated, I hope there will be progress under the German Presidency but the issue may become relevant to its successor. One way or the other, we will have to reach some conclusions on the European constitution in the next year and a half or two years.

Mr. Costello

Having heard the Minister's response to Deputy Gormley's question, I note he has an admirable track record in waste management in his own home.

Mr. D. Ahern

The Deputy has local knowledge.

Mr. Costello

I do. The Minister might transmit his knowledge to the Minister for Finance who, in his forthcoming budget, might withdraw the provision in the last budget to spend €300 million to €400 million on purchasing carbon emission allowances from poorer countries. Thus, the members of the Government will all be singing from the same hymn-sheet. It is quite obvious the Minister for Foreign Affairs is singing for himself.

On the issues of security and justice and the question of how to proceed regarding trans-border crime, one should bear in mind that much crime is now taking place on a transnational, trans-border basis. This includes the importation and exportation of illegal drugs, money laundering, trafficking of children and women and modern-day slavery. Existing policing mechanisms and controls are totally inefficient and inadequate, and this was accepted by everybody at the summit. The proposal by the Finnish President on limiting the national veto was rejected out of hand. There is therefore need for a common EU approach to this issue so citizens of member states will know the Union can act for their benefit in this very difficult area, which causes so much concern right across the Union. How will the Union proceed and does the Irish Government have any proposals?

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, while standing or sitting on his high horse, or whatever one does with one's high horse, has been pontificating that he will jealously stand by Ireland's sovereignty on this matter and that he will not be found wanting regarding co-operation. However, we know modern police forces from different countries do not co-operate effectively unless there are structures or mechanisms in place to ensure that it happens. Circumstances otherwise go from bad to worse.

I quoted the statistics on the recent survey that put Ireland top of the league in terms of the difficulties I have described. We know how much crime on this island has a cross-Border element, just as we know cross-border crime is committed throughout other European countries. Will the Minister state whether the Government has some ideas on this matter?

Mr. D. Ahern

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has been very active in this area and there is no doubt that it is significant from a European point of view given the high level of migration, particularly in the Mediterranean area. This is a significant issue and we are very strong supporters of the FRONTEX proposals in that respect. I have had discussions with some of my colleagues and in this regard I met representatives of the Spanish Foreign Ministry yesterday and Maltese representatives in Malta when the President was there.

In December the European Council endorsed a comprehensive European migration policy, which referred to international co-operation and dialogue with third countries. The latter is vital because it is not a question of "Fortress Europe" whereby barriers would be put up to prevent people from entering.

We provide overseas development aid to developing countries, particularly in Africa, to ensure they have the opportunity to develop such that there would not be a pull therefrom to other areas of the world. They must develop favourable economic circumstances and address all the relevant issues, not least that of HIV-AIDS. It is great that some reports, particularly from countries such as Lesotho and Mozambique, show clearly that investment in the health systems of such countries by the international community, particularly by the European Union, is beginning to stop the rapid increase in HIV-AIDS.

Co-operation among member states in the fight against illegal immigration was addressed at the Council meeting. Ireland, because of its historical ties with Britain, has a common travel area and this can pose a problem. We are not subscribers to the Schengen Agreement, yet we try to work within some of its aspects where possible. We are in a unique area. When this Government came to office, the controls regarding illegal migration, particularly across the Border into my constituency and others, became insufficient. The management of the European Union's external border was agreed at the European Council meeting. Illegal migration was addressed, as was a common European asylum system, of which we are strong advocates. This system is to ensure people are not going from one country to another depending on the controls that apply therein. The availability of adequate resources was also deemed necessary.

We will be proceeding according to the aforedescribed template. I agree that efforts must be made on a European-wide basis so there will be a level playing field and so our own citizens and citizens from outside the European Union will know the circumstances within which they can proceed.

Some say it is very difficult to develop a uniform system when working in concert with other member states in the areas of policing and justice, particularly the latter, considering the types of legal systems that obtain. Some member states have common law systems and others, which comprise the majority, do not. We know from our history of the difficulties that arise, an example being the issue of extradition. I am thankful that the European arrest warrant has been agreed upon but even with that there are teething problems. We must work within the template of what is done at European level to ensure there is a common denominator that everyone understands.

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