Vol. 798 No. 2
6. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he has reviewed the effectiveness of having a non-resident ambassador to the Holy See; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15599/13]
The Government decision in November 2011 to close our resident embassies to the Holy See and Iran and our development office in East Timor was taken with considerable reluctance as part of a necessary budget process to reduce costs. The closure of the resident embassy to the Holy See has yielded substantial savings, not least as it enabled the significantly larger embassy to Italy and the residence of the ambassador to Italy to be relocated to the State-owned Villa Spada, formerly occupied by the embassy to the Holy See, thereby saving €445,000 per annum in rent on two properties.
As the Deputy is aware, the Government decided to appoint the Secretary General of my Department as non-resident ambassador to the Holy See, thereby ensuring that contact with the Holy See is maintained at the highest possible diplomatic level. Ambassador Cooney travels to Rome regularly and was present last week for the inauguration of Pope Francis, to which he accompanied the President and the Minister for Finance who represented the Government and subsequently at the Pope’s meeting with the Diplomatic Corps. I am satisfied that the current arrangement for Ireland’s representation at the Holy See is the most effective possible in light of the resource constraints faced by my Department.
The resident embassy to the Holy See will not be reopened in the immediate term. I will, however, be keeping the deployment of our diplomatic and consular resources under review in light of ongoing national priorities and the availability of resources.
I remind Deputies that we are now dealing with Other Questions and as such they are limited to only one minute for supplementary questions.
Is the diplomatic network reviewed annually? Has the Tánaiste given consideration to a review of the necessity for full ambassadors to some of the international organisations? We have had diplomatic relations with the Holy See since 1929. In the sequence of London, Washington and the then League of Nations, it has been one of Ireland's longest established diplomatic relations and is an important listening post.
Is the Tánaiste, in stating that there are no plans to reopen it in the immediate term, reassuring us that he envisages a permanent resident ambassador being appointed in the medium term? While the Secretary General of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is an extremely able and competent ambassador he is not the least busy official in the Tánaiste's Department. His position is demanding and challenging. While I acknowledge his competence, commitment and ability, is it unreasonable of us to believe he can devote considerable time to that particular post in view of the huge demands on him.
As I said at the time, the appointment of the Secretary General of my Department as non-resident ambassador to the Holy See signalled the importance and significance which the Government attaches to our diplomatic relations with the Holy See. We have a small but good diplomatic service. Our representation in terms of the countries wherein we have resident missions and the number of diplomats therein is approximately half that of countries of similar size. We have approximately 75 resident missions, some of which are to the multilateral organisations such as the United Nations, European Union and so on. We have 58 bilateral resident missions. In other words, we are represented in only 58 of the 190 states that are members of the United Nations.
To take Latin America as an example, we have resident ambassadors in Mexico, Brazil and Argentina, and that is it. We have to review on an ongoing basis where we have our missions and how best to deploy them. It is something we will be doing again at the conclusion of the Irish Presidency.
Many people noticed that Sweden and Slovenia, two member states of the European Union, closed their embassies in Dublin last year. Given that they did so and clearly did not consider they had such a level of interest, either in trade or otherwise, in dealing with us, is there not a case for closing our missions in countries such as those, certainly in the case of Sweden? As the Tánaiste said, €80 million or so is being spent on our 75 missions. Could those missions not be better placed? The Irish Exporters' Association asked recently that we concentrate more on Latin America, as the Tánaiste rightly mentioned, and on Asia and Africa. If the Swedish do not want to be friends of ours, as in the case of Facebook, why should we be friends of theirs?
The Tánaiste outlined previously how he reached that decision and the priorities involved. Does he consider reopening the consulate in the Vatican to be a priority, or is there somewhere else that should be given greater priority?
The Vatican has a relationship with 179 countries and there are 80 resident embassies there. Can the Tánaiste assure us that the idea of a dual location - to have an ambassador accredited to the Holy See as well as to Italy - was considered before the decision was made to appoint a non-resident ambassador?
What we need to do is to expand our footprint around the world. One point we mentioned was that in seven of our missions in European Union capitals we operate a mission with one diplomat. It is a very lean operation. What I would like to be able to do, and I hope we will be able to do this as resources become available, is to expand the number of places where we have resident missions. There are parts of the world where we need such missions in order to promote our trade and our country.
As I said in regard to the Holy See, it was always the case that we were going to examine it in light of changing circumstances, availability of resources and so on. That remains the case. The position has always been that both Italy and the Vatican want to have embassies that are located separately, but that is part of a discussion that is ongoing.
7. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if there has been any enhancement of control measures in terms of the disbursement of Irish aid in view of the misappropriation of €4 million in aid to Uganda in 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15418/13]
58. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the steps he has taken to enhance auditing and spending review in Uganda following last year’s misappropriation of Irish overseas development aid funds; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15581/13]
I welcome the recent progress made on a durable solution to the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, DRC, with the conclusion in Addis Ababa on 24 February of the Peace, Security and Co-operation Framework Agreement for the DRC and the region.
The conflict has been allowed to continue for too long. It has taken millions of lives and caused untold human suffering. It is now vital to build on the framework agreed in Addis Ababa, and I warmly welcome the decision of the United Nations Secretary General to appoint the former President of Ireland Mary Robinson as special envoy to the region. She can count on the full support of the Government and of the EU in her work.
In the United Nations Secretary General’s words, a lasting solution must be anchored in the political will of the leaders of all countries in the region. It must address the structural causes of instability in the DRC itself. It must respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all-----
The Minister of State is reading the wrong reply.
We are on Question No. 7.
No. 5?
No, Question No. 7.
My apologies.
Somebody was listening.
It is an interesting reply. It is coming up shortly.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 58 together.
As Deputies will be aware, I was deeply concerned about the misappropriation of €4 million of Irish development funding in Uganda. I am committed to ensuring we learn from what has occurred in Uganda to further strengthen our systems of risk identification and financial management in Irish Aid and minimise the potential for any misuse of Irish taxpayer’s funds in the future. Ireland has always made it abundantly clear that we have no tolerance for fraud or any other form of financial irregularity in respect of our development programme. When details of the misappropriation came to light, the Tánaiste immediately suspended €16 million of Irish development assistance which was due to be channelled through Government of Uganda systems in 2012. An investigation was initiated into the misappropriation of funds by the Office of the Prime Minister in Uganda which was undertaken by a team from the evaluation and audit unit of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The report has been published and the recommendations are currently being implemented.
Deputies will be aware that the Government of Uganda has accepted full responsibility for the misappropriation of Irish development funds and full restitution of the funds has now taken place. I welcome this action which was brought about after intensive dialogue at a high level with the Ugandan Government.
Several steps have been taken as a result of the misappropriation to ensure the financial and risk management systems used to oversee and manage Ireland’s aid programme throughout the world are strong and robust enough to operate successfully in very challenging environments.
The Ambassadors in the overseas Missions that manage Irish Aid bilateral programmes have undertaken a full review of their management and risk assessment systems to ensure that any weaknesses are highlighted and that appropriate measures are taken to address these. In addition, last month, the Secretary General of the Department held a meeting in Zambia with all of the heads of mission of embassies that manage aid programmes, to underline the importance of managing risk around Irish development funding and to highlight the importance of strong vigilance in the management of aid programmes.
The evaluation and audit unit of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will also continue to build on the important work it has undertaken this year since the misappropriation in Uganda. The unit has begun an intensive programme of assessments of all our programme countries examining the financial controls and risk management systems in place and ensuring that these systems are as strong as possible. This work is expected to be completed by the summer and the unit will submit a report when these assessments are concluded I am committed to the full implementation of any recommendations the unit may have as a result of the work it has undertaken.
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is also seeking sanction from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to appoint a chief financial officer as subsequently recommended by the Committee on Public Accounts. I believe the appointment of a professionally qualified CFO will further strengthen our financial controls, not just within the aid programme but also across the Department.
In regard to Uganda specifically, the capacity of the embassy in the area of financial management and audit has recently been strengthened. In addition, the evaluation and audit unit will continue with its regular monitoring visits to Uganda, the next of which will take place in early April. The embassy is continuing to work closely with the Auditor General of Uganda and has committed to continuing support for his important work.
All of the efforts being made to strengthen financial oversight of the aid programme are to ensure that the valuable contribution made by Ireland towards improving the lives of some of the most vulnerable people in the world can continue, while at the same time providing strong assurance and accountability to the Irish taxpayer.
I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. The suspension of assistance to Uganda is over. Has the programme resumed? How was the repayment of the €4 million expropriated from the €16 million made? Was it taken back in a single payment or did we discount it off this year's programme? How was that handled?
I welcome what the Minister of State said about the invigilation of the Irish Aid programme. I note that he says we will have a report by summer. Have warning lights been flashing in any other countries? Has the Minister of State heard any alarming reports following the investigation of the programme's finances? I welcome the appointment of the chief financial officer. That seems to be an obvious way to go to protect the investment we are making and the support we give to those countries.
I understand the Minister of State recently visited Tanzania, South Africa and Mozambique partly to see what precisely Irish Aid is doing.
Will the Minister of State give the House his own personal observations on the performance of Irish Aid and how taxpayers' moneys go to the people on the front line, not to the elites, in the countries in question?
I have been to Tanzania and Mozambique which has given me the opportunity to see quite a number of our programmes. It is important to go out into the field to see how they operate. We have a very high quality list of programmes, particularly in the areas of health, education and agriculture. Our track record is regarded as second to none in the OECD assessment of overseas development programmes.
The recommendation of the Committee of Public Accounts was to establish a post of chief financial officer. Appointing one to deal with our various programmes is being looked at and I hope the Minister of Public Expenditure and Reform will be prepared to allow the appointment to take place.
The €4 million siphoned off in Uganda was paid back fully before Christmas and an investigation into the matter continues. Funding was taken back into the Irish account. The moneys will be used for the purposes intended to assist the poorest in Uganda and will not go through the Ugandan Government offices but through the Irish bilateral programmes and non-governmental organisations. We are anxious that the people of Uganda will not suffer as a result of what happened owing to the misappropriation of a certain amount of funding from the Irish Government, as well as from the Governments of Norway and Denmark. We are anxious to ensure lessons are learned.
The audit and evaluation unit visited the area in question to robustly deal with the issues involved before the other countries affected did so. We hope this lesson will be applied to all other missions. As I stated, our embassy staff met the Secretary General to discuss future safeguards. The Committee of Public Accounts' evaluation, with my visit to Mozambique, will be taken into consideration in considering the future direction of overseas development funding.
It was the Department's audit committee that recommended the appointment of a chief risk officer and a head of finance. The Minister of State said he hoped the Minister would look at the appointment of a chief financial officer. However, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade told us several months ago that this appointment process had already been set in train and that the necessary approval had been received from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. The Minister of State has not given us the impression that there is urgency attached to the appointment of a chief financial officer. It is a matter which should be dealt with as such.
At what stage is the proposed appointment of the chief risk officer, as recommended by the Department's audit committee? As Deputy Thomas P. Broughan said, there is a great need to assure the public that continues to be very generous, despite the many pressures on it, in its support of overseas development aid. It is important the message is sent that the investment of the taxpayer in overseas development programmes has been successful. We have heard of the great improvements the programmes have made to primary education and health facilities, etc. We all recognise much more needs to be done, but we need the message to be sent to the public that every cent is being put to good use and reaching the intended beneficiaries.
Many of us are very supportive of the work Irish Aid does in Uganda and of the life-changing improvements its work has brought to the Ugandan people, especially in the areas of education, health care and agriculture. This work is important to some of the most vulnerable people in the world. The Minister of State referred to producing the report by the summer. Is he referring to our summer? If so, we could be waiting some time by the look of the weather outside? Can the Minister of State give an indication of when it will be produced?
Many people are concerned about the impact of the suspension. Is anything happening to front-line services or to those working on the ground? The Minister of State indicated that the funding is no longer being channelled through the Ugandan Government but through the relevant NGO. In what way has this impacted on the delivery? Irish Aid has put several proposals to the Ugandan Government. Have these been acted on?
There has been an interesting development for parliamentarians. A group from this House has come together to consider options for various countries in Africa. Does the Minister of State believe that twinning and the development of other interests of Members with their counterparts in the DRC and other countries would be a positive development?
The issue is being dealt with and has been dealt with urgently. The first thing I stated was that the Irish contribution was suspended by the Tánaiste immediately. A full investigation has taken place. There are matters before the courts. Several people will be prosecuted on matters relating to this issue in Uganda.
I emphasise that the finding was made by the Uganda Auditor General, an office that has been funded by Ireland to ensure that it is efficient. It has been efficient at the highest level, including the Prime Minister's Department. The work we have done to improve the quality of audit and evaluation within the country at the level of the Auditor General has been very effective.
We have a strong audit and evaluation network within a unit in the Department. In addition, all Irish overseas development aid funding is audited externally. These measures are in place and there is a strong audit capacity in place already.
We have taken on board what has been said by the Committee of Public Accounts on the matter and we have taken on board the lessons learned from Uganda. Now, a full audit is under way of all our programme countries in Africa. This is the audit which will be completed by the summer. There will be a report on the situation in each of the programme countries.
I realise Deputy Crowe is involved in the Association of European Parliamentarians for Africa, AWEPA. It is valuable that parliamentarians from Ireland bring their skills to bear in parliaments in countries in Africa where, often, democracy is more fragile that it is here. This is especially valuable in terms of good governance and good practices. It would be useful if more of our parliamentarians twined with various committees and so on or visited the governments and parliamentarians there and assisted in that regard.
I wish to ask two brief questions.
I am sorry. We are way over time. I used up all the time because there was a long reply.
We were not given the reply.
I will give you a comprehensive reply.
8. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if it is envisaged that Ireland may soon agree a double taxation agreement with Taiwan in view of the fact that many of our trading partners from both the EU and elsewhere have already done so; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15421/13]
9. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will respond positively to the invitation from the new EU ambassador to Taiwan to afford occasional space to the Irish ambassador to Tokyo in the EU offices in Taiwan to facilitate Irish attendance at the regular trade meetings held there by countries which have trade and diplomatic missions in the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15422/13]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 and 9 together and to make a statement.
Ireland, along with all EU partners, adheres to the one China policy and as a result does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan. This does not, however, preclude the development of economic and trade relations. Ireland, together with our EU partners, sees the benefit of encouraging trade with Taiwan and will continue to explore all appropriate opportunities which arise.
A Taipei representative office, TRO, was established in Dublin in 1988. It has a representative function only in respect of economic and cultural matters.
No political recognition of Taiwan is implied by its presence. The IDA had an office in Taipei, but closed it in 2011. Enterprise Ireland and the IDA currently manage their clients in China, including those in Taiwan, from their offices in Beijing, Shanghai, Hong Kong and Shenzhen.
As regards the EU representative in Taiwan, the EU has no formal diplomatic or formal political relations with Taiwan. The EU does recognise Taiwan as an economic and commercial entity and is represented by the European Economic and Trade Office, EETO, in Taipei, which was established in 2003. Exchanges take place in sectors such as research and technology, information society, education and culture, fisheries, the environment, climate change, intellectual property rights, and standards and norms. I would fully expect Government representatives travelling to Taipei on trade promotion and investment activities to liaise with the EETO and to welcome any assistance which might be offered by that office. However, I would not envisage any arrangement involving our ambassadors to neighbouring countries.
As regards the possibility of concluding a double taxation agreement, DTA, with Taiwan, I understand that this matter is currently being considered by the relevant Departments and agencies. Ireland has a double taxation agreement with the People’s Republic of China, which entered into force in December 2001. Since the conclusion of the DTA with China, a separate agreement was agreed with the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, HKSAR, which entered into force in February 2011. However, the situation in Hong Kong is different from that in Taiwan, as Hong Kong has a separate taxation status. Under the "one China, two systems" approach, this status is specifically provided for in the basic law of the HKSAR which was adopted by the National People’s Congress in Beijing in 1997. This was then promulgated by the then President of the People’s Republic of China.
I am a little disappointed, in respect of Question No. 9, that there is no opportunity to allow our ambassador to avail of the opportunity being afforded to those EU member states that have diplomatic or trade missions in Taiwan. Our relationship with mainland China is precisely the same as those of the other EU countries, so I am unsure why this is felt to be a barrier to having an ambassador in the region attending trade meetings in Taiwan on a monthly basis. I have had representations from individuals and Irish business people living in the area who feel the opportunities available to other EU countries are not available to us.
I welcome the Minister of State's comment that we are open to a DTA agreement with Taiwan. I understand there are sensitivities with regard to our relationship with mainland China and that in the past this might have been a barrier to an agreement. However, the sensitivities between Taiwan and mainland China are not nearly as acute now as they were in the past. We all want some part of the trade with China, but getting any of it is not as easy as people might think. However, the door is open to increased business and trade with Taiwan. Business links between mainland China and Taiwan are increasing exponentially. Therefore, this opportunity offers a possibility for us to open the door into China. It would also benefit both Taiwan and Ireland. I would be very happy to hear progress was being made in terms of a mutual taxation agreement on trade, which would be of benefit to both of us.
The sensitivity with regard to neighbouring ambassadors concerns the issue of political recognition. Our policy has been and continues to be that this is something we are not prepared to do.
Even when there has been ministerial engagement with Taiwan from other EU countries, it has been at a very low level. In fact, it is very infrequent. The vast majority of countries have not engaged at that level at all. It is a very sensitive area. We are treading a fine line. Our official position is that we recognise the "one China" policy. We have to differentiate. We are anxious to deepen and strengthen trade relations. When trade representatives visit Taipei, they use the clear EU infrastructure that is there. Obviously, there are always cost considerations and implications with regard to a decision like the double taxation agreement, which is under active consideration. I think that is an important step. I cannot pre-empt the outcome of the process of consideration that is under way with the stakeholders, including Enterprise Ireland, IDA Ireland and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. It is important that it is under active consideration. I do not think anybody doubts the significance, in terms of potential, of the growth of this trade relationship. However, we need to bear in mind all the political sensitivities that exist.
I welcome our recognition of Taiwan as an economic and commercial entity. I ask the Minister of State to ensure we push the potential of this agreement to its limit.
It is fair to say that is the intention.
10. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will make a public statement calling on Israel to allow the same inspections of its nuclear programme by the International Atomic Energy Agency as it demands of Iran. [15624/13]
It is important to distinguish between the different circumstances of Iran and Israel, particularly with regard to compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, under which Iran asserts its right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. In doing so, Iran has committed itself as it must not to engage in a nuclear weapons programme and to co-operate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency's safeguards system as a means of verifying the exclusively peaceful nature of its programme. As it has failed to co-operate with the agency in this manner, it stands in breach of a succession of UN Security Council and International Atomic Energy Agency resolutions concerning its nuclear programme. In its February 2013 report on the implementation of the safeguards in Iran, the agency concluded that it is unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran or report any progress on the clarification of outstanding issues, including those relating to the possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme. It is for Iran to answer the many legitimate questions the international community has asked regarding its nuclear programme and address the international community's concerns about possible military dimensions to that programme. I call on Iran to do so without further delay.
Israel is not a party to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and has never officially declared itself to possess nuclear weapons. While the decision to accede to any treaty is a sovereign decision for each state, Ireland would like to see full universality of the treaty. We have repeatedly called on the remaining three states that have chosen not to accede to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, including Israel, to do so as non-nuclear weapons states and to place all their nuclear facilities under comprehensive International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. We have made these calls in all relevant international forums, through national as well as EU statements and through our participation in the seven-nation New Agenda Coalition, which was launched in Dublin in 1998 as a means of promoting greater progress on efforts towards a world free of nuclear weapons. The Deputy can be assured that we will continue to use all available opportunities to call on the three non-treaty states to join the treaty. The Deputy can also be assured that universal adherence to and full implementation of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty remain key foreign policy objectives for this Government, as they have been for all previous Governments.
I am not surprised by the Tánaiste's answer. The position he outlined is incredibly disappointing for Ireland. In 1958, this country took the initiative that led to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. It was a wonderful achievement at the time. In essence, the Tánaiste is saying a country that stays outside the terms of the treaty can basically get away with whatever it likes, whereas a country that signs up to the treaty subjects itself to international scrutiny. Despite what the Tánaiste has said, not a single shred of evidence has been produced to say Iran is manufacturing nuclear weapons.
In fact, there is much evidence to show the real objective is to stop Iran from developing uranium, an activity which it is perfectly entitled to do for peaceful means, provided it does so under the scrutiny of the IAEA, as it has done.
Israel, on the other hand, remains outside the treaty and has developed possession of at least 400 weapons, yet the United States has continued to pump in money, making Israel the largest recipient of US military aid despite it not being open to any scrutiny. If one was to follow the logic of the reply, what a country could do is pull out of the treaty and basically not be subject to any scrutiny whatsoever. It is not good enough to just say "Come on in. Join the treaty, lads". We should be publicly demanding that Israel adheres to the same standards it seeks to impose on Iran.
Let us be clear about Ireland's position in regard to nuclear weapons. Ireland has consistently sought a situation where the world is free of nuclear weapons, and that is our consistent foreign policy position. There are two elements to that. First, we ask that all states join the non-proliferation treaty. I again call on those states which are outside it, including Israel, to join the non-proliferation treaty. Second, those states which have joined the non-proliferation treaty are obliged to comply with the terms of that treaty. This means they are entitled to use nuclear material for peaceful purposes for energy and so on, and while there is a debate about that, it is a different matter. However, they are entitled to do that only under the supervision of the IAEA.
A succession of IAEA reports have expressed serious concern regarding possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme. This is why the situation of Iran is the subject of scrutiny and why the EU applied a regime of sanctions in order to persuade Iran to participate in the E3+3 talks and to have serious engagement about assuring the international community that its nuclear capability is not being used for military purposes.
11. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the additional communications that have been held with Irish ambassadors since his re-call meeting of ambassadors in 2011; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15586/13]
In fulfilment of the commitment made in the programme for Government, a two-day conference of Ireland’s heads of mission abroad, entitled Promoting Ireland Abroad, was held in Dublin on 1-2 June 2011. The conference was designed to ensure the heads of mission were fully briefed on the Government’s new approach to promoting and marketing Ireland as a country in which to do business. This was in order to strengthen their capacity to continue their ongoing work in support of the effort to repair Ireland’s international reputation and it was an opportunity for the full team of senior overseas representatives, Irish business leaders and the heads of Irish economic agencies to share best practice in our international economic promotion activity.
The conference provided a valuable opportunity to renew the deep commitment of our diplomatic and consular representatives abroad to the challenging task of promoting Ireland’s interests and restoring our country to its rightful position of global authority and respect. A clear outcome of the conference was the determination that a united front of our embassies, State agencies, business organisations and private companies, working closely together, constitute a powerful force for advancing our interests at this crucial period for the country.
Since then, the Ministers of my Department and I have continued to engage intensively and on an ongoing basis with all ambassadors and embassy staff in promoting Ireland and ensuring our international reputation is restored. Last month I had a video conference with some of our key EU missions to express my thanks and appreciation for all the efforts by missions on the promissory notes issue. We have availed of every opportunity to promote Ireland’s interests, including those presented by trade missions, our chairmanship in office of the OSCE, preparation for and the ongoing Presidency of the Council of Ministers of the EU and the continuing work of building bilateral relations throughout the world. In this, I believe, we have been very successful.
I refer the Deputy to my Department's statement of strategy which sets out the challenges and opportunities from 2011 to 2014. In order to meet these challenges and to take advantage of the opportunities, the Department has been reorganised along a more geographic basis, with new regional units having lead responsibility for managing relations and affording our missions abroad the opportunity for greater input in policy making and coordination. Each regional unit now leads the business planning process for missions within its area. Consultations on business plans take place at the beginning of each year during which heads of division and heads of mission set out their priorities in the context of the Department's overall goals for the coming 12 months. Such consultations are facilitated by video-conferencing. I assure the Deputy that engagement with our ambassadors and our missions continues throughout the year on an ongoing basis and at all levels to ensure the assets of the State are put to best use and give citizens the service and the value for money they deserve.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Will he outline the configuration of the regional units? I presume it is on a geographic basis and takes economic and political interests into consideration as well. As the Minister noted, over the years, there has been, quite rightly and understandably, very close co-operation between representatives of statutory agencies and the diplomatic staff attached to our embassies abroad. That is a very practical and necessary approach, be it the IDA, Enterprise Ireland or Bord Bia that is working closely with officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in different capitals in particular.
In the odd instance, is it practical to consider assigning some diplomatic duties to personnel from statutory agencies where it is not possible to have diplomatic representation or staff and to have an even greater interaction between the duties and responsibilities of public service personnel? Perhaps Enterprise Ireland and the IDA do not have the resources or need to have a full-time official or officials in a particular location. Similarly, the Minister faces the challenges of trying to cover many areas. Is there scope to consider assignment of duties in practical situations to other members of the public service who are not necessarily members of the Department?
Deputy Smith asked me to outline the lead units in the Department. The Europe division is the lead unit for all 29 bilateral missions in Europe, as well as the permanent representation of Ireland to the European Union and the mission to the OECD and UNESCO. The Anglo-Irish division is the lead unit for 12 missions in the US, Canada, the UK and Australia, as well as the British-Irish Intergovernmental Secretariat in Belfast and the North-South Ministerial Conference in Armagh. The development co-operation division is the lead unit for ten missions in Africa and the embassy and aid programme in Vietnam. The Middle East unit is the lead unit for five missions in the Middle East, including the embassy in Cairo. The Asia Pacific unit is the lead unit for seven missions. The Latin America and Caribbean unit is the lead unit for three missions. The political division is the lead unit for four multilateral missions to the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the Council of Europe.
Deputy Smith raised the possible use of representatives from other Departments and State agencies who are abroad. I am examining how we might get a better overall use. If one takes the totality of those representing Ireland abroad, be they diplomats from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, representatives from individual Departments who have a particular representational role in some countries and areas and representatives of agencies, one can see we need to get a more co-ordinated and overall representation abroad. It is something we have been considering in the context of the Export Trade Council which has brought together not just my Department but representatives from other Departments and State agencies to co-ordinate and to give a single focus to our trade and investment strategy abroad.
I have one question relating to our ambassadors in African countries. The statistics relating to rape are frightening and appalling. According to statistics, a rape occurs every 48 seconds in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Can our ambassadors to certain African countries make representations to the governments concerned about the behaviour of their armies? While certain militias are responsible, there is no doubt that the national armies of certain African countries are also involved as a result of the lack of standards.
A significant human rights lawyer has been arrested in Zimbabwe. I ask if the Irish ambassador to South Africa could be present for her trial, because this could be very effective.
Ireland does not have an embassy in Iran, although our trade with Iran is growing. I ask the Minister to consider opening an embassy in that country.
I agree with the Minister. There is general agreement in the House with regard to greater co-ordination. I ask the Minister to provide further information on the business plan for the group of embassies. Is the business plan designed to support trade only? The difficulty may be that separate agencies such as Bord Bia and IDA Ireland are under the remit of different Departments. These are different fiefdoms and it would make sense if the ambassador to a country was the line manager. This would ensure greater co-ordination, rather than allowing people to pull in different directions. When does the Minister intend to introduce that plan?
On the issue raised by Deputy O'Sullivan and the horrendous reports of rape in a number of countries, Ireland takes a very active interest. Where necessary, our ambassadors and embassies undertake work in this regard. I discussed the issue recently with Michelle Bachelet, executive director of UN Women. We also have a very strong position on United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, which addresses the issue of the impact of conflict on women. It is a matter of great concern.
It is our policy to have country teams which bring together the embassy and the different trade agencies. The country teams, which are headed by the ambassador of each country, report back to the export trade council on the co-ordinated activity that is under way. I refer to some excellent examples such as the establishment in some countries of Ireland House, in which all the agencies are under one roof and work in close co-operation with each other.
Ireland has a relatively small footprint internationally but there is significant potential for growth in trade and attracting investment. There is also increased demand for consular services, as more Irish people are travelling to a range of countries, and for visa applications from people wishing to visit Ireland. I have been looking at how we can make the best use of the Department and the agencies in the context of Ireland's representation abroad, in all its facets, in a more co-ordinated and integrated way. I hope to bring proposals to the Government in the not-too-distant future.
I will allow the Minister to reply to Question No. 12 from Deputy Crowe, but we will not have time for supplementary questions.
12. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views on the reported position of the French Government, in relation to the reform of the European External Action Service, that there is a need to reinforce the EEAS's security and defence expertise; and if this was discussed at the informal meeting of the EU's Foreign Ministers in Dublin on 22 and 23 March. [15513/13]
Ireland is taking an active interest in the EEAS review, which was also the subject of discussions at the informal meeting of EU foreign Ministers which I co-hosted with the EU High Representative, Baroness Ashton, in Dublin last weekend. We support a strong European External Action Service that fulfils the vision set out in the Lisbon treaty of an effective and coherent EU foreign policy. The EEAS has achieved much in its first two years of operation. The review of the EEAS, combined with the imminent publication of the joint EEAS-Commission communication on the comprehensive approach, provides a good opportunity to strengthen the coherence and impact of the Union’s external actions.
The Common Security and Defence Policy, CSDP, as set out in the Lisbon treaty, is an integral part and operational arm of the Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy. The EEAS plays a central role in planning for and launching civilian and military CSDP missions. While the issue of CSDP expertise within the EEAS was not specifically addressed by Ministers in our discussion last weekend, it would be the view of most, if not all, member states that the EEAS should possess the necessary expertise to effectively perform the functions assigned to it, including in the field of CSDP. EU member states agree on the need to analyse and streamline the EU’s current procedures for responding to crises. At the same time, member states will wish to remain closely involved in decision-making relating to the deployment of individual CSDP missions, particularly as it is they who will be supplying the personnel involved.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.
I thank the Tánaiste. Pursuant to the Order of the House today, the Dáil is adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 16 April 2013. I wish you all a very happy Easter. I hope you all get your Easter eggs.
I hope the Ceann Comhairle receives his too.
Maybe some of us might get more than one.
