Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 20 Oct 2015

Vol. 893 No. 2

European Council: Statements

The meeting of the European Council which took place last Thursday dealt with several issues of importance to the European Union. Above all, it focused on the complex challenge of migration. It is clear that major problems remain on the ground. This has been underscored in the past few days. However, significant progress has been made in a short period. A structured and comprehensive approach is now in place to deal with the many urgent challenges that lie ahead. Last week's meeting began with short discussions on the five presidents' report on completing economic and monetary union and on the United Kingdom's plans for a referendum on EU membership. It was agreed that we will return to both issues in December. President Hollande made a presentation in advance of the global conference of the parties on climate change, which will open next month in Paris. The European Council also noted the publication of the international and independent report into the downing of flight MH17 over Ukraine. I have asked the Minister of State, Deputy Ó Ríordáin, to touch on elements of the discussions on Syria, climate change and Ukraine in his wrap-up remarks. As I have noted, the European Council spent an overwhelming amount of its time on migration. Therefore, I will begin by speaking about that issue.

The European Council has dealt with migration on a number of occasions this year, including in March, April, June and September. If further reminder of the scale of the challenge were needed, it came when the LE Samuel Beckett rescued 102 people off the coast of Libya on the morning of the Council meeting of 15 October. The achievements of the Naval Service in the past six months are a source of great pride for the Irish people. I know I speak for the entire House when I express our deep thanks and admiration for their wonderful work. Nevertheless, the challenge remains. The European Commission came forward with a comprehensive range of important proposals in September and October. They provided the framework for the Council’s discussions. Ireland has consistently argued that the Union’s efforts must be comprehensive and must balance practical measures with a compassionate response. Our calls for solidarity and responsibility are reflected in the Council’s conclusions, which aim towards a comprehensive strategy and a determined and sustained effort over time.

One of the central components of last week's discussions was the need to co-operate with third countries. Turkey is paramount in this regard. The Commission has accelerated co-operation in recent weeks. On the eve of the European Council, it negotiated an action plan which aims to support Turkey in its current challenge of hosting over 2 million refugees from Syria and to enlist its assistance in reducing migration flows. The Turkish Government has spent some €7 billion in this area. The European Council gave its support to the Commission by welcoming the action plan and signalling its openness to helping Turkey to work within existing frameworks towards visa liberalisation and a range of forms of enhanced political and economic co-operation. It was recognised that the accession process needs to be re-energised in accordance with the negotiating structures. The relevant Council conclusions which set out the accession procedures and criteria must also be respected. The Council underscored that the comprehensive co-operation agenda must be based on shared responsibility, mutual commitments and delivery on both sides. I do not think anyone is under any illusions about how challenging it will be for all concerned to achieve the substantive step-up in relations that is now envisaged. As Turkey plays a geographically and politically central role in its region and is an EU neighbour and candidate country, it is hard to imagine solutions to the current crisis that do not substantially involve it. Therefore, we hope rapid progress can be made over the coming period on the issues set out in the action plan.

Discussions also touched on the recent conference on the western Balkans migratory route and on the upcoming Valletta summit. This latter summit will aim to find agreement with African partners in a fair and balanced manner on how to tackle the root causes of the crisis, how to support development, how to provide for effective return and readmission and how to dismantle the criminal networks that are exploiting this situation and putting lives in danger. The European Council noted the importance of funding for international efforts to support refugees in Turkey and other countries. The WFP and the UNHCR were specifically mentioned in this regard. Ireland is a significant donor and partner to both of these organisations. The European Council also discussed strengthening and protecting the EU’s external borders. This was a matter of serious discussion. The measures discussed in this context dealt largely with building on the Schengen system and enhancing the borders agency, FRONTEX. Although it co-operates closely with its European partners, Ireland is not a member of the Schengen area or of FRONTEX. Many of the issues raised, such as the possibility of a European border and coast guard system, are for other member states to consider in the first instance.

When the Council looked at the response to the influx of refugees in Europe, there was a focus on contributing member state personnel to support FRONTEX and the European asylum support office in the so-called "hotspots", or emergency processing centres, in Greece and Italy. Ireland recently decided to commit six experts to the European asylum support office. Preparations are under way for their training and eventual deployment to the member states where they can be of most assistance. The Council did not discuss any specific further relocation initiative, but instead resolved to keep the whole issue under review. The Commission has proposed a permanent relocation system. Under Protocol 21 to the Lisbon treaty, Ireland can choose whether to opt in to relocation measures. As this House knows, we have agreed to accept approximately 2,450 people on relocation within the EU. However, there is no obligation on us to participate in further relocation decisions if they are proposed. Ireland will monitor the situation carefully with a view to considering any further national response as and when the issue arises.

There was also some discussion of the Dublin system under which asylum seekers are supposed to register and make applications in the first EU country they enter. This is a cornerstone of the whole common European asylum system and Ireland strongly supports it. It is clear that it has been under intolerable strain in the face of the immense pressure of recent weeks and months, but equally there is a view that much can be done to improve its operation and that any reform must be carefully analysed before change is contemplated. Again, this is a matter to which I am sure we will return on the basis of European Commission analysis and proposals.

The Council discussion also included a consideration of the political and military developments in Syria which have such a dominating impact on migration. I want to draw attention to the Council’s clear statement that the Assad regime bears the greatest responsibility for the 250,000 deaths and the displacement of millions from Syria. There are, of course, other actors such as UN-designated terrorist groups who bear responsibility as well but in the end it will only be a political process on the basis of the Geneva Communique of 2012 that will move matters towards a resolution. The EU remains fully engaged in working to find a political solution in close co-operation with the UN, with special representative Staffan de Mistura and with the countries of the region. I would reiterate again, as the European Council did, that there cannot be a lasting peace in Syria under the current leadership and until the legitimate grievances and aspirations of all components of Syrian society are addressed. In the context of discussing regional conflicts, the European Council also noted developments in Libya and called on all parties to swiftly endorse the agreement negotiated by Bernadino León. The EU stands ready to provide political and financial support to the Libyan Government of national accord as soon as it takes office.

I would like to recall again that Ireland has been active in ongoing efforts to tackle the migration crisis. The Government and the Oireachtas have voluntarily agreed to accept around 4,000 asylum seekers and refugees under resettlement and relocation programmes. This is well in excess of any notional quota that might have been attributed to us by the European Commission. This includes 520 refugees whom we have offered to resettle from refugee camps, some of whom have now started arriving in Ireland. Approximately 2,450 people will be relocated from Italy and Greece and possibly other member states under the Commission proposals from June and September. A further 1,030 people will be taken on resettlement or relocation, with the final breakdown between these two categories still under consideration. As I noted earlier, we have deployed a naval vessel and full crew in the Mediterranean since June; initially the LE Eithne, then the LE Niamh and now the LE Samuel Beckett. The total number of people rescued by our naval vessels since May now comes to 7,848 and I commend the Naval Service again on its very admirable work.

The European Council discussions touched upon the work of two UN agencies. This year, Ireland’s core funding to the UN refugee agency, the UNHCR, came to €5.8 million. Furthermore, at the start of September, we committed to doubling our annual contribution to the World Food Programme from €10 million to €20 million per annum for the next three years. We also provide other supports to areas most affected by instability and conflict. By the end of 2015, Ireland will have provided a total of €41 million over the last four years towards assisting those displaced as a result of the Syrian crisis. The Irish Government provides over €80 million each year to humanitarian relief efforts around the world. So far in 2015, Ireland’s targeted humanitarian funding has reached people in countries such as Iraq, South Sudan, Somalia, the Central African Republic and Yemen. All of these measures have been supported by a swift response at home led by the Department of Justice and Equality. The establishment of the Irish refugee protection programme and a new inter-departmental task force, chaired by the Minister for Justice and Equality, are important steps in the Government’s contribution to this crisis.

I would now like to turn to the issue of the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Union. As expected, at last week’s meeting President Tusk provided Heads of State and Government with a brief update on the progress of the technical work that has been under way in Brussels between British and EU officials since June. In addition, he outlined how the process will advance in the weeks ahead before the European Council returns to this issue in December. Much of the recent focus has been on the need to move forward to more detailed debate on concrete issues. I welcome, therefore, Prime Minister Cameron’s undertaking last week to write to President Tusk in early November setting out the reforms that Britain will seek. This should provide a basis for the UK’s EU partners to engage more fully with the issues and to allow for collective discussion. Ireland will play a full part in this process, which is expected to start at senior official level, and I look forward to discussions at the December European Council.

As I have said many times in this House and in other fora, the matter of the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Union is one of real national importance for Ireland. Indeed, this issue is a strategic priority for the Government. In my own discussions with Prime Minister Cameron, I have been unequivocal about how much value we attach to the fact that both our countries are members of the European Union. Given the importance of the issue, it is worth stressing once again just how closely developments are being monitored. In addition to my own discussions with Prime Minister Cameron, there are regular meetings between Government Ministers and their British equivalents. Indeed, the Minister of State with responsibility for European Affairs will meet with his British counterpart this Friday. At official level, the engagement is equally regular, with officials in my Department, our permanent representation in Brussels and our embassy in London in frequent contact with British and other colleagues. In all of these exchanges we remain clear and consistent on our position that Ireland will be open and pragmatic. We are mindful of specific UK concerns and we will be supportive where we can be but we are also fully conscious of our own national interests and of the views of other member states. During the next phase of the discussions, Ireland will work constructively with the British Government and all our EU partners. Our common goal remains the same, to find a consensual basis for the UK’s continued membership of our Union.

Given the European Council's focus on the pressing migration issue, there was only a very brief consideration of the report by President Juncker and the heads of other institutions on completing the Economic and Monetary Union, EMU. The completion of banking union is a vital part of the EMU process but, disappointingly from Ireland’s perspective, there was no specific reference to this in the final conclusions. On the report itself, several member states from outside the euro area were keen to have it spelled out that future EMU debate must take place in an open and transparent manner and in full respect of the Single Market. We would sympathise with and support this approach which was reflected in the conclusions. The European Council is to revert to the issue of EMU in December. We very much favour a pragmatic and gradual approach which focuses in the first instance on steps that can be taken to more effectively implement existing instruments. The Commission is expected to publish a first set of concrete proposals this week and it is expected that these will address reinforcing the economic governance framework, including an in-depth review of the six pack and two pack and reorganising the European semester, as well as on the external representation of the euro area at the IMF and other international organisations. We look forward to examining these proposals in detail when they are published and as they are considered by Finance Ministers.

Many commentators have suggested that it will be our response to the massive waves of people who are now seeking refuge within our borders that defines what the Union will become in the years ahead. I recall that the EU was born from adversity and has always managed to survive it. While the solutions which are negotiated between 28 separate individual member states are often complex and while progress can be slow and difficult, I have great faith that with solidarity, responsibility and compassion, we will again manage to guide the Union to a prosperous and stable future.

After years of unprecedented financial and economic crises, the European Union is today dealing with the largest humanitarian crisis it has ever faced. However, its leaders continue to fail the basic test of responding with urgency, imagination and generosity. This summit slightly nudged along a response but achieved little else. With winter closing in and people about to be caught in desperate circumstances as border after border is being closed to them, what was needed was an agreement to do whatever it takes to help them. This did not happen and therefore the summit has to be seen as a failure. The fact that hundreds of thousands of people are risking everything to seek shelter in Europe shows that it is still seen as a place of hope and safety for many.

While the basic values of Europe are under attack in many places, they remain an inspiration for others. The last thing we can do is allow the values of extremists to triumph. We cannot allow them to make us fail in our obligation to do all that we can.

The Council President, Mr. Donald Tusk, has done good work in identifying the different elements which need to be addressed to provide a comprehensive response to the crisis. Unfortunately, other leaders have been willing to identify the problems but unwilling to commit to the solutions. There is a refugee crisis because millions of people are fleeing vicious conflicts. They do not want to be refugees but want to live in their own homes. The worst impact has come from the war in Syria, which was started by President Assad through his determination to hold power at all costs. The early resistance to him was overwhelmingly from moderate communities, which have borne the brunt of his savage repression. They offered talks, built coalitions of moderate forces and tried to find an end to the misery faced by the Syrian people. In response, they experienced some of the most brutal actions ever undertaken by a state against its citizens. The use of chemical weapons and the systematic clearing of cities caused millions to flee to neighbouring countries.

The Assad regime has been a client state of, first, the Soviet Union and now Russia for nearly half a century. The efforts of some, both here and elsewhere, to claim the United States and Europe are responsible for the war are ridiculous and show again their double standards. The emergence of the ISIS group has made the position worse. It represents no one but the most fanatical religious hard-liners who are seeking to ethnically cleanse the entire region. The systematic expulsion and murder of Christian communities and other religious minorities and the brutality shown towards non-Sunni Muslims are something most of us thought belonged to a different era.

It says something very significant about both Assad and his Russian military backers that the majority of their effort is going into attacking the moderate opposition, rather than ISIS. The Fianna Fáil Party strongly agrees with the basic position of the European Union that there can be no long-term peace with Assad in place. There is too much blood on his hands and he has rejected too many opportunities to end the conflict for him to be a credible leader of a people which has never fully supported him. No one has yet come up with a credible route forward, especially given Russia's ongoing veto threat against any United Nations resolution which could threaten Assad's position. The first priority must be to continue the search for a way through this, achieve an agreed international position for a transition in Syria and create a united front against the barbarism of ISIS. However, the most immediate concern must be the millions of people in camps in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. Every person in these camps who is capable of leaving is rightly considering doing so. They offer shelter but little else. Even basic employment and education services are not available and medical facilities cover little more than the bare minimum.

I welcome the call by the Council on member states to give more as it also recognises the problem. The appalling budget deal means the European Union simply does not have the resources to step change its response. It is, therefore, up to member states to do so. We need an urgent commitment by states to give whatever it takes to bring facilities in the refugee camps up to basic standards and to do so before the full force of winter sets in. The Government has spent the past week talking about how we have the opportunity to be generous. Let us show generosity by taking the lead and immediately announcing a major increase in support for the Syrian refugee camps.

For those who have decided to seek refuge in Europe, the immediate danger is now acute. As we could all see from television reports yesterday, the weather is causing an acute crisis on the European Union's south-eastern borders. There is no alternative to the core principle of solidarity and sharing responsibility between members. Ireland must continue to reject the base populism of extremists and accept its shared role in helping the people concerned. If there is no material improvement in the position in the next fortnight, Ireland should seek to have an emergency summit called. There is no more time to waste.

The summit's conclusions are vague on the deal being discussed with Turkey on seeking to prevent people from leaving camps in Turkey to travel to Europe. As I stated, making conditions in the refugee camps bearable is an essential first step. However, the idea that membership of the European Union, or at least access to core policies, should be bartered away in an emergency is not acceptable. If leaders go too far, there will be an inevitable public backlash.

Just as important is the issue of whether the European Union is agreeing to turn a blind eye to all actions by the Turkish Government in return for help. As I stated previously, the position in Turkey is of great concern. A drift away from essential democratic norms is evident in a number of important areas. These include the pressure on independent media and a growing indifference to minority rights. The Turkish Government appears to have been eager to escalate the conflict with the PKK and has pushed aside earlier, highly encouraging progress towards peaceful reconciliation. Our sympathies should go out to all those affected by the bombing in Ankara, which was directed against a democratic peaceful movement dedicated to finding a place for the Kurdish people in Turkey. Whatever is ultimately proposed as an agreement with Turkey, it must be based on humanitarian and democratic principles.

A clear failure of the summit was its backing away from an essential component of the much needed banking union. The lack of a shared regulation and resourcing of banks in the eurozone has been identified as one of the causes of the financial crisis which ultimately caused so much economic damage. The creation of a banking union has been agreed as an absolute requirement of learning the lessons of the past and returning the eurozone to secure long-term growth. Unfortunately, the Taoiseach and his colleagues have tried to muddle through with a policy which leaves in place key weaknesses. To maintain confidence in the banking sector and its ability to lend to businesses and the community, a credible deposit guarantee mechanism is required. In the context of the eurozone, the experiences of Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Cyprus have shown that the required confidence will only be established if guarantees extend beyond national economies. This is one of the only ways of breaking the implied link between financial and sovereign debt. The draft conclusions for last week's summit included a strong statement about a common deposit guarantee system. In the face of inflexible resistance from Germany, however, this was removed and replaced with a banal statement about something being done at some point in future. This is foolish in the extreme and undermines the very idea of a banking union.

As a result of German resistance, we have a regulatory framework which does not extend to many systematically important banking sectors. We have a recapitalisation fund which covers a tiny fraction of potential need and we now have a deposit insurance system which is basically the current failed model in new clothes. We are nearing the end of the entire process of reform of economic and monetary union and the outcome is not encouraging. There is no provision for fiscal transfers between states at times of need, no credible banking union and only a limited lender of last resort. Not one of the identified weaknesses which led to the crisis has been addressed. Instead, we have more talk about fiscal control as if this was the answer to everything. Unfortunately, Government policy has been solely driven by short-term domestic politics. The Government has not set out a policy on the necessary reforms, has refused to ask for relief for debts incurred by Ireland as a result of what are now accepted to have been failures of European policies and has instead encouraged the view that Ireland was to blame for everything.

Statements on European Council meetings will probably not be held more than once or twice before the next general election. It would be worthwhile for the Taoiseach to take time to examine the overblown rhetoric he used in previous contributions. He should look at how often he spoke of everything being fine and described issues that are still in crisis as having been sorted. He will see a Government that ignores what it said in its first years. Let us not forget the billions of euro in retrospective recapitalisation the Taoiseach told us he would apply for before quietly abandoning that position without explanation. Let us not forget his claim that Europe had been reformed and all was fine. Let us not forget that instead of going to Europe with a clear agenda, time after time his only approach has been to wait to see what was agreed and then claim it as a great victory.

That is how he returned from one summit: claiming to have moved mountains to win a major interest rate reduction for Ireland when, in truth, he had asked for one quarter of what Greece secured and which was automatically extended to Ireland without discussion. Time and again, other countries negotiated while the Taoiseach sat back with a public relations team ready to spin.

The Taoiseach's relationship with the UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, has delivered nothing discernible for Ireland. Their joint approach to Northern Ireland has been hands-off and, therefore, very damaging. On Europe, it has meant meetings which were long on rhetoric and devoid of detail. Five years after Mr. Cameron's announcement that he wanted an in-or-out referendum and two years after the renegotiation of British membership of the European Union was launched, we still have not heard from the British what they actually want. We have not heard from our Government what we are willing to support. It appears that the Prime Minister was finally forced last week to agree to say what he is looking for. The first demand is for an opt-out from the concept of ever-closer union. This is part of the treaties which has no specific legal effect and is of no concern. The second demand is for an explicit statement that the union is a multi-currency union. This is intended to separate the workings of the Union from those of the eurozone. In practice, this could be very damaging. The completion of a real fiscal and banking union requires a central entity to develop, enforce and administer policies. This can only credibly be the institutions of the European Union. What we urgently need in this regard is a proposal for the long-term governance of the eurozone, without which the British idea is risky at best. The third demand is for a means to re-nationalise areas that have been subject to joint decisions within the Union. If this is a Trojan horse for the Tory agenda of removing basic worker protections and other regulations implementing equality and safety policies, we should not accept it. Finally, there is a general demand to protect the City of London and give it guaranteed access to all eurozone opportunities. This is basically Britain saying that eurozone countries must bear all constraints of membership but share all the opportunities. This is of particular concern for Ireland, as the return of certain euro markets to the eurozone is standard policy and one from which we might significantly benefit.

Taken together, the list is a vague one that is more about English nationalist concerns than improving the European Union for other member states or even other parts of the United Kingdom. Britain's remaining in the European Union is important for Ireland, but not at any price. We need to know exactly what it is looking for and we need a debate on how far it is in our national interest and the interest of the European Union as a whole to make concessions.

I endorse the Taoiseach's commendation of the Naval Service, most recently in respect of the crew of the LE Samuel Beckett, who rescued 102 people on 15 October. Tá siad ag déanamh sárobair. Táimidne uilig agus tá muintir na hÉireann fíorbhuíoch agus fíorbhródúil as na mná agus na fir ar an long seo.

Before the last European Council meeting, I raised the ongoing refugee crisis with the Taoiseach. As his statement outlines, that dominated the Council meeting. It is worth repeating that we are in exceptional times. In the face of such a humanitarian crisis, our collective response must go above and beyond the bare minimum. Hungary has now sealed its border with Croatia and thousands of refugees are stranded in inhuman and dangerous conditions, as Slovenia has limited the numbers it will allow in. In human terms, this means that men, women and children who are literally fleeing for their lives are stuck in freezing and wet conditions as winter approaches. The congress of the European People's Party, EPP, will take place on Wednesday and Thursday in Madrid. I do not know if the Taoiseach is attending that cruinniú. If so, will he discuss Hungary's criminalisation of refugees with Hungary's Prime Minister, who is a fellow member of the EPP group? Will the Taoiseach condemn his atrocious comments that refugees are terrorists and that somehow Hungary is defending Christian or European ideals by criminalising refugees? I am sure that, as a decent man, the Taoiseach does not subscribe to these baser instincts.

Slovenia and Croatia have both indicated that they will keep the present corridor open as long as Austria and Germany keep their doors open, but it is clear that EU states are incapable of formulating a common and humane position despite facing the worst refugee crisis since the Second World War. More than 615,000 people, most of them Syrians, have reached Europe so far this year, compared to just over 200,000 for the whole of 2014. More than 475,000 people made it to Greece from Turkey in 2015. Despite these figures, the EU has agreed to resettle only 160,000 refugees so far. This is not good enough. It is unacceptable, and EU governments need to show greater leadership. We have witnessed violent demonstrations by far-right elements and attacks on refugee centres in some EU states. Over the weekend, a candidate for the mayoralty of Cologne, who works with refugees and has promoted policies which would assist them, was stabbed in the neck. I have heard that she is in a serious but increasingly stable condition and has won the election. I wish her a speedy recovery. Additionally, an Afghan man trying to make his way into Bulgaria last week was shot by border guards and killed. This must be the first time in a very long time that an EU border guard has shot and killed a refugee attempting to enter the EU.

Before the Council meeting, I asked the Taoiseach to argue for a humane and moral approach to the refugee crisis. However, the conclusions of the meetings do not represent such a position. The only agreement seems to be one to provide Turkey with €3 billion in aid, ease visa restrictions for Turkish nationals, and offer a prospect of granting Turkey safe-country-of-origin status in return for that state's co-operation. This completely ignores Turkey's deplorable human rights record, especially against Kurds, and Turkey's own role in the Syrian conflict. Additionally, the EU's support for the Turkish Government is a political boost for the AK party ahead of the elections in Turkey on 1 November. Peace rallies have been attacked by suicide bombers, most recently in Ankara, when 102 people lost their lives. Our sympathy is with them and their families. Some say the Turkish Government is deliberately failing to provide adequate protection for these rallies. We must be mindful that many of the refugees fleeing Turkey are Kurds and that sending them back, as appears to be contemplated, could allow for major human rights violations. The EU is offering a carrot to the Government of Turkey and a stick to refugees. This is not a morally sustainable position.

Before the Council meeting, my colleague Deputy Seán Crowe raised with the Taoiseach the issues in Palestine and Israel. I see nothing in the meeting's agreed conclusions to indicate that this was raised by the Taoiseach as requested by my colleague. Did the Taoiseach raise that issue? If not, why not? If so, what was the consequence? The death toll from political conflict in this region is rising and Israel is continuing to seal off neighbourhoods in occupied east Jerusalem. While the Palestinian question may sometimes be submerged by the awfulness of other crises in the region, it remains a constant. It is constant in terms of the suffering of the people involved and in terms of the destabilising effect that this unresolved issue between the people of Israel and the people of Palestine has on the wider region. The Israeli Government is using violence against Arab residents while continuing military operations across the West Bank and Gaza.

According to the UN, last week was the deadliest for Palestinians in the West Bank and Israel in ten years. Thousands of people have been injured by live and plastic bullets and hundreds have been arrested for protesting. The Palestinian people need international protection as the situation in occupied Palestine deteriorates at an alarming rate. I have been there and talked to some of the older people in its civic society. They believed that they were losing influence over their younger people. They almost predicted what is now happening. Will the Taoiseach raise the blatant violations of international law and human rights that we are witnessing with his European counterparts? Will he call for immediate international protection for the Palestinian people who are living under this violent and brutal occupation?

As my colleague, an Teachta Adams, has spoken at length about the refugee crisis, I will not reiterate his comments. However, I wish to stress the urgency of an agreed humane and united solution. The world was shocked and shamed into action after photographs of Aylan Kurdi's dead body were shown around the globe. We promised that no more children seeking refuge would die as he did, yet four people, three of them children, drowned after their boat sank off the Greek coast last Saturday. According to reports, 44 children died at sea trying to cross the Mediterranean last month, but none of them made the world headlines. While European countries differ and argue, children are drowning in the Mediterranean. The collective failure of the EU to stop children who are running for their lives from dying on its doorstep is a horrible reflection of its priorities.

This is not just a refugee crisis, but a crisis of humanity. There is no easy solution to it. There is no magic formula. However, the core solution is to end the war in Syria. Europe wrongly believed that it could contain the war in Syria, that some countries could support its rebels, that these could topple Assad's government and that there would be no consequences for Europe. It continued with this even as the war grew more violent and deadly. It largely turned a blind eye when millions of people escaped to Lebanon, Jordan and Syria seeking refuge. All sides continued to fail to do anything concrete to end the war. Now, more and more refugees are fleeing to Europe as the conditions in Syria and neighbouring countries deteriorate further. Despite repeated urgent appeals, the UN has only received 43% of the funds that it needs to respond to the humanitarian crisis in Syria. The situation has become so bad that the World Food Programme has been forced to cut rations for refugees in Jordan and Lebanon. This issue needs to be to the forefront of the political agenda in Europe. European leaders cannot pander to those who seek to divide and spread fear and hate. All international efforts must be made to resolve the conflict in Syria, not escalate it.

Was the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, TTIP, discussed at the European Council meeting? It seems like a significant issue to leave off the table. Mr. John Hilary, the executive director of the campaign group War on Want, which has been vocal on the threats that TTIP presents, met the European Commissioner for trade, Ms Cecilia Malmström, to discuss it recently. According to reports, when challenged on why she insisted on continuing with the TTIP negotiations when so many EU citizens were against it, the Commissioner stated: "I do not take my mandate from the European people." Is the Taoiseach concerned that the Commissioner for trade, who is negotiating a large agreement that will have an impact on Europe's democratic institutions, environmental standards, workers' rights and the future of the agricultural sector, is not taking her mandate from the people? It should come as no surprise, given that almost all of the documents and details of the negotiations are kept secret and those that have been released have only become public through leaks or pressure from bodies such as the European Ombudsman. Some other documents have been released but are kept in a secret reading room that only some MEPs can enter upon signing an agreement that they will never divulge what they read, and after having their mobile telephones, papers and pens confiscated. A security official even stays in the room while an MEP is present, and these are only some of the documents. The rest are still top secret and kept under lock and key. This is undemocratic. TTIP's potential effects are too important and dangerous for details to be kept from European citizens. Will the Taoiseach stand up for democracy, transparency and the rights of Irish citizens and demand that the TTIP negotiating documents be made public?

The European Council has given the Commission a mandate to negotiate TTIP, yet hundreds of thousands of citizens are mobilising against it. Eleven days ago, nearly 250,000 people marched against TTIP in Berlin. More than 3 million people in Europe have signed a petition against the deal. Surely in the face of such opposition the Council should seek a suspension of the negotiations. Will the Taoiseach listen to the people of Ireland and the EU and join in the call for a suspension?

As my colleague, an Teachta Adams, mentioned, the congress of the European People's Party, EPP, begins in Madrid tomorrow. A leaked version of a new declaration to be launched at the congress states that the EU should move towards the creation of a common army. Is this the Taoiseach's position? Is this the formal position of Fine Gael, or will the Taoiseach seek to change such a declaration? This and successive Fianna Fáil Governments have notoriously undermined Irish neutrality, but is the Taoiseach formally agreeing with his right-wing European colleagues that there should be a standing European army? It is no wonder that the Government failed to support a neutrality Bill proposed by my colleague, an Teachta Crowe, that would have necessitated a referendum to enshrine neutrality in Bunreacht na hÉireann, thereby giving the Irish people a say on the issue. Sinn Féin will continue opposing the further militarisation of the EU, the EPP's efforts to create a standing army and the erosion of Irish neutrality.

Next is Deputy Boyd Barrett, who I understand is sharing time with Deputies Mick Wallace and Maureen O'Sullivan.

Apparently, Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan will not be present.

As the refugee crisis unfolded, someone told me that the tears of sympathy would soon dry up and policy in the EU would revert to type. That is starting to happen. The barriers are being raised again against refugees who are fleeing desperate circumstances. Fortress Europe is being re-established.

There are many aspects to this issue, but something that was of concern in the European Council's discussions was the talk of enlarging the mandate of FRONTEX. That mandate and FRONTEX's resources have increased exponentially in recent years. I wonder about FRONTEX and its approach to desperate people fleeing desperate circumstances. Its record is not good. I will cite a few instances. Recently, inflatable dinghies carrying refugees on the River Evros at the Turkish-Greek border were shot at by FRONTEX. Border officials have also stated that German police stationed there were involved in incidents in which refugee boats were shot at. In 2012, a Spanish patrol boat co-ordinated by FRONTEX and travelling at great speed off Lanzarote deliberately overran a refugee boat that had 25 people on board who were waiting to be picked up by the coast guard. Seven refugees were killed. In 2011, 63 refugees died of thirst after being at sea for 15 days in the Mediterranean even though FRONTEX and NATO ships that were involved in the assault on Libya at the time were aware of their presence.

In recent days, a refugee boat was shelled by Libyan soldiers or militia.

This raises the question as to what precisely FRONTEX is doing when mandated to go into the countries of origin of some of the refugees with the aim of what is described as stemming the flow of refugees. I am deeply concerned, and there is widespread criticism, that there is no transparency in FRONTEX. We cannot get real information about what it is doing but its record is not good. As we further expand its mandate, it is not clear precisely what it is doing. Certainly, signs are that Europe is trying by various means to close the door further on desperate people looking for refuge in Europe.

A particularly worrying example of this is the attempt to offload the problem onto Turkey and to co-operate with the Turkish regime. The Turkish regime has an appalling record on treating some of its own minority groups, especially the Kurds. It is widely believed Mr. Erdogan and the deep state in Turkey are behind the recent bombing directed at peaceful protesters in Turkey, yet it seems we are willing to do deals with, co-operate with and give resources to the Turkish regime, which has a very questionable record on human rights within its own borders and on the treatment of its own people. This is because we want to keep the problem out of Europe.

This speaks to the fundamental problem. I heard Deputy Martin state earlier — I presume he was directing his comments at some of us on the left — that it was completely wrong to blame Western policy for the rise of ISIS or the conditions that led refugees to flee from north Africa, Syria and Iraq to Europe. Of course, the Deputy could not be more wrong on that. The Turkish example highlights this.

In one way or another, Europe consistently co-operates and trades with, talks to and supports ruthless, vicious, despotic, brutal regimes right across the north African and Middle Eastern region. Now we are co-operating with Mr. Erdogan. We have done so with successive regimes in Iraq and are doing so with Israel in terms of its brutal persecution of the Palestinian people.

Another important example concerns the el-Sisi regime in Egypt, which is engaged in a vicious campaign of persecution, oppression, mass imprisonment and execution of its political opponents, to the extent that an election took place in the country in which there was no electorate. Nobody is voting. Some 16% of the electorate turned out for the elections in Egypt because no ordinary Egyptian believes they are anything other than a sham and rigged. They believe the el-Sisi regime is a brutal dictatorship, yet we are doing beef business with Mr. el-Sisi, and the Taoiseach recently met him. No voices are being raised in Europe about what Mr. el-Sisi is doing to his own people and the political opposition in his country. Similarly, no voices are being raised demanding sanctions against Israel for what it is doing, including in respect of the escalation in the number being thrown out of their homes in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. I include the Palestinians who have been killed by Israelis and settlers since the beginning of this month. No serious voices are being raised over these matters.

What does this do? Is it any wonder that against the background of Western hypocrisy and co-operation with these brutal regimes, people are driven into the hands of extremist groups such as ISIS? In some cases, we are actually doing business with regimes that finance groups such as ISIS. We must first show compassion and allow people into this Continent who need refuge. We must not try to stop people. Also, we need to change our hypocritical policy on dealing with the brutal regimes in the areas from which the refugees are fleeing.

I did not hear Deputy Martin make the statement that the current refugee crisis has nothing to do with Western policy. That is an amazing statement. I do not believe for a second that the Minister of State, Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, would agree with that. I believe he would have a more open-minded approach than to come up with that notion.

The refugee crisis in Europe has been incredible. It is outrageous if we do not try to determine why it has happened. Of the 60 million people who have been displaced, 33 million have been displaced by war. Never in the history of mankind have so many munitions been manufactured. Never in the history of mankind have so many munitions been sold. Never in the history of mankind has so much ammunition been poured into the Middle East. In 2012, Europe alone sanctioned €9.5 billion worth of arms for the Middle East. This figure pales into insignificance by comparison with the value of the arms the Americans have sent to the region. It is totally disingenuous if we pretend this does not have an impact. When one drops bombs on people's houses, there is a fairly good chance they will move because they have no house left to live in. Obviously, the Western powers are not the only ones dropping bombs. Russia is just as culpable and Iran does not help the situation. Surely we should be able to adopt a neutral position and wash our hands of the whole lot of them and say that under no circumstances should we have anything to do with anyone who uses munitions, including bombs and guns, to settle disputes. This is because we are not innocent.

A considerable number of military planes have been refuelling in Shannon. We wonder whether they are on their way to war zones to refuel fighter jets. Many of the planes are currently engaged in ongoing aerial refuelling sorties in support of Saudi-led bombings in Yemen. One hardly hears Yemen being discussed. If one turns on one's television tonight, it is unlikely that it will be mentioned. Nobody is interested in talking about it here. Since March, 2,300 civilians have been killed in Yemen, 400 of whom were children. It is a mad war. The Saudis could not even carry it out without the United States, and they have the United Kingdom to support them as well. What is occurring in Yemen is mindless. Refugees are being created every hour there but no one seems to be interested. The United States and United Kingdom are giving munitions and logistical support to those concerned. The United States is selling to the Saudi-led forces cluster bombs, which are banned in most countries. It is selling cluster bombs to drop and US-made fighter planes are being used to drop them, and we are okay with that. We are not giving out about it to those responsible.

We are still allowing US military planes to pass through Shannon.

We still give permits for civilian aircraft to come from America with arms. We have not seen yet what they have allowed in 2015, but in 2014, serious amounts of munitions came through Shannon and went to the Saudis. We give out about ISIS, and so we should; they are a mad lot. However, does the Minister of State realise that in the first half of 2015, the Saudi Arabian Government cut off the heads of 102 people, and still we have no problem trading with it? I do not understand that. If it does not matter what someone does because it has nothing to do with trade, we might as well sell them to everyone and facilitate all war efforts. When will an Irish Government have the courage to say that while it likes doing business with America and it is great that American companies come here and provide jobs - although it is unfortunate that they do not pay much tax - we do not want them using Shannon as a military air base to travel on and kill many people in the Middle East?

More than 2.5 million troops have come through Shannon since 2001. The Americans do not do body counts but a reputable organisation in America did one recently. It set out to count the number of civilians, not people carrying guns, who were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan alone by American military hardware since 2001. The figure is 2.1 million, and we help them do it because we do not search the military planes but give permits for the civilian planes to carry such hardware. The Minister does not need me to remind him, but when the Labour Party was in opposition it wanted those planes searched. Why does it not want them searched now?

We now have 20 minutes for questions from the parties in opposition. I call Deputy Martin. I ask the Deputy to be brief so that I can go to the Minister of State for a response and allow more time for questions.

Very good. My first question is about the summit meeting and the Government's view on the position of the Hungarian Government, which, from the outset of this refugee crisis, has been seen to be, to put it mildly, very much removed from the core values of the European Union. The action and the language articulated by the Prime Minister of Hungary and the sense of putting up the wall to stop genuine refugees fleeing war seems to fly completely in the face of the Geneva Convention and strains the idea of European Union solidarity to its very core. It seems there has been a reluctance on behalf of the Government to call it as it is. I do not get a sense of that within the European Union summits or the various meetings that have taken place. I accept that people have to focus on helping the refugees, but Hungary seems to have set a standard and a pattern that has been very negative in terms of the way the crisis is unfolding, and particularly how Europe's response to the crisis is unfolding.

My second question relates to the Irish State's support for the camps in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. As I said earlier, the European Union budget was so restrictive that it has reduced the capacity of the Union as a whole to make substantial provision to improve the quality of life in those camps. If we did that, it could reduce the need for people to leave the camps for a better quality of life. Very basic services are not up to standard. I accept that those countries have taken in millions of people. How much funding to date have we given to the camps in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey? Have we a figure for that? Is the Government considering providing a much greater level of financial support, over and above what we have done to date, to those camps to reduce the numbers fleeing into Europe and to try to improve the overall quality of life, given the difficulty at a European Union budgetary level? The Taoiseach gave a general figure of approximately €5 million to the UNHCR, but I take it that is ongoing Irish Aid funding. What is required is an out-of-the-ordinary allocation to deal with the quality of life in the camps.

With regard to the Turkish situation, is the Minister of State comfortable that we should barter EU membership or access to core policies in return for Turkey's acquiescence in facilitating a better quality of life in the camps? There is a major geopolitical issue here in terms of Turkey and the European Union, but in more recent times, Turkey's attitude to an independent media, for example, has been worrying. There is a drift from democratic norms within Turkey, with very little regard for minority rights and so forth.

Comments were made earlier that I ignored any role of responsibility on the part of Western powers, the EU or the United States in the Middle East. That is not an accurate depiction of what I said, but I stand over what I said in terms of the reluctance of many to criticise Russia's role in supporting the Assad regime. There is a tendency in this House to always blame the US to the exclusion of anybody else. Deputy Wallace spreads the blame around, but there is always a tendency here to do that. On a range of issues - the partition of Ukraine by the Russians and so on - there is an extraordinary silence on the part of Sinn Féin. Obviously, it is developing a very strong relationship with the Russian authorities.

Deputy, to be fair, I have to call other people as well.

On the banking union-----

The Deputy is talking about officials-----

That was the case, but-----

(Interruptions).

The completion of the banking union is a vital part of the EMU process. The Taoiseach said the outcome of the meeting from Ireland's perspective was disappointing in that there was no specific reference to this in the final conclusions of the summit. Apparently, there was a strong statement in the draft conclusions about a common deposit guarantee system and then, in the face of inflexible resistance from Germany, that was removed and replaced with a banal statement. Can the Minister confirm that?

I call the Minister of State and ask him to be as brief as possible to allow other Deputies to put questions.

Quite a number of issues have been raised.

In regard to Hungary, many of the comments from Hungary have upset people, including many Irish people, considering that, in the 1950s in particular, Ireland reached out the hand of friendship to Hungarian refugees. The official position is that it is not helpful in a European context to comment on a position adopted by any particular partner because each member state will have its own national challenges and concerns from its own perspective. We should understand that, just as we expect Irish views to be respected by others. However, all actions by the authorities in any member state should respect and reflect the high human rights standards we have in Europe.

I hear the Deputy's comments in regard to Turkey. Turkey is a hugely important partner for all of us in the European Union, a point that has come into even sharper focus as we formulate our collective response to the current crisis. It plays a geographically and politically central role in its region, and as an EU neighbour and candidate country. It is currently host to well over 2 million refugees; therefore, it is hard to imagine solutions to the crisis which do not involve it substantially.

The importance of the EU and Turkey working together was clearly recognised in a joint EU-Turkey action plan, which was welcomed at the European Council last Thursday. No one is under any illusion that it would be anything less than challenging to step up our co-operation, but it is important to engage with Turkey and to help bring about change in that country. Many of the issues the Deputy raised are relevant. We hope that rapid progress can be made over the coming period on the issues set out in the action plan.

It is worth recalling that Turkey is an EU candidate country which has been in accession negotiations since December 2004. Fourteen out of 34 chapters have been opened for negotiation, of which one has been provisionally closed. We must also remember that enlargement is a conditional process. The October European Council endorsed the action plan and called for the accession negotiations to be re-energised. However, this will only be in accordance with a negotiating framework and the relevant Council conclusions.

Our funding for refugee camps is handled mainly through the UNHCR World Food Programme. We have already decided to donate an additional €30 million to our core funding over the next three years. We are also actively considering additional contributions in the various new EU funds.

Along with other parliamentarians, including Deputy Derek Keating, I went to Jordan in 2013. We went down to the Syria-Jordan border and we visited the refugee camps there. There was something rather striking about the whole thing. There are three different refugee camps in Jordan. The camp in Amman is where the 1948 Palestinian refugees were put up. Further south there is another Palestinian refugee camp dating from 1967. Then there is the Syrian-Palestinian refugee camp on the Syria-Jordan border. One thing that struck me was that the conditions in the refugee camp there, as bad as they were, were far better than those in the camps dating from 1948 and 1967. This has been allowed to continue in relative silence and without anything being done, either by Europe or anyone in the so-called developed world.

Last year, I went to Turkey. I went on my own. What struck me most about Turkey was the fact that there are 800,000 Syrian refugees in Istanbul alone. That was the figure I was given. I travelled for 17 hours down to the Syrian border where there are more than 1 million people in camps at the moment. These camps are certainly being used to some extent as a source of recruitment by ISIS and other anti-Assad forces in Syria. Worse, they are being supported and financed by people who have another agenda. Obviously, American hardware is being supplied to them. Some weeks back, while Americans were bombing ISIS in Syria and Iraq, Turkey decided to start bombing the Kurds because they were fighting ISIS, having been supported by the Americans to do so initially. What is being allowed to happen is absolutely and totally disgraceful. I suggest we should use whatever influence we have within the EU to try to promote and push an agenda to demilitarise the entire area. We cannot have a situation whereby we have weapons being supplied by America and its allies to Kurdish fighters to fight ISIS while Turkey, a friend of America, is bombing the same people. What is happening is absolutely disgraceful. Growing numbers of refugees are coming from Syria and Iraq.

Let us not forget that the invasion of Iraq set the whole place alight. We need to remember that. At the time, tens of thousands of people took to the streets to oppose it. The Labour Party vehemently opposed it at the time and I imagine members of the Labour Party were among the marchers. We now have a situation whereby the Government is silent despite what is happening with Shannon Airport being used for rendition fights and so forth. The Government's silence is deafening. From a humanitarian perspective, I trust the Minister of State will use his influence to try to ensure the demilitarisation of the area by the superpowers, as they call themselves. They are only using the Syrian people and refugees throughout the region as cannon fodder.

I am keen to make the point at the outset that it is to the credit of the House and the political system in the country that we do not have a political debate in Ireland based around resistance to refugees coming to Ireland. That is to the credit of the House and the political parties operating within it. As Deputies will know, throughout Europe there is major resistance and growing xenophobia. However, in Ireland the pressure and lobbying is for a humanitarian response, with people wanting us to be more generous. There is no political capital to be gained from the opposite point of view, and that is to our credit as a political collective. No general election or any election has ever been dominated by the issues of migration, emigration or refugees. I hope that continues in future.

Deputy Ferris asked a direct question in respect of Shannon. This was referenced before by Deputy Wallace. Foreign military aircraft may be permitted to land in the State on condition that they are unarmed, carry no arms, ammunition or explosives, do not engage in intelligence gathering and do not form part of any military exercise or operations. The US is granted blanket permission for overflights by unarmed military aircraft. Civil aircraft are prohibited from carrying weapons or munitions through Irish airspace and airports unless an exemption has been obtained in advance from the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport.

I am aware of a recent press release regarding the landing at Shannon Airport of an armed aircraft similar to a type of aircraft which took part in an airstrike. This took place in September 2013. Contrary to notification the aircraft was found to be armed with a fixed weapon and did not, therefore, comply with the normal conditions that apply to foreign military aircraft overflying or landing in Ireland. As the then Tánaiste informed the Dáil on 15 October 2013, this case was raised at the highest possible level with the United States Embassy. The embassy official explained that this isolated incident had taken place as a result of an administrative error. Assurances were given that steps had been taken to prevent any recurrence.

I neglected to answer Deputy Martin's direct question about economic and monetary union and banking union. We welcome the focus in the report on completing banking union, backstops, bridge financing and revisiting a common deposit reinsurance scheme. It was regrettable that the reference to a banking union did not feature in the conclusions. However, we will continue to push for this in further discussions.

I agree with the Minister of State. It is to the credit of the political class and to Irish society, more to the point, that the overwhelming response to the refugee crisis is one of compassion and solidarity. I accept that point. However, the thrust of many of the questions and contributions directed at the Minister of State is to ask why Ireland does not raise its voice more loudly and decisively against the double standards, hypocrisy and sordid manipulation by Western powers in the Middle East and north Africa. This behaviour created these crises in the first place and they are continuing. This is not simply an interesting historical point. However, there is a historical point with regard to the US bombing of Iraq. Does the Minister of State not accept that, undoubtedly, the bombing of Iraq destabilised the region and unleashed these forces? Does the Minister of State not accept that the arming, supporting and financing of the Saudi regime has been a contributory factor to the growth and prevalence of some of the worst, most vile and extreme forces in the region which have helped to tear Syria apart? Does the Government accept that? If it does, why are we not speaking out more loudly? Why are we not a voice in Europe calling for the European Union to refuse to do business with Saudi Arabia or sell that country arms? Why do we continue to trade with these regimes?

A total of 40 Palestinians have been killed in the past month in an escalation of Israeli and settler violence against the Palestinian population. Why do we not declare that it is time to say enough is enough, stop treating Israel as a normal state and demand sanctions on Israel? Why can we not be that voice in Europe? Why are we afraid to do that? I suspect that those occupying much of the political spectrum in this country agree with this privately, even if they do not say it publicly. They know these things to be true. Why are we doing business with the el-Sisi regime when he is busily crushing all political dissent? Is it because we can make money out of the beef trade?

Is that it, with human rights concerns going out the door? He crushes democracy and civil rights go out the door because we are doing business with him. If that is not it, can the Minister of State please explain why we do not raise our voices?

One of our citizens, Ibrahim Halawa, is suffering in Egypt, but many others are also suffering. It is not just the Muslim Brotherhood. People involved in campaigns for secular and civil rights, lawyers and people on the left of the political spectrum in Egypt, are in prison because they organised peaceful protests against the el-Sisi regime and face possible execution. What about the Turkish regime and what it is doing to the Kurds? We now seem to be willing to shut up about all that because we want to unload the refugee crisis onto Turkey rather than having to deal with it ourselves. Why are we not more forthright in pointing out these inconsistencies and hypocrisies, which produced the problem in the first place?

The Minister of State can answer Deputy Boyd Barrett's questions first and then wrap up with his concluding remarks.

How much time do I have?

I have attempted to address many of the questions raised over the course of the question-and-answer session. Deputy Boyd Barrett asked me whether I accept that the invasion and bombing of Iraq destabilised the whole region. On a personal basis, I do, and the question now is what we do from here on.

I do not think we have seen anything near the peak of this crisis. This is the largest movement of human beings across Europe since the Second World War. In terms of our voice, we raised it within the corridors of power in the EU and will work as a collective within it. I would not want the Deputy to be under any illusion that we do not do that. As a collective we are stronger and our voice within the EU will be heard.

I am conscious that our response stepped up to the mark and went beyond what was expected of Ireland in terms of our acceptance of 4,000 refugees. It focused the attention of other countries which were not doing as much as they should have been doing. I accept that part of the issue in that region is an historic reaction to what happened in the past and that is why we cannot make the same mistakes again.

Europe is, as is America.

This crisis will not be solved today, tomorrow, next week or next month. It will be with us for quite a long time.

I thank Deputies for their comments and questions. I am pleased to have the opportunity to wrap up the debate on the outcome of the October European Council and touch on some of the issues on the agenda, including some that the Taoiseach did not have time to cover.

Many of the contributions focused on the migration crisis, or the refugee crisis, as it should be more appropriately termed. It is an issue of major concern to everybody in this House and in Ireland. I reiterate a point made by the Taoiseach, namely, that we want a comprehensive EU response based on solidarity which balances a compassionate approach with practical measures. I am pleased to say that Ireland is playing a full part in this response. In addition to our humanitarian assistance, development aid and the provision of naval vessels for search-and-rescue efforts in the Mediterranean, the Government agreed on 10 September to establish an Irish refugee protection programme and to accept up to 4,000 refugees and asylum seekers overall under the EU resettlement and relocation programme.

This will not come at any cost to the ongoing issue of addressing the direct provision scandal in Ireland. Anybody living within those centres should not be under the impression that they will be at a disadvantage because of our humanitarian response to the refugee crisis. The report of the direct provision working group is being implemented.

A new cross-departmental task force is being established and is working with NGOs, religious bodies, local authorities and the Red Cross to deal with the operational and logistical aspects of the support programme. A network of emergency reception and orientation centres is being established for the initial reception of asylum seekers arriving under the relocation programmes. The Government is also engaging with the public on their generous pledges of support and has tasked the Red Cross with drawing the offers together. A website has been launched to enable members of the public to formally register their pledges.

I will move on to a different international issue which the Taoiseach did not have time to touch on. The European Council took note of the publication of the official Dutch report on the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight airline flight MH17 over Ukraine. While there was no detailed discussion at the European Council, Ireland underlined the conclusion to reiterate the EU's commitment to hold to account those responsible for this appalling tragedy. The situation in Ukraine remains one of concern, although there have been signs of some stabilisation recently. While this is to be welcomed, Ireland's position is that all parties must adhere to the terms of the agreement set out in Minsk if there is to be meaningful progress in addressing the conflict.

Turning to climate change, the French President updated his colleagues on the conference that will start in Paris on 30 November, bringing together the international community to agree new and enhanced commitments to address climate change. The EU has already set out an ambitious position in advance of this conference, which is known as COP 21. Ireland strongly supports an ambitious, legally binding and global agreement with broad participation as the core outcome of the Paris COP. As part of the EU, Ireland is committed to playing its part in reaching that historic agreement. I note budget 2015 includes a contribution of €2 million to the green climate fund, which represents the first step in Ireland's longer-term financial engagement. This is in addition to our Irish Aid activities which involve working closely with developing partner countries on resilience to climate change and to which we contributed some €33 million last year.

I thank Deputies for their questions and contributions and for the attention of the Acting Chairman.

Top
Share