Enda Kenny
Question:1 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department during November 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34140/07]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Freedom of Information.
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:2 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department during November 2007 and the comparable figure for November 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35285/07]
Enda Kenny
Question:3 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests which were processed by his Department during 2007; the number which have been acceded to; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3535/08]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:4 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information applications received in his Department during 2007; the way these figures compare with the same period in each year since 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36122/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.
I propose to circulate in the Official Report the information sought by the Deputies regarding the statistics on freedom of information requests received in my Department. All freedom of information applications received in my Department are processed by statutorily designated officials in accordance with the 1997 and the 2003 Acts and, in accordance with those statutes, I have no role in regard to processing individual applications.
|
Year |
Jan. |
Feb. |
March |
April |
May |
June |
July |
August |
Sept. |
Oct. |
Nov. |
Dec. |
Total |
|
2002 |
20 |
12 |
14 |
10 |
10 |
9 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
13 |
15 |
18 |
146 |
|
2003 |
21 |
29 |
30 |
10 |
11 |
7 |
13 |
6 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
3 |
142 |
|
2004 |
1 |
8 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
12 |
1 |
5 |
45 |
|
2005 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
16 |
5 |
7 |
61 |
|
2006 |
9 |
1 |
4 |
7 |
6 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
54 |
|
2007 |
14 |
1 |
8 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
9 |
10 |
— |
4 |
7 |
6 |
71 |
|
Month |
Received |
Granted |
Part Granted |
Refused |
No. Records |
Transferred |
Withdrawn |
|
Jan |
14 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
|||
|
Feb |
1 |
1 |
|||||
|
Mar |
8 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
||
|
April |
4 |
2 |
2 |
||||
|
May |
2 |
2 |
|||||
|
June |
6 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
|||
|
July |
9 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
||
|
Aug |
10 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
|||
|
Sept |
0 |
||||||
|
Oct |
4 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|||
|
Nov |
7 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
||
|
Dec |
6 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|||
|
Total |
71 |
23 |
17 |
11 |
17 |
3 |
The Taoiseach has rehearsed that reply on several occasions. Does he have a view on whether the time has come to review the charges for freedom of information requests, which appear to be a significant factor in people deciding against submitting requests? Is there any intention of reconsidering the question or am I to grow tired asking it?
Does the Taoiseach wish to comment on the freedom of information released by the Department of Finance which revealed that an acquaintance of his, a gentlemen by the name of Mr. Turner, claimed that he received tacit approval from the Taoiseach for the construction of a major project in the Phoenix Park. I am aware the issue does not strictly concern the Department of the Taoiseach but he may wish to comment.
Arising from his reply to Deputy Gilmore, can we find out when the Minister for Health and Children was made aware of the theft of the laptop in the United States? I am aware the matter does not directly concern the Taoiseach's Department.
The dates I gave on that issue were the dates I got from the Irish Blood Transfusion Service. I would say the Department of Health and Children was informed at the same time. In fairness to the organisation, it acted promptly. It is clearly concerned about its own security and credibility and the importance of the good work it does. It has been very careful. Its representatives have said they would be happy today to answer questions. To the best of my knowledge, the organisation worked promptly and speedily to deal with the issue because of its importance.
As Deputy Kenny said, I answered this question on numerous occasions. The fees are a matter for the Minister for Finance, who has made clear that he has no plans to review them. The prices have not changed for the past five years and I do not think he is reviewing them upwards. The current system was introduced almost exactly five years ago. At €15, the fee is modest, particularly when compared with the estimated average cost of processing freedom of information applications, which was €425 at the time. The cost has not remained at that level but has probably increased to €600. Requests for personal data are free. The Deputy will be glad or sad to hear that the number of requests made to my Department is drifting upwards again. The figures were very high in the first few years and they have increased again to more than 70 compared to 45 made when the fees were first introduced. The figures in respect of the first year or year and a half were false because people made requests about old data. The number of requests subsequently fell to the 40 to 50 range but it has increased again to more than 70.
On the other issue, which is not strictly relevant but in case the Deputy thinks I will not answer it, the development planned at the time minus the casino probably would have been better than what is currently on the site. The casino was never a runner in the form proposed by Mr. Turner. I often wonder, as a matter of interest, what would have happened if he had done what everyone else did. We all argued at the time that we could not change the law for casinos but now we seem to have casinos all over the place even though we never changed the law, so it is an interesting point.
Acres of slot machines were not to my liking. Will the Taoiseach categorise the 70 claims made to his Department? Were they made in respect of questions to the Department of the Taoiseach? How many are personal requests from employees of the Department or are they inquiries about the Department's obligations and responsibilities?
The breakdown is usually between individuals and journalists. Personal data comprises approximately half the requests. Other Departments receive a large number of requests from business interests but that is not relevant to my Department.
What is the procedure in the Department of the Taoiseach for reviewing the operation of the Freedom of Information Act? Is there a cross-departmental process for monitoring and reviewing freedom of information requests either in place or planned?
It is almost a year since we received the report of the Information Commissioner wherein she outlined a list of suggestions aimed at improving the operation of the Freedom of Information Act. What view has the Taoiseach taken of some of her specific suggestions? What was his reaction to the recommendation that fees for internal review of freedom of information decisions and appeals to her office should be brought into line with that applying in other jurisdictions, where there is either no charges or a nominal fee? What is his position on her recommendation that such fees should be refunded in the event of a successful appeal of a decision made by a public body?
I selected the aforementioned recommendations from the several made by the Information Commissioner, who also recommended that the Freedom of Information Act should apply to all records held by the Health and Safety Authority. The Taoiseach will recall that the authority's enforcement records were removed from the scope of this Act in 2005. These are very important recommendations. What position has the Taoiseach, his Department and the Government taken in relation to the recommendations of the Information Commissioner in her report of just a year ago and will changes be introduced on foot of them?
I remind Deputy Ó Caoláin that overall responsibility for the management of the Freedom of Information Act rests with the Minister for Finance and the determination of fees is also a matter for the Minister.
That is true of most of the questions asked by Deputy Ó Caoláin. Specific recommendations about appeals, access and other issues that have been made by the Information Commissioner are for the Department of Finance and a question to that Department will elicit considerations it has on them.
In my Department, designated senior people act as freedom of information adjudicators. Freedom of information requests come into a central location and a designated officer circulates the information to designated persons in the various sections. The information is supplied from the sections for co-ordination purposes and a reply is issued. The Department does all it can to provide as much information as possible. In my Department, only one or two areas are excluded from the archives Act of 1935 and all the other information is permissible. If it has the information, it is provided through an individual who acts as co-ordinator. That is how the system works.
An issue arises with regard to cases where records either do not exist or cannot be found. The Information Commissioner made a number of recommendations that are relevant to my Department and other Departments. My Department closely follows the records management guidelines set out by the Department of Finance and has access to the services of a fully qualified archivist to advise on all aspects of records management. Of a total of 1,274 applications, the number of cases where records could not be found stands in single figures. When processing requests the Department follows the guidelines set out in the FOI decision makers manual. It is seldom that the relevant officials are not able to provide the information requested, particularly if there are no barriers to such information being released.
I appreciate the note of caution sounded by the Ceann Comhairle in respect of this matter. Have the Taoiseach and his officials considered the recommendations of the Information Commissioner in the context of their effect on FOI vis-à-vis his Department? Has an assessment been carried out in respect of the impact of the introduction or implementation of her recommendations regarding the operation of FOI within the Department? Does the Taoiseach, as head of his Department, have a view on her recommendations regarding fee structure changes, particularly her assertion that fees be refunded in the event of a successful appeal in respect of a decision made by any public body?
I do not believe all of these matters can be kicked to touch in the Department of Finance but I accept the Ceann Comhairle's point. In the case of the Department of the Taoiseach, surely some consideration — even if it only amounted to a scant examination of the potential effect of the introduction of these changes — has been given to this issue.
The ninth report of the Information Commissioner is her most recent. All of the issues relevant to my Department would have been examined by the relevant officials. There are 18 key decision makers at assistant principal level across the divisions of my Department. Outside of the directives issued by the Department of Finance, any of the commissioner's recommendations relating to processing, retrieval, etc., would be considered and taken into account. Cognisance is taken at all times of the recommendations of the Information Commissioner. That is done as a matter of course by the individuals in the Department who are involved in this process.
Deputy Kenny requested the most recent figures. During the past year a significant majority of requests — 62% — were submitted by journalists. Other interests account for 25%, while between 5% and 8% of applicants were Oireachtas Members.
Does the Taoiseach believe that the original Freedom of Information Act, introduced on behalf of the rainbow coalition by former Minister of State and Deputy, Eithne Fitzgerald, contributed to the climate of openness in this country that has been extremely important to our economic and social development? Does he agree that since the gutting of the Act by his Government in 2003 — pandering to senior civil servants who do not want the files to be opened — there has been, at massive cost to the public, a spiralling increase in the number of tribunals and inquiries? To date, €1.7 billion has been paid out in respect of various inquiries. In many cases, if people had received the necessary information, explanation, apology and, perhaps, restitution, the Government would not have been obliged to spend money at the level it has been spending it.
If the Government had a positive approach to freedom of information, we could reintroduce the climate of openness to which I refer. I accept that pesky journalists might ask detailed questions about particular elements of Government. Is that a major price to pay for restoring a climate of confidence and openness and a sense that the country is going places? When the Government gave in to senior civil servants, it allowed them to regain control of the files and restore the type of secrecy many of them have been trained to love.
I remind Deputy Burton that the management of the Freedom of Information Act is a matter for the Minister for Finance. In such circumstances, the Deputy's questions to the Taoiseach are somewhat inappropriate. However, I will allow the Taoiseach to pick and choose which questions he wishes to answer.
The Taoiseach is the leader of the Government. This matter revolves around how the Government does its business with the public. We want an open democracy, the key element of which is accountability. It is not possible to have accountability unless there is a degree of openness. The Taoiseach is hiding.
The principle is——
Last year, 70 people asked questions of his Department.
——not at issue here. The question is whether——
The principle is at issue.
It is not at issue because no one is arguing with the Deputy.
The Freedom of Information Act has been gutted. It has been closed down.
It has not been gutted. The Deputy should stop misleading the House.
It is a question of the Chair enforcing Standing Orders. The management of the Freedom of Information Act is a matter for the Minister for Finance. I am merely stating the factual position for the Deputy. I am taking no sides, I am merely outlining the situation for her.
Does the Government propose, in line with the recommendations of the Information Commissioner, to extend the Freedom of Information Act to a number of bodies such as the Garda Síochána? If it does not propose to do so, will the Taoiseach indicate why that is the case?
As already stated, it is a matter for the Minister for Finance of the day.
The extension of the Freedom of Information Act is an ongoing process involving the Department of Finance. Last year and the year before — in the largest ever extension of the Act — its provisions were extended to 137 further bodies. As a result, more than 520 bodies are now covered by the Act. This compares with a figure of 67 when it came into operation a decade ago. In such circumstances, I am afraid the Deputy's argument falls.
Deputy Burton is probably not aware that the only significant change made to the Act in 2003 relates to the protection of what are considered exempt records, namely, those relating to meetings of Government in respect of which the deliberative process has not been completed. This extends to the records of certain committees where the committee concerned is certified by the Secretary General as being established in direct support of such deliberations. The Deputy made the point that this amounts to a regaining of control on the part of certain individuals. Since the introduction of the change in 2003, the number of issues that have been signed off on and certified is none.
Deputy Kenny referred earlier to the case of Mrs. Murphy and her son, Luka. I raised this matter on three occasions on the Adjournment and I was not able to obtain answers. We cannot obtain an indication from the Departments of Education and Science and Health and Children regarding when this little boy can access the education and services to which he is entitled. The Taoiseach can come before the House and impugn the reputation of the board of management of Castleknock Educate Together national school but there is no recourse, via the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, to discover what has occurred within the confines of Government.
We cannot travel down those roads at this stage.
That is the practical impact. Why should the Garda not be subject to the Freedom of Information Act? It would be of enormous assistance if the provisions of the Act were extended to the force.
That is a question for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
It is actually a question for the Minister for Finance, who is responsible for the management of the Freedom of Information Act.
Is the Taoiseach stating that he has no views on the extension of the Freedom of Information Act to the Garda or on the rights of citizens to obtain information from the force?
What I stated is that in each of the past number of years, we have increased the number of bodies to which the Act applies. From the low number covered at the outset, more than 520 bodies now come under the Act. The process is ongoing and any individual issues should be taken up with the relevant Minister, namely, the Minister for Finance. Issues relating to the Garda should be taken up with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Does the Taoiseach have plans to extend the provisions of the Act to the Garda over the next decade?
That is a matter for the Ministers for Finance and Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
It certainly is a matter for the Minister for Finance.
Departmental Bodies.
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:5 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the cross-departmental teams and interdepartmental committees on which his Department is represented; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35292/07]
I am circulating in the Official Report a list for the information of the Deputy detailing the principal cross-departmental teams and Interdepartmental committees on which my Department is represented.
Principal cross-departmental teams and Interdepartmental committees on which the Department of the Taoiseach is represented.
|
No. |
Interdepartmental Group |
Sub Committees under Interdepartmental Groups (only applicable where shown) |
|
1 |
Interdepartmental Coordinating Committee on European Affairs |
|
|
2 |
Senior Officials Group on European Affairs |
|
|
3 |
Interdepartmental Committee on Reform Treaty |
|
|
4 |
External Energy Group |
|
|
5 |
Assistant Secretary Steering Group on the Review of the EU Budget |
|
|
6 |
Interdepartmental Coordinating Committee on the Council of Europe |
|
|
7 |
Interdepartmental Committee on the OECD |
|
|
8 |
Interdepartmental Committee on Development |
|
|
9 |
High Level Group on the Asia Strategy |
|
|
10 |
Interdepartmental Working Group on Emergency Planning |
|
|
11 |
Task Force on Emergency Planning |
|
|
12 |
Government Legislation Committee |
|
|
13 |
Freedom of Information Interdepartmental Working Group |
|
|
14 |
Interdepartmental Emergency Response Coordinating Committee [Nuclear] |
|
|
15 |
Interdepartmental Committee on Public Health Emergency Planning |
|
|
16 |
National Security Committee |
|
|
17 |
Senior Officials Group on Health and related sub group |
Working Group on Long-Term Care |
|
18 |
Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion |
Senior Officials Group on Disability |
|
19 |
Dormant Accounts — Interdepartmental Committees in relation to Persons with a Disability, Economic and Social Disadvantage and Educational Disadvantage |
|
|
20 |
High Level Group on Travellers |
|
|
21 |
Interdepartmental Group on Sustainable Travel and Transport Action Plan |
|
|
22 |
Interdepartmental Group on Drugs |
|
|
23 |
High Level Group on Activation |
|
|
24 |
National Carers Strategy Working Group |
|
|
25 |
Senior Officials Groups on Children’s Referendum |
|
|
26 |
Committee of the Pilot Project for the Co-ordination of Youth Services in Waterford |
|
|
27 |
Ministerial Task Force on Road Safety |
|
|
28 |
Interdepartmental Committee on Science, Technology and Innovation |
|
|
29 |
Lisbon Agenda National Reform Programme Group |
|
|
30 |
Cross Departmental Team (CDT) on Housing, Infrastructure and PPPs (HIPPPs) |
CDT sub-committee on Legal Issues |
|
31 |
Interdepartmental Group on PPPs |
|
|
32 |
Interdepartmental Group on Implementation of National Spatial Strategy |
|
|
33 |
Transport 21 Monitoring Group |
|
|
34 |
Cross Departmental Group on Unique Business Identifier and Central Business Registry |
|
|
35 |
Data Strategy Liaison Group |
|
|
36 |
Senior Officials Group on Climate Change and Energy Security |
|
|
37 |
Interdepartmental Committee on Climate Change |
|
|
38 |
High Level Group on Sustainable Development |
|
|
39 |
Interdepartmental Committee on Implementation of the National Women’s Strategy |
|
|
40 |
Tax Strategy Group |
|
|
41 |
e-Strategy Group of Secretaries General |
|
|
42 |
Assistant Secretaries Implementation Group (ASIG) on Information Society and related sub groups |
|
|
43 |
National Payments Implementation Programme Advisory Group |
|
|
44 |
SAFE (Standard Authentication Framework Environment) Steering Group |
|
|
45 |
ICT Statistics Liaison Group |
|
|
46 |
Implementation Group of Secretaries General |
Task Force on Customer Service QCS Research Group High-Level Group on Redress |
|
47 |
OECD High Level Steering Group |
OECD Liaison Group |
|
48 |
Interdepartmental Group on the Review of the Economic Regulatory Environment |
|
|
49 |
High Level Group on Business Regulation |
|
|
50 |
Steering Committee on the Organisational Review Programme |
|
|
51 |
Interdepartmental Committee on Aging in the Public Service |
|
|
52 |
Interdepartmental Committee on the Reconciliation Fund |
The Taoiseach has just shared much information. When the Taoiseach answered this question previously, he was more detailed in his reply as he listed a range of committees. Does the subgroup of senior officials on disability, which was to progress work on the Disability Bill, still exists? What progress has been made in that group's deliberations?
To keep this brief, as the Taoiseach is inclined to do in this instance, I ask the same question with regard to the strategic task force on alcohol, which was to review international research to identify and recommend to Government specific evidence-based measures to prevent and reduce alcohol-related harm. Where does that task force stand and is that project being progressed at this time?
I gave exactly the same reply the last time the Deputy asked the question. The Deputy is reading "the blacks", which contain the list I circulated with the answer.
The Taoiseach gave us more information.
I did not. I have a copy of the answer. It states:
My Department participates in a wide range of cross-departmental teams and interdepartmental committees, many of which come under the aegis of other members of the Government and deal with issues primarily under their remit. If the Deputy wishes to obtain information about any specific activity of those teams or committees, he should table a question to the appropriate Minister or Ministers.
I provided the full list this time just to be helpful to the Deputy. I gave him more information.
The Taoiseach can tell us about them. I have only mentioned two.
I was trying to be helpful.
Where would we be without the Taoiseach?
Given that my Department is at the centre of Government, it is involved in a large range of cross-departmental teams. The team dealing with the alcohol issue is one of them. I am not sure if it is relevant to this question but two pieces of legislation are related. I answered about one of them during legislative questions and the appropriate Minister has not made a final decision on the other.
I accept what the Taoiseach has stated but there is a need for a greater information flow in this House on the work of cross-departmental and interdepartmental teams and task forces. I am specifically trying to secure some up-to-date information about just two of them. With reference to the helpful mode the Taoiseach is suggesting he is in this morning, perhaps he will undertake to circulate to this Deputy the up-to-date position on the two areas I have addressed if his notes do not offer the salient detail. These are the subgroup of senior officials on disability, a very important area, and the strategic task force on alcohol.
The Taoiseach has shared information with us, particularly with regard to the latter, given the significant public concern about the abuse of alcohol, particularly by younger people. There are many areas of concern, both in regard to the health of young people and how alcohol affects development and contributes to the continual carnage on our roads. There is a raft of areas involved so I would like to know where this so-called strategic task force stands. Where is its work programme at this point and when will it report?
It would be welcome if the Taoiseach could elaborate on what he has said. I will understand if he does not but in the same spirit as he responded on the question before, I ask him to circulate further information subsequently.
The Official Report contains the full list of the committees.
I would not be involved with these groups on a daily basis but I know the position of the group relating to alcohol. Two separate pieces of legislation are being considered. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Brian Lenihan, has commenced the examination of the sale of alcohol products and he has engaged the same chairman who dealt with the previous legislation to consider what can be done about the sale and supply of alcohol. The Deputy made the point about the significant number of outlets where alcohol is available, from petrol stations to supermarkets. The issue will be considered.
The other matter relates to advertising. The attitude taken to that for the past few years is to try to co-ordinate the industry to work together to change the image regarding the abuse of alcohol. If that is not working, it is open to the Minister and the cross-departmental team to make a decision at any time to proceed with advertising legislation, which was substantially drafted a few years ago. They are the two main issues.
The Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, hopes to have a Bill on the sale of alcohol in the House later this year.
Cabinet Committees.
Liz McManus
Question:6 Deputy Liz McManus asked the Taoiseach the number of Cabinet sub-committee on climate change meetings that have been held. [35627/07]
The Cabinet committee on climate change and energy security has met on three occasions since September 2007. The committee last met on 23 January 2008 and will meet again next month.
The Deputy will be aware I have outlined to the House now on a number of occasions that Cabinet committees are an integral part of the Cabinet process. Questions as to the business conducted at Cabinet or Cabinet committee meetings have never been allowed in the House on the grounds that they are internal to Government. The reasons for this approach are founded on sound policy principles and the need to avoid infringing the constitutional protection of Cabinet confidentiality. As always, questions on particular policy issues should be put down to the relevant Ministers.
Did the Taoiseach attend the three meetings?
Yes.
I accept the points made by the Taoiseach about Cabinet confidentiality. Does the Taoiseach accept that three meetings since the last general election of a committee charged with dealing with the vital issue of climate change is hardly an impressive record? I suggest the sub-committee has been remarkably ineffective. I am sure the Taoiseach is aware regarding the Government's climate change strategy that fewer than half the targets of 2007 were met. The overshoot of the Kyoto target is now almost 100%.
Is the Taoiseach not ashamed that despite the rhetoric, nothing has worked to ensure there is a real change as a result of a pressing challenge facing the world? Does the Taoiseach accept responsibility because, unlike other key heads of Government, he has been remarkably silent on the issue of climate change, which has added to lethargy in tackling an enormously important political issue?
The committee was set up at the very end of September. That is four months ago and there have been three meetings, so I would consider it an active committee. The officials group meets separately.
I explained recently in the House in answer to another question that all the issues regarding climate change and negotiations with the European Commission on the decisions made in January were all directed at the Cabinet table. They were not directed to the sub-committee. The discussions which went on for most of last year related to the Commission's decisions and the share of the burden we all have to take. All of the meetings were discussed by Cabinet.
The issues of climate change and renewable energy are rarely off the main Cabinet table. As per the terms of reference, certain aspects are put to the sub-committee but the day to day important issues and what we are doing with the Commission are taken at full Cabinet level.
Does the Taoiseach accept that there is a lack of leadership on this issue? The public knows more about his views on soccer than his views on climate change.
Policy issues in respect of climate change are a matter for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, as the Deputy well knows.
The Government established a sub-committee made up of a range of Ministers.
Climate change has a significant impact on soccer.
The Ceann Comhairle's point is not strictly true.
Climate change has an impact on the soccer front as well.
I assume he knows about the Cork manager too.
The Cork team is back in harness.
It has a good manager too.
The sub-committee was established because the Government recognised that it is not solely a matter for the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government but that four key Departments need to tackle this major political challenge. They need to be led from the top. Does the Taoiseach not accept that his lack of leadership on climate change is part of the problem? When will he give that direction to ensure that we make real changes to tackle climate change which affects every one of us but, most important, parts of the globe that are too poor to help themselves?
I do not accept any of that. It is nonsense. This issue has been on the agenda for most meetings of the Cabinet over the past two years. The sub-committee was set up to deal with aspects of it and the officials group is working hard on it. The Deputy should put down a question to the relevant Minister whom I am sure would be glad to give the detail. I have been involved through social partnership with what we have done on the question of renewable energy and burden sharing with the Enterprise Ireland strategy, industry and agriculture. If the Deputy watched what we were doing she would see the comments about that. Probably seven or eight Ministers are actively involved in this, not just one Minister or me. We have just completed a long, difficult and arduous negotiation with the Commission in which I was directly involved and which has been well publicised. We completed this in the past few weeks and received backing from President Barroso who was kind enough to thank the country and me personally for our involvement in it. Several Ministers are involved in this problem. I accept that the Deputy wishes to follow up on this but she should table a question to the Minister because he would be glad to give some of the background on this issue.
Official Engagements.
Enda Kenny
Question:7 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of meetings planned by the National Forum on Europe during 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3536/08]
Enda Kenny
Question:8 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the foreign visits he plans to undertake during 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3552/08]
Enda Kenny
Question:9 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he will next meet with the President of the European Commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3553/08]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:10 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach his plans for official visits abroad during 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36118/07]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:11 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his recent visit to South Africa. [36119/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:12 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his visit to South Africa. [1326/08]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:13 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his discussions with President Mbeki, during his recent visit to South Africa. [1480/08]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:14 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his recent visit to Tanzania. [1481/08]
Enda Kenny
Question:15 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent visit to South Africa; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1589/08]
Enda Kenny
Question:16 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the South African President, Mr. Thabo Mbeki; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1590/08]
Enda Kenny
Question:17 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent visit to Tanzania; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1591/08]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:18 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his discussions with President Jakaya Kikwete during his recent visit to Tanzania. [1906/08]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:19 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the work programme for the National Forum of Europe for 2008; the role the Forum will play in the provision of information on the Lisbon reform treaty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4654/08]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:20 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he has received an agenda for the March 2008 EU summit; the Government’s priorities for the summit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4655/08]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:21 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the number and planned location of meetings scheduled by the National Forum on Europe during 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4973/08]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 21, inclusive, together.
I visited South Africa between 13 and 15 January, accompanied by the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Micheál Martin, and the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for overseas development, Deputy Michael Kitt.
The key objectives of the visit were to further develop Irish-South African bilateral and trade relations, leading the largest ever Irish trade mission to South Africa with more than 50 companies participating including businesses from Northern Ireland, and also to visit Irish Aid funded development projects.
In Cape Town, I visited the Niall Mellon Township Trust, where I announced that the Irish Government is providing €5 million to support the work of the trust in Cape Town and Johannesburg. I also attended a reception for the Irish community in South Africa hosted by the Irish ambassador to South Africa as well as visiting a number of businesses and charitable organisations with Irish links.
In Johannesburg, I attended a breakfast organised by Tourism Ireland with the aim of promoting the image of the island of Ireland as a destination to South African tourists and business travellers. I also visited a seminar organised by An Bord Bia in the wake of the recent reopening of the South African market to Irish beef and attended a business lunch organised by Enterprise Ireland to promote and further develop Irish-South African trade links.
In Pretoria, I met with both President Mbeki and with the Deputy President. President Mbeki and I noted the positive bilateral relations between our two countries and discussed a range of political and trade and development issues. President Mbeki briefed me on the current political situation in Zimbabwe, the prospects for successful elections there and his role as mediator. We both expressed the wish for a peaceful solution to the crises facing Zimbabwe and for policy change which would ensure full respect for the human rights and dignity of its people.
I referred to the impending deployment of some 400 members of the Irish Defence Forces with the UN mandated EU military mission in Chad, and the fact that an Irishman, Lieutenant General Pat Nash, is the operational commander of that mission. I also took the opportunity to express Ireland's great admiration for South Africa's impressive achievements as a young democracy along with my personal appreciation to President Mbeki and the people of South Africa for their sensitive support for the peace process in Northern Ireland, which many of their people gave over recent years.
My subsequent meeting with the Deputy President expanded on many of the issues we discussed during her visit to Dublin in November 2006. Once again, we had a cordial and constructive discussion on a number of issues. We discussed recent progress in South Africa's economic development including in the area of education and training. I assured the Deputy President of Ireland's support for furthering skills training for young South Africans and we agreed to mutually explore ways to assist South Africa in learning from Ireland's experience in this area.
I also reaffirmed the Government's commitment to continuing to provide development assistance through our Irish Aid programmes including assistance for the major challenges posed by the effects of the HIV-AIDS pandemic. Finally, I welcomed the decision of the South African Government to reopen the market for Irish beef. I thanked the Deputy President for the political support provided on this issue and said I hoped my visit would help to further strengthen the already strong political, trade and development links between Ireland and South Africa.
On the conclusion of my visit to South Africa, I travelled to Tanzania, accompanied by the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for overseas development, Deputy Michael Kitt, to see at first hand the impact of Irish Aid's development programme in that country. I visited several projects supported by Irish Aid in key areas such as health, education and agriculture. I had a wide range of contacts with people whose lives have been transformed as a result of Irish Aid support; with NGOs and others, including Irish missionaries working on the front line; with senior members of the media; and with the political leadership in Tanzania.
It was a most useful and thorough programme. I was extremely heartened to see the profound effect that targeted assistance can have on the everyday lives of some of the poorest people on the planet. For example, I witnessed the immediate impact on the health and well-being of people as a result of providing a clean fresh water supply and in the provision of badly needed health services. It was also a pleasure to meet the many Irish people delivering essential front line assistance and I would like to pay tribute to their commitment.
During my visit, I met with President Kikwete. We had a wide-ranging discussion on our respective economies in the course of which I repeated Ireland's ongoing commitment to development in Tanzania, which will involve some €170 million in direct bilateral assistance between 2007 and 2010. This year alone, the direct aid figure will be approximately €40 million. In particular, we discussed the importance of good governance for the provision of effective aid, greater trade and investment and enhanced international relations. I commended the president on the strong position he has taken on the need to tackle corruption, the action he has recently taken in this regard and the need to continue with his efforts.
We also discussed some of the challenges that exist in other parts of Africa including Zimbabwe, where the situation remains a cause for grave concern, and the more recent developments in Kenya which could have severe implications for Tanzania. I welcomed the mediation role being played by Tanzania and noted that Ireland and Tanzania share a proud tradition of peacekeeping activities. In this regard, I briefed the president on the role that Ireland will now be playing in Chad.
In conclusion, I confirmed that Tanzania is a particularly important partner in Ireland's development programme and we will continue to provide assistance in close collaboration with the Tanzanian Government to help realise the full potential of all its people.
Working through government systems is an effective approach which allows us to provide sustainable support for key sectors in partnership, and in line with the priorities of, the Tanzanian Government. Needless to say, we will also ensure that we continue to support our NGO partners in their valuable work, both in Tanzania and elsewhere.
With regard to my travel plans for 2008, I will of course attend all the European Councils during the year. I propose to travel to Slovenia, Austria and Poland next week for a series of bilateral meetings and for an engagement with the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe. I will make my usual annual visit to the United States for St. Patrick's Day on 17 March. I have also been invited to address the Joint Houses of Congress in the US on 30 April. In addition, I propose to attend the Fifth Summit of the Heads of State and Government of Latin America and the Caribbean and the European Union in Lima, Peru on 16 May 2008. I also propose to attend the EU-Asia Summit which will be held in Beijing, China in October 2008.
The National Forum on Europe is an independent body and it would be inappropriate for me to comment on its day-to-day operation or on its likely future work programme. I am, however, sure it will play a key role in the debate on the reform treaty in the run up to the referendum. I welcome its recent publication and the fact that it is holding public meetings around the country.
I received the first draft of the annotated draft agenda for the spring European Council recently. The launch of the new cycle for the Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, the stability of financial markets and energy and climate change policy will feature in the discussion at the spring European Council. The draft agenda was the subject of a first discussion at the General Affairs and External Relations Council on Monday.
I have no firm arrangements to meet with President Barroso ahead of seeing him at the European Council in Brussels on 13 and 14 March.
It is appropriate that I should congratulate the Taoiseach and wish him the best on being invited to address the joint Houses of Congress in the United States. After a lengthy period as Taoiseach he has achieved a first for a Fianna Fáil Taoiseach and is following in the footsteps of the two Cosgraves, father and son, as well as Garret FitzGerald and John Bruton.
Members heard this list from Deputy Kenny a few months ago.
Mr. de Valera addressed the Houses of Congress in his capacity as President. It will be an interesting April for the Taoiseach. As he is aware, he will begin his address to one congress on 1 April and to another Congress on 30 April. At some point during the Taoiseach's contribution to the joint Houses of Congress, he should be in a position to refer to progress being made on the undocumented Irish problem, that is, the immigration problem to the United States, arising from the bilateral all-party agreement in this House. Hopefully this could become a reality and I wish the Taoiseach well in this regard.
I refer to the increasing complexities and logistical nightmare associated with the Chad mission and the obvious tinderbox that is Kosovo. Would it be appropriate, even for an interim period, for the Taoiseach to call together a group comprising himself and representatives from the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Foreign Affairs and Defence to monitor the situation in respect of the ongoing safety of Irish troops and Defence Forces personnel in both Chad and Kosovo? The Garda is also involved in this matter.
Has the Taoiseach decided yet on a date for the EU reform treaty referendum? As the Taoiseach is aware, a significant change will take place with regard to qualified majority voting as new competencies will be decided by that method. I am concerned that the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny may not be adequately resourced. A river of information is coming towards Members, who are ill-prepared for the avalanche of material coming from that source. In respect of the reform treaty, the Government should see to it that the requisite personnel and staff are in place to deal with that flood of information. One does not wish to see a situation arise whereby questions may be asked that cannot be answered. A great deal of this information can be quite complex for the average Member serving on the joint committee. In the national interest, the Government should ensure that this joint committee is serviced properly in order that Members in attendance are adequately informed on the issues that arise from the Commission, the Parliament and the Council.
I refer to the grouping together of questions Nos. 7 to 21. There is no relationship between the work of the National Forum on Europe and its scheduled meetings on the Lisbon treaty, the EU reform treaty or whatever name one wishes to call it, and the Taoiseach's meeting with President Mbeki in South Africa. I do not understand this grouping, which is an absolute mishmash of questions and is completely inappropriate. In the brief opportunity provided, Members cannot address any of these matters in the serious detail they deserve.
I will conclude with a single question. Unfortunately, I will be obliged to leave to one side the scheduling of the National Forum on Europe. When the Taoiseach met President Mbeki in South Africa, was the issue of Zimbabwe discussed in detail? Did the Taoiseach emphasise the importance of addressing the outrageous situation that applies in that country? Did the Taoiseach convey to President Mbeki the views of the Irish people, which I understand are shared across this House? Did they discuss what actions, if any, the Taoiseach believed the South African or Irish Governments could take or what impression both men intended to make on the international community to address the situation in Zimbabwe?
Like Deputy Kenny, I wish the Taoiseach well in his forthcoming address to the joint Houses of Congress. Does he intend to raise the issue of the undocumented Irish during his two planned visits to the United States?
As for the EU meeting, I refer to developments in Kosovo last weekend. Will Ireland formally recognise Kosovo? The Minister for Foreign Affairs has not made clear the exact Irish position. Has the Government considered the implications for the mandate for Ireland's participation in the international security presence in Kosovo, KFOR, which is authorised under UN Security Council Resolution 1244 of 1999? In the absence of UN recognition for an independent Kosovo, will it be possible for Ireland to maintain a contribution to the international military presence in Kosovo, under NATO or other auspices, without a UN mandate? What timeframe has been outlined to sort out the mandate of the Irish troops? This matter is important in respect of both the troops' ability to operate if their mandate has been compromised by the changes that took place last weekend and Ireland's consequent positions on those changes.
Does the Government propose to have monitors participate in the forthcoming elections in Zimbabwe? The Government's position in this regard is unclear to me. Moreover, in respect of the trouble in Kenya, it is now agreed that more than 1,000 people are dead. A massive amount of intercommunal violence has taken place, much of which has been targeted against women and children as has happened in Darfur, including rape and sexual violence against women.
Thankfully, Ireland now is among the major contributors to international aid. While I commend the Taoiseach on his visit to southern Africa and to Tanzania, is Ireland pulling its weight with regard to the level of contribution it makes in respect of aid at present? The issue of land reform is central to the dispute in Kenya. Moreover, it is central to the historic legacy of that which has now pauperised Zimbabwe. In that unfortunate country, people no longer have enough to feed their families. Can the Taoiseach be more precise as to what he envisages Ireland doing to assist actively in decelerating such conflicts and to solving thorny issues in Africa such as land reform? Is the Government supporting initiatives that would lead to long-term real settlements? Members have only heard general stuff from the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs.
I will make a number of points. Obviously, the Government will continue to try to develop a consensus on the undocumented Irish as it has done for the past few years. While I stated previously that it might be difficult to make much progress this year, we must continue to make our case. I will discuss it again with President Bush in a few weeks' time.
On the new reform treaty, I have indicated that I would like to deal with it before the end of May or early in June. Parties are working with the Attorney General's office and it would be important to finalise that in the next few days because then it could be brought before the Government next week. That would trigger the legislation for Members to debate in the House. I also am anxious to give three months to the referendum commission so perhaps we can try to get that in place.
On the committees, I agree with Deputy Kenny's point regarding the volume. When the committees were being set up, some people — not Deputy Kenny — stated that we appeared to be establishing too many of them. At the time, however, I made the point that this was due simply to the volume of work before the Houses. Parliamentarians understand this but perhaps those outside the Houses do not. A huge volume of work exists and I split up the two committees to allow them to deal with the volume of work. This is a matter for the commission. The committees in question are going to become increasingly busy for evermore. The issue of such business will be never-ending.
I refer to questions from Deputies Ó Caoláin, Kenny and Burton on Zimbabwe. This probably formed the longest part of my discussion because I was anxious to hear from President Mbeki, who was acting as the negotiator with Zimbabwe on behalf of the overall umbrella group in southern Africa. He gave me a long report and was to go to Zimbabwe the following day to try to make progress and work towards elections.
Time will not allow me to elaborate on every development; suffice it to say that, in the past year or two, the relevant parties have drafted a substantial amount of legislation and the new constitution. There is substantive agreement on some issues, but, as always in such circumstances, it has not been possible to resolve a few deal-crunching issues in respect of the election. One of the key issues is the question of when the president goes as part of the new election. That has been the key deal breaker since January and it has not been resolved since. President Mbeki and others have been involved in the process. President Levy Mwanawasa, whom I met in Tanzania, has taken over as the chairman of the South African Development Community.
On the general point, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his predecessor have been actively engaged and very supportive of the reforms for a number of reasons. Ireland is highly respected in the region because it is contributing a lot of aid. Ireland is the sixth best donor in the world and a large part of our funds is channelled into the region. We have many key people on the ground and many of the traditional missionaries are still present. They are well known and have educated many of the leaders. Ireland has many substantial people in the UN organisations and NGOs and they are now very well known. We are engaging very substantively in the region. Our presence may not be large in number in comparison to other countries, but the people in question are certainly very significant.
On 17 February, the Kosovo Assembly adopted the resolution declaring Kosovo's independence. At the General Affairs Council on Monday, the Foreign Ministers noted the resolution and reiterated the European Union's commitment to the principles of the UN charter and the Helsinki Final Act, underlining that in light of the conflict of the 1990s and the extended period of international administration under Security Council Resolution 1244, Kosovo constitutes a sui generis case. The Council also noted that member states will decide in accordance with international practice and international law on the relations with Kosovo.
It is regrettable that lengthy negotiations have failed to produce an agreement with Belgrade and Pristina. A new UN Security Council resolution clarifying the position would have been greatly preferable to the current circumstances. A considerable effort was made by us and others to achieve such a resolution but the clear reality is that Serbia effectively lost Kosovo through its own actions in the 1990s. The legacy of the killing of thousands of civilians in Kosovo and the ethnic cleansing of over 1 million made the restoration of a Serbian dominion in Kosovo unthinkable.
The European Council agreed just before Christmas that the status quo in Kosovo was inherently unstable and that more than 90% of the population wanted independence. This is supported by our major partners in the European Union and beyond, many of whom have already recognised Kosovo. Taking all the circumstances into account, the Minister for Foreign Affairs intends to recommend that we recognise the Republic of Kosovo at next week’s meeting of the Cabinet. To answer the Deputy’s question, we will make a decision on this next week.
On the basis of positive advice from the Attorney General confirming the continuation of UN Security Council Resolution 1244 in the aftermath of a declaration of independence, we are committed to maintaining our enhanced presence in KFOR, the UN-mandated international presence in Kosovo. We intend to contribute members of the Garda in the SDP mission and also to support the economic development of Kosovo.
The Minister for Defence spoke about Chad for an hour yesterday and there is not much point in repeating what he said. There is continuing international support for the deployment of EUFOR. The European Union has reaffirmed its commitment to the mission and the United Nations has condemned the rebels' actions. The deployment of 50 members of the Army rangers is expected to take place today. It is urgent that security and protection be provided for refugees. It is a considerable humanitarian issue and this was emphasised to me when I was in Africa. It has been emphasised to me by several countries since then. I am mindful of the need to minimise risk. We remain strongly committed to the humanitarian objectives of the EUFOR mission.
I asked the Taoiseach about the Irish troops' mandate in Kosovo.
I have answered it.
If the United Nations does not recognise——
We must move on. We are ten minutes behind.
I have answered the question and stated that, on the basis of positive advice from the Attorney General confirming the continuation of UN Security Council Resolution 1244 in the aftermath of a declaration of independence, we are committed to maintaining our enhanced presence in KFOR, the UN-mandated international presence in Kosovo.
Is that the case even if the United Nations does not recognise an independent Kosovo? That is the net point.
The point is that the UN-mandated international military presence in Kosovo has reaffirmed its position. The Attorney General has advised that there is no difficulty for Ireland and we are, therefore, anxious to stay and maintain our position.