Billy Timmins
Question:56 Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the Government policy with respect to the future of Kosovo; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29345/07]
Priority Questions.
Foreign Conflicts.
The difficult and sensitive issue of Kosovo's future status is the legacy of the Balkan wars of the 1990s. The framework for post-conflict Kosovo was set out in UN Security Council Resolution 1244 which established an interim United Nations civilian administration and authorised an international security presence, Kosovo Force, KFOR. The resolution also provided for a gradual transfer of competence from the United Nations civilian administration mission to provisional institutions of self-government.
In November 2005 the former Finnish President, Martti Ahtisaari, was appointed as the UN Secretary General's special envoy to lead the political process to determine the future status of Kosovo in a final settlement. Following more than one year of consultations and direct talks with the parties, Mr. Ahtisaari submitted his comprehensive proposal to the Secretary General in March this year. He recommended that Kosovo's status should be independent and supervised by the international community. The proposal includes detailed provisions concerning the promotion and protection of the rights of communities and their members. A key element of the proposed settlement would be a continuing international civilian and military presence in Kosovo, with the KFOR military force remaining and a new civilian European Security and Defence Policy, ESDP, mission created.
Ireland welcomed this proposal but, regrettably, intensive efforts within the UN Security Council to agree on a new resolution on the basis of the Ahtisaari proposals ended in failure. On 1 August the Secretary General announced that an international troika would facilitate a further four months of direct talks between Belgrade and Pristina. No agreement has yet been found and the Troika is due to report to the UN Secretary General on the outcome of these talks on 10 December.
During his recent visit to the Balkans the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, met leaders in Belgrade and Pristina. He expressed Ireland's strong support for the troika process and urged both parties to take a constructive approach to try to find an agreed solution.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
It was clear from these discussions that the positions of the two sides remained diametrically opposed. We hope the talks may yet produce a positive outcome, but if they do not, we recognise that difficult choices will need to be made which deal with the reality of the situation on the ground.
With our partners in the European Union and the international community, Ireland is ready to play its full part in the efforts to resolve this important European issue. Since August we have increased our commitment to KFOR to 270 troops, following our assumption of command of task force centre which covers the capital Pristina and the surrounding area. While we will face a more complex and uncertain political and legal environment in the event that there is no agreement on final status, we very much hope to be in a position to maintain our presence in KFOR, to consider contributing members of the Garda to an ESDP mission and to support the future economic development of Kosovo.
I thank the Minister of State but I am not fully satisfied with his reply; perhaps there is more information in the part he did not read out. What is the Government's policy on the future status of Kosovo? The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, stated Europe would be united on the issue. Will there be agreement on it by 10 December? Will there be a united European position? It is probable that a unilateral declaration of independence will be made in Kosovo. Will the Government support it? What will be the implications for Irish participation in KFOR of the probable unilateral declaration?
Regarding the speculation alluded to by the Deputy, agreement will be difficult to reach and if it is not reached, hard choices will have to be made. Ireland is ready to play a full part in efforts to resolve this issue with our European partners and the international community. Since August we have increased our presence on the ground; 270 troops are now attached to KFOR and Ireland has taken command of the task force centre.
The Deputy mentioned our position on the UN resolution. It is clear that, in the absence of a new resolution, there will be complex political and legal issues to be considered by member states. To answer another of the Deputy's questions, I hope the European Union will adopt a single cohesive approach because to do otherwise would be damaging. Like other member states, we will have to reflect carefully on all the issues that arise and prepare to deal with whatever situation will face us. We do not wish to be diverted by speculation and are committed, not only because 270 troops are on the ground but because we have made a commitment to put members of the Garda Síochána in place. One hopes sanity will prevail.
Is it fair to assume, based on the Minister of State's response, that the Government does not have a position on the future status of Kosovo? It appears that the only solution comes under the European Union's umbrella. An indication could be given to Serbia that it will eventually gain EU membership and that Kosovo's declaration of independence will be recognised. Does the Minister of State have a view on this? I would like to agree with him that a united EU front is possible on this issue but I do not believe it is. There has been much procrastination on the matter. As we face a stumbling block, it is important that the Government outlines its position.
If the European Union sticks together between now and 10 December and makes its expectation clear to the parties in the region, this will be far better than independent speculation. The Government is committed to finding a solution and sees this as a European problem that must be solved by Europeans. The best way for the European Union to make a concrete contribution is to stick together.
Middle East Peace Process.
Michael D. Higgins
Question:57 Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the human rights implications of the cutting off of basic infrastructural facilities to the Gaza region by the Israeli authorities; if he will advocate the establishment of a permanent secretariat to the peace talks in the name of the Quartet; and if the European Union is engaged in such talks with the different parts of Israeli and Palestinian society as would initiate or assist in the achievement of a negotiated peace. [30902/07]
The international meeting taking place in Annapolis today represents a crucial opportunity to restore momentum to the Middle East peace process. The Government and its partners in Europe have strongly supported the preparatory work for the meeting and the political dialogue between Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas. It is important that these discussions now lead to meaningful and urgent final status negotiations for a lasting and just two-state solution. The negotiations will have to address the most sensitive issues at the heart of the conflict, including borders, settlements, security, refugees and the status of Jerusalem. This should provide the opportunity for serious movement towards a comprehensive regional settlement, building on the historic Arab peace initiative which was launched in Beirut in 2002 and reaffirmed by the Arab summit in Riyadh in March this year.
The European Union will have an important role to play in the coming months, working directly with the parties and as an active member of the international Quartet. The Government has for some time been among those member states that have sought to strengthen the Quartet and the European Union's role in it. Depending on developments, it may be that a proposal for the establishment of a permanent secretariat could be considered to add focus to the work of the Quartet. The Government would judge any such proposal on the contribution it might make to the achievement of the strategic objective of a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
To be credible the renewed political process must be bolstered in the weeks ahead by decisive action to improve the daily lives of the people most directly affected by the conflict. This must involve an end to all violence in and from the occupied territories, a genuine freeze on the building of settlements and the lifting of checkpoints. Prisoner releases will also make a vital contribution to the reduction of tensions. We are strongly of the view that the two-state solution is the only viable option, a point I made recently at a meeting of EuroMed in Lisbon.
The Government is particularly concerned by the humanitarian situation facing the 1.4 million people living in Gaza and by the serious disruption to vital economic activity in the territory. We have called for the ending of all policies aimed at isolating the people of Gaza and for the urgent re-opening of crossing points for people and goods. We strongly agree with the statement of the UN Secretary General that the interruption of essential services to the civilian population would be contrary to Israel's obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law and to its own interests.
Several questions immediately arise from the Minister of State's response. Will he consider the Annapolis meeting a failure if its final statement does not address the issues he mentioned, including the future status of Jerusalem, illegal settlements and so on? Does he agree that the credibility of the European Union is badly damaged by, in the first instance, the clearing house decision that added Hamas to a proscribed list, with no accountability to this Parliament or any parliament in Europe, and, following that, its failure to recognise the result of the election, which was acknowledged as free and fair by several international bodies, including the Carter Centre? All we had from the EU was a mealy-mouthed statement expressing gratitude that no lives had been lost in the course of the election. It is absolutely absurd to suggest it is dealing with all the parties. What contact has the EU with Hamas? Most commentators, including the British Foreign Office, agree the only solution will involve talks that include both Hamas and Fatah. Where is the semblance of that recognition in anything the EU says?
The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, suggested in a previous reply to a question on this issue that he had made the Irish position known. However, we do not know what the Irish position is. Is it our position not to recognise the results of the election? Is it our position not to have any contact with Hamas? Is it our position never to remind Israel that as an occupying force, it is in breach of international law by cutting off vital structures for Gaza?
It seems some slow and tedious progress is being made through the permanent secretariat. I am pleased the Minister seems to be following my suggestion in this regard. However, the notion that we should rely on a press release from a meeting in Annapolis as an alternative to such a secretariat is depressing, as is the operation of an exclusion policy towards some of the participants in the conflict.
We hope that all of the issues mentioned, particularly the rights of the 1.4 million people who are suffering in Gaza, will be dealt with in Annapolis. The reality that has informed the attitude of the EU is somewhat misrepresented by Deputy Higgins, although I recognise that he makes his points with goodwill. In the aftermath of the election, the EU's position is that there can be no twin track position that offers politics and violence in equal balance.
The EU did not recognise the Government that was elected.
We in this country have learned something about ballot boxes and armalites.
Our general position is that the policy of isolation of Gaza and its people is neither just nor politically sustainable. With regard to the divisions among Palestinians, we are of the view that there is a need for reconciliation between Fatah, Hamas and the other political factions. Reconciliation efforts should be encouraged. However, the timing is delicate and that is an issue for the Palestinians. Encouragement for both sides to come together is the right approach.
The legacy of proscribing Hamas has damaged the EU's credibility.
There is an eternal conundrum between violence and politics. I am sure the Deputy accepts the reality that there has been a twin track approach whereby violence and politics were used in tandem.
Ireland should have recognised the election results and the Government formed thereafter.
Hamas won a clear electoral victory in January 2006 and there is no gainsaying that.
The Government did not recognise the Hamas-Fatah Government.
However, the twin track approach of violence and politics is not a practical way forward. If nothing else can be learned from the history of this island, it is that violence has no place in a final political solution. Dialogue is the way forward.
Hamas is more advanced than the IRA.
Diplomatic Representation.
Billy Timmins
Question:58 Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the recent measures he has taken to advance Ireland’s economic interests abroad; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29346/07]
The Minister attaches the highest priority to the economic work of diplomatic missions. In the past year, a review of the Department's work in this area was carried out. A set of guidelines was issued to advance the economic objectives set out in the programme for Government. These guidelines reiterate that all missions have a role to play in promoting trade and investment; and that this role should be discharged in a dynamic manner. My experience is that this is the case. In addition, officials taking up diplomatic postings abroad in 2007 received intensive training in economic and trade related matters. Follow-up to these initiatives is continuing.
Embassies and consulates typically engage in a range of economic and trade work, including awareness-raising and promotional work, networking, identifying new market opportunities, maintaining and extending market access for Irish goods and services, and supporting business and young professional networks. Missions lobby on a government-to-government basis on issues of concern. Every opportunity is used, including high-level visits and bilateral meetings, to raise and advance Ireland's economic interests abroad. Although often the subject of negative comment in this State, in this regard the St. Patrick's Day phenomenon provides a unique and effective opportunity. I attended an ASEAN conference in Singapore last week. Upon reaching my hotel, I learned that the ambassador, Mr. Richard O'Brien, and his small staff had already arranged a series of bilateral meetings, to discuss such issues as Irish beef exports, educational matters and young and emerging Irish companies in the area. A significant effort is being made to advance our economic interests in this way.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs cannot be here because he is visiting Japan to celebrate the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between our countries. Among the objectives of the visit is to take forward the Ireland — Japan bilateral economic agenda. The limited numbers of staff in most embassies are being used to great effect.
On a recent visit to the Irish mission to the UN in New York, I was greatly impressed by the courtesy and professionalism of the staff. The work of the diplomatic corps should be acknowledged in this House.
One of the high-level goals of the Department of Foreign Affairs is to promote trade and investment opportunities for the State. Since December 2000, Irish cost competitiveness has deteriorated by 30% against our trading partners. Since 2002, our share of world merchandise trade has declined by one quarter. For a country that relies on export trade and attracting foreign direct investment, particularly from the United States, it is vital that the Department of Foreign Affairs provides assistance to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment in promoting Ireland abroad.
The Minister of State mentioned in his reply that training in economic and trade related matters had commenced in 2007. What is the location and duration of this training? Does the Department have any plans to increase the number of embassy staff in the United States? The falling dollar and our reliance on investment from that country make it imperative that we continue to attract such investment in coming years. The diplomatic corps does an excellent job, but it is often the case that we must go outside regular diplomatic relations and adopt a more pro-investment and pro-business approach.
I agree absolutely with Deputy Timmins, particularly his last point. That is already happening. In Singapore, for example, the embassy has a small staff, but we have Ireland House there, along with Enterprise Ireland. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment also has staff on the ground in Singapore. This is precisely the point being made by the Deputy of approaching in an holistic way the promotion of Ireland. The Deputy also asked about training, which was more formalised in 2007 than it had been previously. There is a now a very specific course put together with TCD and the IMI which makes it even more professional and focused.
The other issue dealt with by the Deputy is Irish cost competitiveness. Although it is very important it is slightly beyond the remit of our embassies abroad.
I will allow a very brief supplementary question.
Some time ago I remember mentioning a concept to which the Department of Foreign Affairs has not warmed. This is the idea of looking outside the diplomatic corps for assistance for these missions. Retired politicians or people from the IDA could be used, either through secondment or other ways of assisting the missions.
Deputy Timmins is making a very valid point. For example, there is abhorrence in Ireland to using retired politicians for anything. John Bruton currently represents Europe very well in Washington DC. Many people with much skill could be called upon.
With regard to networking and using the resources available on the ground, Irish embassies are unsurpassed. The networks being established are extraordinary, as the Deputy will know from his recent visit to New York and the United States. We have made a very small investment over the years in the East but we are punching way above our weight, doing very well with few resources.
Millennium Development Goals.
John Deasy
Question:59 Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the mechanism used to measure the success or otherwise of the implementation of the millennium development goals; the progress Ireland has made to date in this implementation. [29347/07]
United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has assigned the task of monitoring implementation of the millennium development goals, MDGs, to the United Nations Development Programme. This programme compiles information against each of the MDG targets in collaboration with national governments, regional groupings and experts, other UN partners, the World Bank, the IMF and the OECD. The objective is to come up with a country and regional picture of progress on each of the goals. The UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs then draws on this material to issue regular reports on progress towards the goals.
The latest MDG progress report, issued in July, gave us a snapshot of the progress achieved at the midpoint of the 2015 MDG target date, broken down by goal and region. Overall, there has been good progress on some targets, with more intensive effort required on others.
On the positive side, the indications are that if current trends continue, we are on target to reach the MDG on poverty reduction for the world as a whole. Progress has also been made globally in reducing child mortality and increasing school enrolment rates. However, there is significant geographical disparity, with sub-Saharan Africa at particular risk of falling behind. It was for this reason the UN Secretary General convened an MDG Africa steering group in September of this year. His initiative has brought together high level representatives of the African Union, European Union, African Development Bank, Islamic Development Bank, IMF and World Bank, who will meet regularly to examine how to strengthen Africa's efforts to meet the goals.
A further initiative aimed at measuring progress towards the MDGs has been taken by British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, who has proposed that a Heads of State and Government meeting take place at the UN in September 2008 to revitalise the pledges made in 2000 and provide the impetus for more intensive efforts in the period up to 2015. The British Prime Minister wrote to the Taoiseach about his proposal and the Taoiseach has replied indicating Ireland's strong support. The Taoiseach has also indicated he would be willing to attend a preparatory meeting in Britain in spring 2008, as well as the New York event.
Ireland is participating fully in efforts to achieve the MDGs. As set out in the White Paper on Irish Aid, the millennium development goals are the overarching framework for our overseas aid programme. By delivering on the commitment to reach the 0.7% UN target for development funding by 2012, Ireland is also seen as being at the forefront of their implementation internationally.
I thank the Minister of State for his response. The Minister of State may be aware that a number of Irish aid agencies met with the EU Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid in the past couple of days. They had a concern in looking at the millennium development goals. In the health and education areas, for example, the EU has fallen way behind in its millennium development goal commitments.
The concern is that the emphasis seems to be shifting to a trade agenda from a purely aid agenda. In some of the categories the percentages are very low compared to set targets. Will the Minister of State respond to this or indicate the kind of talks which have been held with his counterparts in Europe to ensure the set targets are maintained?
Ireland is very much aware of the role it must play in reaching the millennium development goals and we are focusing very much on reducing poverty and supporting the provision of basic services to the poorest people in the world. Clearly our goal is reaching 0.7% of GDP by 2012, three years earlier than the agreed European Union deadline of 2015. The interim target this year was 0.5% and we are going for an interim target of 0.6% by 2010.
The Deputy raised an issue regarding trade which is very relevant now because we are discussing economic partnership agreements. We have had two meetings of development Ministers, with the last meeting in Brussels. I put the point that I do not want any ACP country to be worse off on 1 January than when we met on 20 November. There will be a report back to the Council in December.
It is vitally important to secure arrangements which would allow trade to continue without interruption, and the least we can expect is for arrangements to be put in place which will not disadvantage developing countries. Ireland has often stated that the development aspects of economic partnership agreements, EPAs, must take priority and I put that point to the Commission at the recent meeting. EPAs will be the major instruments of our relations with ACP countries and they should fully reflect both trade and development aspects. I called upon the Commission to conduct negotiations in the spirit of goodwill, flexibility and understanding.
I believe the Minister of State understands my point. Concerns were raised by aid agencies when they met the Commissioner that the agenda is becoming more trade-oriented, as opposed to purely aid-oriented.
That is right.
Has the issue been raised in the Minister of State's meetings in Europe? How will the Minister of State assure people that, from our standpoint, a purely aid agenda is carried on instead of a trade agenda?
I appreciate the Deputy's support on this. That is the very point I have been making at the meetings, first of all in Madeira and more recently in Brussels. We are pressing very hard, particularly in Africa, which the Deputy would accept has fallen behind. There has been more progress in China and other Asian countries.
We can also consider with some satisfaction that some 6 million schoolchildren are now attending schools in Uganda, for example, where only 2 million were attending those schools 13 years ago. We have made very good progress with regard to home-care packages in countries such as Mozambique, which I visited recently. A high proportion of the funding there goes to tackling HIV-AIDS.
We are very keen on the development issues, which I stressed at all our meetings should be the direction we, as a country, would like to go. We will work on that, particularly with the funding through the United Nations, NGOs and missionaries and the bilateral programmes with the seven programme countries, particularly in Africa.
EU Treaties.
Lucinda Creighton
Question:60 Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the timeline for the referendum process for the EU Reform (Lisbon) Treaty in 2008; when he expects the referendum to take place; when the enabling legislation will be moved; when the White Paper will be published; when the information campaign will begin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30970/07]
The reform treaty will be signed by Heads of State and Government, including the Taoiseach, on 13 December and is expected to be ratified by each member state before 1 January 2009. The Government has sought formal legal advice from the Attorney General on whether ratification of the treaty requires an amendment to the Constitution. It is anticipated that this question will be answered positively.
A date has not been set for the referendum but the Irish people will have an opportunity to express their vote on the treaty, probably in the middle of next year. Before a referendum can be held, the Oireachtas must pass the necessary enabling legislation. I assure the House that I intend to use both Houses of the Oireachtas to ensure we have the fullest possible debates on the treaty.
As Members will know I have already written to every Member in the House, those who are for the treaty and those likely to be against it, providing a summary of the treaty's main provisions and offering further briefing as desired. A number of Deputies have already taken up that offer. We will shortly be in contact with party spokespersons to arrange formal consultations on the treaty and its ratification.
A referendum campaign should be preceded by a very active information effort.
To this end a short explanatory pamphlet on the treaty will be published next month. A dedicated website will be established, dealing with the most frequently asked questions on the treaty. The Government will publish a non-technical guide to the treaty in January and a White Paper in January or February. We should make the language associated with this treaty as simple as possible, because the treaty approach is more complex than the constitutional approach.
In accordance with established practice, a well-resourced referendum commission will be created to give objective information to the public and encourage citizens to exercise their right to vote. As with the previous EU referendum in 2002, significant resources will be ear-marked for the use of the referendum commission. The National Forum on Europe will also be active and in the last few days I have written to the social partners, who will be involved, as well as all sides of this House.
I asked the Minister this question at the European affairs committee last week and there is little more clarity now on the date of the referendum. At the committee meeting the Minister said he had a date in mind, which he would put to the Taoiseach. Has the Minister had that conversation with the Taoiseach and how has he responded? I am concerned because a TNS MRBI poll found that 25% of people were in favour of the reform treaty, 13% were opposed and 62% had no opinion. This side of the House is in favour of the treaty. Its institutional reforms and democratisation of the EU are right for Europe. However if people are to decide in a positive manner, the onus lies on the Government, which has negotiated and agreed to this and will sign on 13 December, to ensure there is an adequate information campaign. The Minister said he has written to every Member of the Oireachtas and that is true and welcome. However, I imagine most Members have decided how they will vote on this and I hope and anticipate most Members are well informed on it, although I do not assume anything. It is imperative that members of the public be informed. I am not sure what the Minister has in mind. He mentioned a leaflet next month. I do not know how much detail will be in that, but we need an active debate. There has been more media coverage of the "no" side than the other side and the Government has not shown adequate commitment to this.
I disagree with Deputy Creighton's last point. I agree there must be a vigorous campaign and more positive media coverage. Last week's full debate, facilitated by Deputy Creighton's colleague, Deputy Durkan, got virtually no media coverage. That reality faces us. One broadcaster I approached told me it was too complex. I do not agree it is too complex. The treaty is a complex issue, but it is not difficult to sort out the issues: a more democratic Europe that can make its decisions in a clearer and better approach, that will better protect its citizens' rights and that will be more efficient in dealing with the external world and in which the smaller member states are protected. I thought this would interest our media, but sadly it has not happened. With the glorious exception of The Irish Times, to which I give full credit, minimal cover has been given to this.
There is an information gap and we all have a responsibility to fill it. That is why I made the point that I want every Deputy, for and against the treaty, properly briefed so that there is no mythology on this treaty and we do not hear nonsense about tanks on the streets and our neutrality, taxation or sovereignty being undermined. This is about making Europe work better for every citizen, Irish and European. I agree we have a task but we are up to it and will focus on it.
The Minister has again avoided the question on the date for this referendum. The Taoiseach said it will be in the first six months of next year. He announced it at the forum for European journalists rather than this House, which is unacceptable. Deputy Roche said he has a date in mind. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has indicated it could be any time next year. Can Deputy Roche give us a timeframe for this?
I have a date in mind, to which the Government has not yet agreed.
The Taoiseach.
Because of the complexity of this issue we would be foolhardy to rush into it. We must put in place a strategy to inform the Irish people, because when they are informed, they will vote "yes".