Enda Kenny
Question:1 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the constitutional referenda, if any, he will hold in the remainder of 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30221/10]
Ceisteanna — Questions
Constitutional Amendments
Enda Kenny
Question:2 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the recommendations of the Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30252/10]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:3 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the constitutional referenda the Government plans to hold during the remainder of the life of the 30th Dáil; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32307/10]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:4 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation to date of the reports of the Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32308/10]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:5 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the constitutional referenda he intends to initiate during the remainder of the current Dáil; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32331/10]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, together.
The renewed programme for Government envisages the following potential referenda during the lifetime of the present Dáil, subject, of course, to appropriate Oireachtas approval: to consider children's rights, based on the work of the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children; to consider amending Article 41.2 of the Constitution, to broaden the reference to the role of women in the home to one which recognises the role of the parent in the home; and to consider the establishment of a Court of Civil Appeal.
The renewed programme for Government states the proposed electoral commission will propose reforms to the electoral system, including outlining new electoral systems for Seanad Éireann, and proposals for which could give rise to constitutional amendments. Work is progressing on these matters, to give effect to the commitments in the renewed programme for Government.
As regards the Joint Committee on the Constitution, I have put it on the record before that neither I, nor my Department, are solely responsible for the implementation of recommendations in the reports of the joint committee. It would be a matter for the relevant Ministers to consider any recommendations emanating from these reports and to bring forward proposals to respond to them, as appropriate. To date, the joint committee has not brought forward any recommendations relevant to my Department.
Will any referendum be held in the lifetime of this Administration? What is the position of the Attorney General's assessment of the agreed wording put forward in February 2010 by the all-party committee dealing with a referendum on children's rights? That was a number of months ago. I know matters need to be analysed and assessed. Can the Taoiseach give an update on the current position?
We may have a referendum. It is a matter that is receiving attention and is being dealt with on an inter-departmental basis. As the Deputy knows, it is subject to Cabinet and committee discussions but there are issues arising in regard to it that are being looked at, such as the possible unforeseen consequences of some of the wording and how that might result in legislative changes or have financial implications. That all has to be examined so we can come forward with wording that meets the requirements of the situation and can be properly implemented, if agreed to, and subsequently ratified by the people.
Would the Taoiseach hazard a guess as to whether any referendum would be held in the lifetime of his Government?
On the basis that the Government would run the full term to May 2012, I do not see any reason why not.
I will give way to Deputy Flanagan on the referendum.
I do see reasons why not.
The Taoiseach referred to the various matters which are in the programme for Government which would require referendums at some stage. They include the recommendations on extending the franchise for presidential elections to Irish people living abroad; recommendations for changes to the electoral system; a new electoral system for Seanad Éireann; a new basis for European elections; a recommendation on the possibility of extending the franchise for local elections to those aged 16 and over; and proposals to hold a constitutional referendum to amend Article 41.2 of the Constitution, broadening the reference to the role of women in the home to one which recognises the role of the parent in the home. Will any of those recommendations see their way into a referendum in the lifetime of this Government? When will the referendum on the rights and protection of children be held?
I cannot say when the referendum will be held because the Government is still considering the implications of the proposed wording and a lot of work is taking place on an inter-departmental basis, which is continuing. The Minister of State with responsibility for children and youth affairs would know what is the up-to-date position.
On the other issues, I understand they are the subject of consideration for the Electoral Commission. Those issues will be dealt with in that forum in the first instance.
On those matters, there are no proposals for a referendum. It is safe to assume that there will not be referendums on any of those issues in the lifetime of the Government.
On the referendum on children's rights, the report of the all-party committee was published on 16 February and recommended that there should be a constitutional amendment on the rights of the child. The expectation was that the referendum would have been held last summer. The Taoiseach deferred holding the referendum because he did not want to hold the by-elections with it. The Chief Whip told us when we debated the moving of the writs on the by-elections last week that they would be held towards the end of the first quarter of next year. Does the Taoiseach expect that the referendum on the rights of children will be held on the same day?
The assertion made by the Deputy is incorrect. It is not correct to say that one could have expected a referendum last summer. The proposal was submitted to the Government in March or April and was the result of many years work. We have to examine the implications of the proposed wording. Ministers and Departments were asked to consider the report, which dealt with the complex nature of the issues involved, and to examine the implications of the proposed wording for their individual areas of responsibility. Arising from that examination, a range of unintended policy and resource implications were identified. Consequently, the Minister for Health and Children was asked to develop further work on the referendum, in co-operation with the Attorney General, and that has to be brought back to Government in due course.
The implications of the proposed wording are potentially far-reaching and could give rise to very substantial costs. The examination of the committee's wording identified a range of unintended policy and resource implications. These included concerns that the concept of continuity of care might lead to children being left in inappropriate care situations. There are also concerns about the implications for immigration policy and the manner in which the voice of the child provisions could lead to unwieldy and inappropriate arrangements, for example, if a child is suspended from school it could result in legal representation being required on both sides.
A new wording to try to take account of the proposals put forward by the joint committee, with the policy support being provided by the office of the Minister of State with responsibility for children and youth affairs, is currently being considered. This will try to bring forward a recommendation for Ministers and the Government to see in what way we can deal with this issue without the unintended resource and policy implications.
Two issues arise from that. I understand the Taoiseach said the Government is now considering a new wording. Do I understand from that the Government is considering a new draft of the proposal? Given that the original wording came from an all-party committee, does he intend to share the proposed new wording with the all-party committee? How does he intend to progress the new wording? Is it intended that the Government will consider the new wording and come to the House with a Bill for a referendum which contains the new wording or will there be consultation or discussion with the all-party committee on what the new wording contains?
I again return to the intention of the Government. Is it still the Government's intention to hold the referendum in the lifetime of this Government or do I interpret what the Taoiseach has said about the difficulties the Government is considering, in terms of the consequences of the amendment and the provision being put into the Constitution, as meaning that the referendum will not be held at all?
No, obviously the work is continuing and drafting is being considered. No issue has come to Cabinet for its consideration at this point. I will give the Deputy an update on the work that has been ongoing. The commitment to bring forward legislation for a constitutional amendment remains and the Government is determined to fulfil that commitment. We are all agreed that we want to acknowledge the rights of children in the Constitution. We have to do it in a careful and considered way. Substantive work is going on.
I ask the Taoiseach to comment on the wording.
Work is continuing on the wording. No wording has been brought to Government at this point.
I understood from the Taoiseach's earlier reply that he said the Government was considering new wording.
No, I said it is being drafted by the Office of the Attorney General with the policy support being provided by office of the Minister of State with responsibility for children and youth affairs. This is a matter that the Minister of State will bring to Government in due course and we can deal with it on that basis.
I appreciate that I am probably testing the patience of the Ceann Comhairle. Do I take it from that that the Government has decided to reject the wording was presented to it by the all-party committee?
On an examination of the proposed wording, its implications for the areas of responsibility of the various Ministers and Departments were examined. An examination will identify the range of unintended policy and resources to date. Arising from that, work will continue in the Office of the Attorney General to bring forward a writ for consideration by Government on legislation for a constitutional amendment. That commitment remains. The drafting and wording continues to be worked on and will have to be brought back to the Government for further discussion and consideration. It is a work in progress.
Has the wording of the committee now been dropped?
On examination, a range of unintended policy and resource implications were identified.
The work that has arisen from that has meant the Minister with policy support is engaged with the Attorney General to see what could be provided that would deal with some of the issues being raised. When we get back whatever wording arises from that work we can consider it and take it from there.
It will not be Mary O'Rourke's wording. That is the bottom line.
Deputy Gilmore, we need to move on.
I have just explained that from the Government's point of view it has identified a range of unintended policy and resource implications, some of which I outlined in my first reply.
Clearly from the Taoiseach's responses this morning, the all-party consensus on the wording of the constitutional amendment to enshrine children's rights in the Constitution has been rejected by the Government. Over the past while, there has been much talk about achieving all-party consensus. We had all-party consensus after a protracted period of engagement between all the parties in the committee itself——
A question, Deputy.
——with the finest of legal advice, expert to this area.
Now that the Taoiseach has indicated to the House that the Government will proceed to look at an alternative wording, will he advise us whether he has concluded his deliberations with the various Departments vis-à-vis the impact of the change in the Constitution on their respective areas of responsibility; whether the deliberations of the Attorney General have concluded; and whether he expects he will reach a finite position on the now being drafted alternative wording before the end of the year? If that would be the case — or if it is not the case, whichever — is the Taoiseach in a position at this point in time to indicate the Government’s expected timeframe for the conclusion of this process which at present has a duration of several months? Will the Taoiseach affirm for the House that the Government will come before the House and advise of its intention to move towards a referendum in 2011? If new wording is to be agreed at Cabinet will the former committee, no longer in existence, be reconstituted for an evaluation of what the Government will propose?
Deputy, we are getting into detail that is not appropriate to Question Time for the Taoiseach.
Of course it is absolutely appropriate.
It is more appropriate to the line Minister.
Let me assure the Ceann Comhairle that it is absolutely appropriate. I did not spend two years wasting my time so I want to know exactly what will happen. Many people from all parties, including Fianna Fáil, put much good work into this and I want to know whether we have been absolutely discarded and set aside or whether there will be any consultation whatsoever with what has been referred to here colloquially as Mary O'Rourke's committee?
I want to put on record again the Government's appreciation of the work done by the joint committee. The committee assisted greatly in ensuring political consensus on the policy objectives of the referendum. The Government has a duty to consider the implications of the proposed wording put forward by the committee and to fully understand exactly what is involved. The Government has to be satisfied that the acknowledgement of children's rights as enunciated in the proposed constitutional amendment meets the policy objectives. We must also ensure that the constitutional language used provides the necessary clarity. In particular, the Government must ensure there are no unintended consequences arising from the proposed wording. The important matter here is that we get this right. None of us wants to find himself or herself back here in a year's time trying to undo unintended consequences which could arise if the full implications of the proposed wording are not properly teased out in advance of the referendum.
Every statement on the proposed wording must be constitutionally right, bearing in mind that it may be subject to judicial interpretation. I think everyone would accept that. It does not take in any way from the work that people have done, the policy objectives they set themselves or the proposed wording it put forward for consideration by the Government. The Government is now discharging its obligations in that respect. Obviously it would be the intention of the Minister of State with responsibility for children to liaise with those who have been involved in this work thus far when the issue is crystallised, and we can come forward with a discussion at that point. It is part of the process; the Parliament has done its work in bringing forward its proposals and the Government has to do its work. It is a substantive and complex area as everyone knows and the intention is to avoid any unintended policy or other consequences; that is the purpose of the work being undertaken at present.
Will the Taoiseach address the matter of the timeframe of the work in hand? Does he have any idea at this moment in time when the current process of drafting and consultation with the various Departments and the Office of the Attorney General will conclude? Will there actually be a product and, thereby by extension, a determination as to when a referendum would follow?
On an unrelated issue but with regard to previous referenda referred to, the Taoiseach's predecessor indicated a very strong determination to bring about an improved or increased involvement on the part of Irish citizens North of the Border in the electoral process in this State. He had signalled his hope to bring about a situation where Irish citizens North of the Border would be able to participate in presidential, Dáil or Seanad elections or any combination of all three. Nothing was done on that. However, rightly there is continuous reflection on the importance of the Irish diaspora globally and the Taoiseach has invited many successful figures from that diaspora——
It may be necessary to submit a separate parliamentary question on this matter.
No, this is about this question. It is really tedious not being allowed to conclude simple questions. I do not expect to be treated any differently from anybody else who has tabled——
I have no difficulty with the simple questions. When the Deputy starts dispensing advice and information that is where we run into difficulty.
No, we are not running into difficulty here; we are going directly to a specific question. The point is that the Taoiseach has reflected on the important role and the potential of involving the diaspora more in problems currently besetting us. Is any consideration being given at this point in time to a constitutional referendum on extending the rights of participation to Irish citizens living overseas — with more and more of them in that situation over the past 12 to 18 months by virtue of forced emigration — so that people would have the opportunity, as is the case in many other states at least for a defined period of time, to participate in the electoral process in their home country? Is the Government giving any consideration to such a proposal, one that I would very much welcome?
In a specific reply to the question raised by the Deputy, I am not aware of any proposal in gestation at present to provide for such an arrangement for those outside the country who hold citizenship to have votes in general elections or any other elections here. On the issue generally——
Does the Taoiseach have any interest in it?
I think——
You are the Taoiseach.
I am indeed and the Deputy has asked me without notice to take a considered view on an issue that obviously has very far reaching implications, and I do not engage in that type of arrangement where it is then used against me that I stated I would be this, that or the other on an issue. I like to consider a matter when those who propose it put all of the issues in front of me. If people have a view that it should be done, perhaps they will put the case——
Will the Taoiseach initiate a consideration?
No, I will not initiate any consideration. Deputy Ó Caoláin is proposing that this is an issue which has validity and merit.
The Taoiseach's predecessor actually——
I am saying the onus is on those who propose it to come forward with some case for consideration. It is not for me to build their case.
The Taoiseach's predecessor was very strongly of that view.
That is fair enough.
With regard to matters generally, the question of what is being considered as a priority for the Government relates to the issues that we have just discussed.
Can I take the Taoiseach back to the matter of the referendum on children's rights? I put it to him that what has happened over the past couple of years in this House is a prime example of a serious and fundamental flaw in our parliamentary system. We have a situation where consensus was reached on an all-party basis over a period of two years. That all-party consensus was reported from this House to Government, which now, only when questioned, offers excuses such as unintended and unforeseen consequences. I ask the Taoiseach to confirm that these consequences are, in fact, discussions across three Departments, the Departments of Health and Children, Education and Skills, and Justice and Law Reform, on issues that I accept are complex.
It appears that we have now entered the politics of drift. The Government received the report on 18 February. There has been nothing in terms of any proposal from Government since that day other than unintended consequences. In that regard, I ask the Taoiseach to inform the House as to who in Government is co-ordinating the various discussions between the Departments of Justice and Law Reform, Health and Children and Education and Skills, and when it is expected that these discussions will be completed? It seems that there is not a timeframe, there are no time lines, and we are merely drifting along.
The Taoiseach's Government colleague, the Minister, Deputy Gormley, speaks of consensus. This is the prime example of consensus that this House has seen in the course of this Dáil and it is treated in a manner that is less than acceptable. I ask the Taoiseach to outline to the House the process, who is co-ordinating and when it is expected that the co-ordinator will report to Cabinet. I ask him to then confirm the necessity to reconvene the committee on the basis that the wording that will ultimately be published by Government will differ substantially from that which has been agreed by the all-party committee.
Having regard to the fact that the Taoiseach reluctantly admitted that it is the Government's intention to hold the referendum next year, is it not timely that a public information campaign commence now on the matter of the rights of children and of a proposed constitutional change in advance of a referendum campaign?
My reply to Deputy Flanagan would be that it is not a question of being reluctant. It is a question of getting it right, as far as the Government is concerned. Substantive work is being undertaken in these matters. This work is being co-ordinated by the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews, in the Office of the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs.
I made the point that there is work ongoing at the Attorney General's Office to bring forward. I am saying also that we all are agreed on the objectives but there are, on examination by Departments, issues of substance being raised that must be addressed.
It is not to take away from the work that has been done by the committee. The committee brought forward a draft wording that it believed would meet the requirements of the situation. That was agreed among the members of the committee. That is fine and valid in its own right, but as Deputy Flanagan will appreciate, Government then has a responsibility that is distinct from that as well.
It is not a question of a flaw in the parliamentary procedures. The parliamentary procedures worked well. Members went in with a view to coming forward with a clear understanding of what the objectives should be and what the proposed wording is.
As the Deputy will be aware, the wording brought forward is lengthy and involved. We all know that all of these matters must be very carefully worked through because every sentence is subject to judicial interpretation and if there are some unintended consequences which have been identified arising out of the good work that has been done, then it is right that should be interrogated and that we should come up with solutions so that we come back to the House, either at plenary or committee level, to go through them. That is what I expect Deputy Barry Andrews to do once the work has been completed.
Deputy Flanagan asked for a timeframe. As I stated, it is not a question of drift. There are issues that are being addressed. The Attorney General's office is involved in a drafting exercise to try to address those issues. Once it is brought back to the Cabinet committee and to Cabinet for our appraisal so that we can stand over it, we can defend it and we can say that it meets the requirements taking into account the work that has been undertaken by committees, etc., we can come back to the House to have that discussion and be able to interact with the House so that we can try to ensure that the all-party work that has been brought to this stage can hopefully be maintained.
The Joint Committee on the Constitution, in its fourth report published in July 2010, recommended that a new electoral commission, as promised in the programme for Government, be formally established under the Constitution in order to enhance its legitimacy and guarantee its independence. Will the Taoiseach act on this recommendation contained in the report of the Joint Committee on the Constitution chaired by one of his party colleagues?
I understand that is a recommendation in that report. The question on the up-to-date position would be best directed to the line Minister concerned, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
Official Travel
Enda Kenny
Question:6 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to visit the United States; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30223/10]
Enda Kenny
Question:7 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will convene a meeting of the Ireland-America Economic Advisory Board during his next visit to the United States; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30224/10]
Enda Kenny
Question:8 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the arrangements in place within his Department for maintaining contact with the Ireland-America Advisory Board; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30225/10]
Enda Kenny
Question:9 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the programme for his visit to New York in July 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32324/10]
Enda Kenny
Question:10 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the Mayor of New York, Mr. Bloomberg, in July 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32325/10]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:11 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his visit to the United States during July 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32327/10]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 11, inclusive, together.
I led an economic mission to the United States from 11 to 15 July last. During this trip I met with leading figures in US business, politics and the media in New York and Atlanta, as well as representatives of the Irish American community.
I attended the New York Stock Exchange on 12 July and I launched "Innovation Fund — Ireland", which is to support enterprise development and job creation. The fund is a key pillar in the Government's smart economy strategy. The following day I met with the New York Mayor, Mr. Mike Bloomberg, at his City Hall headquarters in New York. The meeting was also attended by the New York City Council Speaker, Ms Christine Quinn. We discussed the economic situation in the US, Ireland and internationally and shared our experience on tackling the global recession. I listened with particular interest to the mayor's experience of improving public services in New York City, with a population of over 8 million people. I expressed my gratitude for the continued interest in and support for Ireland and the Irish community from New York City.
While in New York I also met with successful young Irish people based there who are part of the global Irish network and with Irish community leaders. My schedule also included meetings with Irish companies who are creating new business in the US, as well as representatives of IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland and Tourism Ireland. In addition, I met with Irish campaigners for immigration reform.
Following my engagements in New York, I travelled to Atlanta, Georgia where I opened the first ever Irish diplomatic mission in the southern United States and met with Governor Sonny Perdue. This new consulate has been opened as part of the roll-out of the new strategy for Ireland-United States relations which I launched last year. In Atlanta, I also made a key-note speech on the Ireland-United States relationship to the Irish Chambers of Commerce USA and met with leading Georgia-based businesses that have invested and created jobs in Ireland.
While plans have not yet been finalised, I expect that I will next visit the United States for the traditional St. Patrick's Day celebrations in March 2011. I would expect to meet with the Ireland-America Economic Advisory Board in the course of that visit. The Irish Embassy in Washington maintains very close contact with board members who are an important source of advice and assistance for us.
When the Taoiseach met with the Irish community leaders in July in New York he stated that the Government remains firmly committed to supporting the cause of immigration reform. What progress has been made on the follow-up on that statement and what progress has been made in respect of sorting out the worsening situation in so far as the undocumented Irish is concerned?
That is an issue on which we campaign all of the time. The Irish Embassy in Washington is very active on the Capital Hill in that regard. As Deputy Kenny will appreciate, it is a very difficult issue on the domestic agenda of the United State. President Obama, when I last met him on St. Patrick's Day in March, gave a strong commitment on his view that this was an issue that needed to be address but one understands that prior to the November elections the political situation is not conducive to getting the matter dealt with, certainly, on a bipartisan basis or, indeed, in any way.
The issue is prioritised in all Government contacts with the US Administration. We continue to focus on what is a three-pronged strategy — the reciprocal working holiday arrangement agreement which is now working successfully, the new bilateral arrangements to provide reciprocal long-term E3 working visas, and a solution for the undocumented.
President Obama has made his commitment to comprehensive reform clear and, in his address on the issue delivered in Washington on 1 July, he signalled his willingness to move forward and shape what he called "a practical, common-sense approach". Clearly, we would like to see a comprehensive resolution to this issue at the earliest opportunity. However, the status of the undocumented can only be changed by virtue of legislation passed by both Houses of Congress and it is not merely a matter of bilateral engagement between the two Governments. It remains a highly sensitive political issue and very considerable challenges remain.
On 30 September, prior to the current congressional recess, Senator Robert Menendez published an immigration reform Bill that includes an E3 provision for Ireland. Although the publication of this Bill is only the first step in a long process, the inclusion of an E3 scheme at this stage is an important achievement for the Government and the Irish community.
The Government maintains close contact with the Irish community and immigration reform groups, as the Deputy will know. We met the Irish lobby for immigration reform while in the US last March and with immigration reform groups during my recent New York trip. The Minister for Foreign Affairs meets such groups regularly when he is in the US, including during his recent visit to New York for the UN General Assembly session.
Practical support is provided through the Government's emigrant support programme. Since 2006 the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform has received grants worth $325,000, and $20,000 has been provided to the Chicago council for immigration reform over the past two years.
We will not see a comprehensive solution to immigration concerns in the short term because of the complex issues involved and because of the situation in both Houses of Congress in terms of the American Government. Has the Government decided to more or less wait until the possibility or probability of a comprehensive solution happens, which might be a long way down the line, and in the meantime is there advice that can be given to undocumented young Irish people from all over the country who are living from day to day in an anxious state in the US? Or is the Government moving to a point where it wants to follow up on a bilateral arrangement between Ireland and the US?
Second, a scheme was to be introduced by the Minister for Foreign Affairs which was to result in up to 10,000 US visas being available. I understand the take-up under that scheme has been poor with only a few hundred having applied. Is there a reason for that or does the Taoiseach have any information to indicate why this scheme was such a failure?
I do not have any detail on that. I will ask the Department of Foreign Affairs to let the Deputy know the position.
On the issue in regard to bilateral arrangements, I do not believe there is any political prospect of bilateral arrangements being agreed between countries on immigration reform. As the Deputy is aware, there are various caucuses in regard to various groups which would insist that this matter can only be dealt with in a comprehensive fashion, dealing with everyone's problems rather than any specific sector of the émigré community being dealt with exceptionally.
When the Taoiseach was in the US he opened a new consulate general office in Atlanta and it was termed to be a strategic long-term development. He indicated that the consulate would be more streamlined than other long established consulates in the United States. Atlanta has a population of 8 million. It is also the location of the headquarters of Coca-Cola, CNN, DHL and CRH, which is Ireland's largest firm. In the spirit of wanting to continue to foster relations between Ireland the United States — I note the welcome comment from the Minister for Finance that there is no intention of shifting from the 12.5% corporation tax rate — if the consulate is to be more streamlined and strategic, is it intended that personnel from Enterprise Ireland, IDA Ireland or Tourism Ireland should be seconded to Atlanta to deal at first hand and face to face with opportunities presented, firms, organisations and interest groups that would have an impact in terms of investment or travel to Ireland with obvious consequences for the economy here? The Taoiseach might like to comment on that.
Was there any indication in the Taoiseach's discussions about Ireland's commitment to meeting the millennium development goals of the UN? The summit took place from 20 to 22 September. I do not know whether the Taoiseach was invited to it but I know President Sarkozy and the Prime Ministers of Spain, Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark and Japan attended it.
An interesting point was raised by Deputy Barrett here yesterday. He said that we have a great number of young qualified brilliant people in the country, many of whom are now unemployed, and that their participation in assisting in other countries could be deemed to be part of the contribution that Ireland would make. I am aware there is a difficulty with the economic situation and that we are committed to the 0.7% of GNP contribution by 2015. In the Taoiseach's discussions in the United States with Irish-Americian interests, Mayor Bloomberg or whoever, was this matter raised or did the Taoiseach have any opportunity to reflect on that? As a small country we have made a massive impact internationally in this regard and perhaps the point made by the Deputy Barrett should be worthy of consideration.
Those issues were not discussed, the focus was very much economic and bilateral. On the issue of the millennium development goals, I would refer the Deputy to the speech of the Minister for Foreign Affairs at the General Assembly where that matter was addressed.
In regard to——
The consulate.
——the question on the APSO-type contribution where people make their skills available to do development work generally, or across the world, we have a personal services organisation that does that work and it is part of the funding for development aid by the Department of Foreign Affairs. I presume that can be augmented or increased, where demand requires it or skills are sought. There have been many instances where Irish citizens have volunteered for that type of work and I commend them for it.
On the issue in regard to Atlanta, a consulate has been set up there and it has been very much welcomed. While it is located in Atlanta, it's remit is not limited to the Georgia situation, although, as the Deputy said, there are important firms in the Atlanta area. It is an important commercial hub in the United States. The other southern states will be part of the remit of work of the consulate.
On the question of the people from the IDA being seconded there, IDA personnel who work in the United States work from a couple of offices nationwide but they are very much on the move all the time and are not located in a geographical space. We have people of expertise in the various sectors who keep in touch with the foreign direct investment community on a very regular basis. Operating in that way the work is company focused rather than geographically based, which is probably the best way to operate. I would defer to the IDA's experience in that respect as to how it organises itself to best effect.
On the question of the consulate generally, it was a question of increasing our presence in that part of the world. We have a large number of Irish in that area, Irish from this part of the jurisdiction and Irish from the North of both traditions. It is important to point out that this consulate gives us a foothold in the southern states and places us at the centre of a dynamic economic base. I am also delighted to say that we have appointed new honorary consuls in Denver, Seattle, Pittsburgh and New Orleans. That is another initiative. As part of the strategic initiative on the Irish-US relationship, we have also, as the Deputy will be aware, established the Irish American Leadership Council. Its first meeting last year in October was attended by representatives of the Irish-American community, including economic, social, political and cultural organisations and US based representatives of Irish Government agencies. Delegates attended from all regions of the United States, including representatives from Houston to Chicago and from New York to San Francisco. A second meeting was held in September of this year. This is another important resource which is being developed.
During his visit to the United States in early July, did the Taoiseach take steps to address, redress or rebut some of the negative commentary about Ireland that has been appearing in some of the influential US newspapers? The Taoiseach was in the United States between 11 and 15 July. On 29 June, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal each published a lengthy article on the Irish economy, both of which were negative. The former described Ireland as “a once thriving nation” that is “struggling, with no sign of a rapid turnaround in sight”. The latter had similarly negative comments to make about Ireland. Did the Taoiseach hold briefings for the United States media during his visit? Did he make any attempt to speak directly to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, with a view to talking up the prospects of the country?
I did television interviews, including an interview with Charlie Rose on Bloomberg Television, and met representatives of the New York Stock Exchange, the Bank of New York Mellon, one of the largest banks in the United States, the board of Goldman Sachs and various other business interests.
The Taoiseach will have been conscious of the commentaries on Ireland published in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal shortly before his visit. Was an attempt made to arrange a briefing or interviews for these two newspapers? Was any effort made to use the occasion of his visit to the United States to influence these two highly influential newspapers about their take on Ireland?
I did not have a direct briefing with the newspapers in question but I know it was covered. We dealt with them and they are continually dealt with. I also dealt with other media interests.
On the undocumented Irish, the so-called illegal Irish emigrants in the United States, is it possible that the Department of Foreign Affairs would prepare a briefing for the leaders of the Opposition parties on its approach — the steps taken and areas of possible redress identified — to the very serious situation faced by countless Irish people, some of whom have lived in the United States for a longer period than they lived at home? With the growing number of people now displaced as a result of the decline in the economy, it would be helpful, given that we all have engagement with people from the political, administrative and business life of the United States, if we were all at least singing from the same hymn sheet and pressing all the right buttons. I ask if this could be done purely and solely in the interest of aiding and abetting the best possible outcome in terms of impacting on the US Administration and those who can help to bring about progress in this particular area. Will the Taoiseach consider arranging such a briefing at the earliest opportunity? It would be very welcome from my point of view.
Is the Taoiseach aware of the growing number of state assemblies, city councils, municipalities and organisations in the United States which have, in recent months, passed resolutions encouraging the pursuit of peaceful and democratic resolution of the issue of partition and encouraging work towards the achievement of Irish reunification? It is certainly a major issue of debate across all of the bodies in question.
We are drifting somewhat from the group of questions.
Not at all. I am asking the Taoiseach, in the context of his US visits, whether he is aware of this growth in interest which is a natural outworking of all that we have achieved moving from a peace process to a political process. Is he aware of it? Has he been briefed on it or has he discussed it with the Minister for Foreign Affairs? Will he join me in the logical outworking of it by encouraging all parties and interests here to sit down and collectively seek to open up a respectful debate and process that would encourage exactly what the elected bodies in question in the United States are encouraging?
The whole purpose of the peace process and political process in which we are engaged is to enable everyone, those of all traditions, to pursue their objectives peacefully and democratically, overcome past dissensions, recognise the commonality of our interests and, in due course, try to develop political structures which would be consistent with these objectives. That is part of the normal democratic debate. I welcome the decision of any institution, anywhere in the world to adopt motions that confirm that their interest in Ireland and Irish affairs is also on the basis that they promote peaceful and democratic resolution of issues. Since the Good Friday Agreement was signed, we have been engaged in work that is dedicated to this purpose and to doing so democratically.
On the Deputy's question on the undocumented, I can ask the Department of Foreign Affairs to give an update on the current position and on replies I have given concerning the work the Department is undertaking. It has a three-pronged strategy which I have outlined in previous supplementary questions. That is the focus of the strategy it is pursuing.