Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 19 Jun 2018

Vol. 970 No. 4

Ceisteanna - Questions

Departmental Websites

Micheál Martin

Question:

1. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the status of the plans for revamping his Department's website. [23795/18]

Mary Lou McDonald

Question:

2. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach his plans to update his Department's website. [24672/18]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.

There is no plan to revamp or update the Department's website. As part of a broader programme of work to streamline citizen information, all non-transactional Government websites are being migrated to one portal, gov.ie. The gov.ie website is managed by the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer, OGCIO.

It is planned that later in the year Government Department websites will begin migration to gov.ie. To support the migration, my Department has opted to be one of the first Departments to migrate. Merrionstreet.ie will continue in its role as the Government news service website.

As the Taoiseach will be aware, documents released under freedom of information show that the procurement of a new website for the Department of the Taoiseach and a new overall web portal was rushed through last year. This happened before a single piece of research had been undertaken on what the users of the sites might want. The Taoiseach will also be aware that the one uniform finding from the small piece of work carried out by the strategic communications unit on international practice stated that all initiatives should emerge from a clear public demand and not from politicians or officials. Is it acceptable practice to commission major work such as this in advance of developing specifications informed by users?

The Taoiseach committed to the research being published. When will this happen? It is the near uniform experience of such projects that a failure to start with consultation and research leads to wasted effort and money.

It is more than six months since the Taoiseach told the Dáil that parties would be consulted in advance of the public opinion commissioned by the strategic communications unit. Will he explain why this extraordinary delay has occurred? I am informed that it is viewed as bad practice to undertake major opinion research during holiday periods. When will the research that the House has been discussing for a long time be carried out? There was meant to be consultation with all of us but for some reason that has not happened in six months.

I echo Deputy Martin's question. Is it intended to go ahead with the research or has it been abandoned?

In a similar response last year, the Taoiseach stated that as part of the eGovernment strategy, the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer had been working on the development of a digital service gateway. This, the Taoiseach stated, would allow for "a single digital point where citizens can easily access information about the Government services that are available to them." We would all welcome that as a means of providing a more user-friendly experience for citizens, the users of Government websites. The MyGovID service has been a welcome addition in this regard, as has the gov.ie portal, but the Taoiseach should not take this as an endorsement of his strategic communications unit. It simply makes sense to harmonise the Government's online presence. In fact, it should have been done years ago.

The Department of the Taoiseach's website, in fairness, is not bad and is fairly easy to use and navigate. Like all of the Government websites, however, it could do with a makeover. Is it envisaged that the Department's website will be changed in line with the gov.ie concept?

It makes sense to have a single Government website. I have explained previously my view that Government is too fragmented, that every Department and agency has its own website and web officer and it makes sense to have a single portal. MyGovID works well and gov.ie, which will be the single portal for Departments, will work well too. It should not be necessary to expend public money on expensive research to tell us why it makes sense to have a single Government website. It simply makes sense to me because that is the direction in which the world is moving and this has been done successfully in other countries.

The reason for the delay in undertaking the citizen survey is that it has not been a priority. My Department has many tasks and the citizen survey has not been a priority. I was only briefed on the matter in the past two or three weeks. It is planned to consult Opposition leaders on the questions before the survey is in the field and to publish the results when it is complete. As I stated, with so many things going on, the survey has not been a priority. While it is still intended to carry it out, it may well be the autumn before that happens.

On the role of gov.ie, with due regard to international practice, as part of the eGovernment Strategy 2017-20 and in line with the Our Public Service 2020 report, the Government Information Service, GIS, has been working with the Office of the Chief Information Officer to develop gov.ie. The website will serve as a single digital point where citizens can easily access information about Government services that are available to them and provide the digital face of the Government to the people. The OGCIO is responsible for the technical development of the site in line with its responsibility to lead on the implementation of the public service ICT strategy. The Government Information Service is responsible for ensuring the website is developed and is citizen focused in design and content and consistent with international best practice and overarching Government communications. Consultation, trialling and testing are ongoing and will involve the rationalisation of existing Government websites and online services over time.

Taoiseach's Meetings and Engagements

Micheál Martin

Question:

3. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with Prime Minister Lee Nak-yeon of South Korea and the issues that were discussed. [25354/18]

Joan Burton

Question:

4. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent conversation with the Canadian Prime Minister, Mr. Justin Trudeau. [25360/18]

Joan Burton

Question:

5. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the Prime Minister of South Korea. [25362/18]

Mary Lou McDonald

Question:

6. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his engagement with the Prime Minister of South Korea, Mr. Lee Nak-yeon on 29 May 2018. [25769/18]

Mary Lou McDonald

Question:

7. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his conversation with the Prime Minister of Canada, Mr. Justin Trudeau, on 26 May 2018. [26446/18]

Brendan Howlin

Question:

8. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the Prime Minister of South Korea. [26544/18]

My apologies for the delay. I live in a world of treasury tags and paper clips at the moment.

The Taoiseach should go digital.

Yes, it would be much easier to find replies.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 8, inclusive, together.

On Monday, 28 May, I met the Prime Minister of the Republic of Korea, Mr. Lee Nak-yeon, in Government Buildings. This was the first visit by a South Korean Prime Minister to Ireland since 1990, and an opportunity to discuss strengthening bilateral relations between our two countries and a number of developments at European Union and international level. We discussed the strong growth in trade between Ireland and South Korea in recent years, which has been enabled by the European Union-South Korea international trade agreement. We also discussed progress in reopening access to the Korean market for Irish beef. I look forward to further progress on this issue during the coming months.

The Prime Minister and I also discussed increased co-operation in the area of education and research and we noted the increasing number of Korean students in Ireland. We discussed the latest developments on the Korean Peninsula. I reiterated Ireland's support for the Korean Government's continuing efforts to build peace and achieve denuclearisation of the peninsula. The meeting was an excellent opportunity to progress our bilateral relations, which I expect will continue to strengthen in the months and years ahead.

I spoke by telephone with Canadian Prime Minister, Mr. Justin Trudeau, on 26 May. He called me to convey his congratulations on the outcome of the referendum on the regulation of termination of pregnancy, which he described as a significant milestone for women's rights.

In the context of the Taoiseach's meeting with the South Korean Prime Minister, businesses and workers throughout the country have been looking on with growing concern at the chaos that appears to be about to hit global trade. The wild and indiscriminate attacks being directed at America's trading partners pose a direct threat to our economy. This point has been made repeatedly by independent commentators. Did the South Korean Prime Minister and the Taoiseach discussed that issue?

Clearly, the European Union must respond when unilateral and unfair trade sanctions are imposed on European businesses. The European Commission's response thus far has been measured and restrained. No one here is naive enough to believe that Ireland on its own has any chance of influencing events. However, we must be on top of the issues and assist sectors which are disproportionately hit. What action has the Taoiseach taken to assess the specific impact on Ireland of President Trump's unilateral actions on trade?

Has anybody in the Taoiseach's Department or across Government undertaken any analysis of the impact of President Trump's decisions to date in terms of tariffs on specific trade, if it involves the sectors that are most likely to be hit and undermined and has the Taoiseach prepared any measures to assist sectors which will suffer short and medium term damage?

In terms of the Taoiseach's international contacts with people like the Prime Minister of Canada and the Prime Minister of the Republic of Korea, has he had an opportunity to get some advice or seek some experience from what they as countries have learned in terms of addressing issues like the housing crisis and the crisis and difficulties in the HSE? In particular, I would like to know if they have discussed how countries invest for the future. The Taoiseach and his Cabinet have produced a 22-year capital programme which is unusually long. On paper there are a great deal of proposals by the Government but in practice that plan will probably extend over the period of three to five Governments and in the meantime our housing crisis, particularly in social and affordable housing, is getting worse. It seems that part of the problem with this Fine Gael Government is that it has, at a minimum, a delicate apprehension which is negative on social and affordable housing as though somehow or other people might get a greater sense of entitlement than the Taoiseach's party would traditionally see people who rely on social housing as having. Has the Taoiseach taken the opportunity to share experiences with countries like Canada, a country of major immigration, which has had big house building successes in its different provinces, but also with the Republic of Korea, which has a significant public investment record so that just as we often advertise Ireland for what we have done well, we might gain some knowledge from them as to how they have addressed those problems in housing and health which are currently besetting the Government?

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Taoiseach as ucht a chuid freagraí. The press release which followed the Taoiseach's conversation with Prime Minister Trudeau said that they discussed the recent referendum to repeal the eighth amendment. He has referred to it in his answer. I know this had been an item of discussion between them when they met last year so he might give us some more detail as to Mr. Trudeau's reaction. I know that he expressed congratulations and that was welcome. I also note that the British Prime Minister tweeted her congratulations to the Irish people on their decision, Together for Yes and the successful campaign, which is extremely welcome. It would of course be more welcome if she could take the issue up with the DUP who continue to bury their heads in the sand on this. I will see Mrs. May tomorrow and I will raise it with her directly myself.

With regard to the Taoiseach's meeting with the Prime Minister of South Korea, was the recent deal between the United States and North Korea discussed? Moves towards peace and stability in the region are obviously very welcome. However, there appears to be a valid concern in South Korea about their omission from the process and I wonder if that was raised in their discussions.

The Taoiseach may have noted that Prime Minister Trudeau's Canada has today decriminalised cannabis and that follows the fact that in Canada, cannabis for medicinal use was previously decriminalised. In light of the Taoiseach's great admiration for Canada and all things Canadian, might that prompt him to stop trying to sabotage Deputy Gino Kenny's medicinal cannabis Bill which is being buried by his Government in what I think is cynical game playing with completely inaccurate references to it being poor legislation-----

It is not really relevant to the question-----

It is relevant to the discussions that were had with Prime Minister Trudeau and whether we might learn something from Canada in its attitude towards the issue of cannabis and specifically medicinal cannabis given that there are thousands of people out there suffering from pain and other conditions who could benefit from it. His Government has cynically tried to bury that Bill rather than progress it and accept the amendments that Deputy Gino Kenny has proposed to deal with some of the so-called concerns that have been raised.

As we have heard, the Taoiseach spoke on the phone to the Canadian Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau, in the aftermath of the Irish referendum. Since the phonecall, the G7 meeting descended into total acrimony with extraordinary things being said by the American President about the Canadian Prime Minister and the American administration has subsequently begun to impose tariffs on global trade and products coming out of Canada and other allies on the extraordinary pretext that it was being done on the basis of security. I ask if there has been any analysis done on the likely impacts of the tariffs imposed to date or the likely escalation of a trade war on Ireland, an open trading economy which is vulnerable to the closing down of markets and imposition of tariffs. Are there any contingency plans? The Taoiseach might indicate to us what exactly the Irish Government's submission to the European Commission is on the proper and appropriate response to be made by it to such tariffs being imposed.

The meeting with the Prime Minister of South Korea was a good meeting. We now have an EU-Korea Free Trade Agreement in place which has been very successful and has helped us to increase trade between the two countries. The Republic of Korea is now the ninth largest trading country in the world and offers considerable opportunities for Ireland, particularly in the context of the free trade agreement. Bilateral trade between Ireland and the Republic of Korea doubled between 2013 and 2016 to reach a value of €2.6 billion per annum. There have been regular visits to the Republic of Korea to promote Ireland as a trading partner and a location for investment in the EU. When I spoke with the Prime Minister I strongly encouraged him to increase the number of ministerial visits that happen in both directions. It is always on the St. Patrick's Day itinerary for us outbound but we do not get as many inbound Ministers from the Republic of Korea as we would like and hopefully that will increase into the future. The EU-North Korea summit which happened in Singapore was not discussed because it had not happened at that stage.

On the trade issues between the EU and the US, it is disappointing that the US has ended the temporary exemption on new steel and aluminium tariffs which had been granted to the EU. The measures cannot be justified on the grounds of national security in our view and they are an inappropriate remedy for real problems of overcapacity on which the EU has offered the US its full co-operation in multiple fora, including the OECD, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. We will continue to support the Commission in its determination to protect fully EU commercial interests, including through World Trade Organisation, WTO, legal proceedings and appropriate rebalancing measures. This issue is before the European Council, which will meet next week. It was discussed in March and I expect it to be considered again when we meet later this month. In March, the European Council restated its commitment to strong transatlantic relations as a cornerstone of peace and prosperity and underlined its support for a dialogue on trade issues of common concern. The view of the Irish Government is that we would prefer to avoid the imposition of tit-for-tat trade restrictions on tariffs between the EU and the US. Those that have been imposed to date will have a relatively limited impact on Ireland but were it to spread to other goods and services it certainly could impact Ireland. The particular concern we have is for the potential impact on Aughinish Alumina. My Department, with the Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Industrial Development Authority, IDA, are engaging intensively on this. I have spoken with the CEO of Aughinish personally and made it clear that the Government will do everything possible to assist it. Similarly, the IDA has been liaising closely with the firm's senior management since details of the sanctions first emerged.

The matter is also being raised through diplomatic channels and with our international partners. As has been widely reported efforts are under way on the part of the parent companies to restructure their respective ownerships. If this proves successful and the US authorities expressly agree it could result in the sanctions against the companies in question being lifted meaning that Aughinish may no longer be impacted. That would be very welcome given its value to the area in terms of employment. There is no guarantee, however, that this will happen and that is why the Government will continue to engage very closely with Aughinish and provide any support or assistance we can.

In response to Deputy Burton's question on my engagement with other Heads of Government and whether we compare notes on domestic problems, yes absolutely, I always take the opportunity, if there is time, when I meet another Head of Government to talk about some of the domestic challenges we have, whether around health or housing and ask about their domestic challenges and compare notes. For example, most recently when I met the new Prime Minister of Spain I learnt that Spain's health service does not have access issues as severe as ours yet it spends much less on health than we do. I was trying to explore with him what Spain had got right that it spends considerably less per head on health care than we do but does not have the kind of access issues, long waiting times and so on, that we have. We agreed that there should be an exchange involving Spain's department of health and ours on that. He looked for something in return from me because Spain has a problem with structural long-term unemployment. It has very high youth unemployment rates, with 20% long-term unemployment, or something close to that figure, whereas it is approximately 3% in Ireland. I spoke about how that had been the case in Ireland for decades and how we had resolved that and we agreed that there would be an exchange between our Departments of Business, Enterprise and Innovation and Employment Affairs and Social Protection and Spain's on that issue.

I often find, which is interesting and mildly reassuring but not very that when we do speak to other Heads of Government and Prime Ministers about the domestic problems we face it is very often the case that they face the same domestic problems, to a greater or lesser extent. It would not be unusual in other member states or other countries for the same kinds of problems we have in the health sector to be problems there as well, perhaps not on the same scale but certainly issues such as recruiting staff, waiting times and increasing overcrowding in emergency departments are problems in other countries, even in France. It can often be the case with housing shortages as well.

The capital programme is not a 22-year programme, it is a ten-year programme. The national planning framework runs for 22 years, between now and 2040. The capital programme runs for ten years, that is €116 billion to be invested in public infrastructure, in housing and transport, broadband, new health care facilities and new schools. It will not take ten years to start. It has already started. Investment in public infrastructure is up by 18% this year alone. It will increase by another 25% next year, that is an additional €1.5 billion. We are getting this programme done and it is very much under way. The ten year national development plan provides for us to grow our social housing stock by 110,000 units over the next ten years. We grew the social housing stock, by different mechanisms, by 7,000 last year. It will be similar or more this year and will go up to 10,000 a year and more after that, adding to the social housing stock by 110,000. That is a considerable------

The Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, has revised that to 14,000 over two years.

No. Those ESRI projections do not relate to social housing. They relate to total house builds.

It says 14,000 over two years.

The Deputy is mistaken about the content of both the capital plan and the ESRI report, unfortunately.

I thank the Taoiseach. We are moving on to Question No. 9.

Deputy Boyd Barrett did not get an answer to his question on cannabis.

No answer to the question on cannabis is par for the course.

If the Deputy put down a question on it that would help. I do not think cannabis was the question.

I asked the Taoiseach if he talked to Prime Minister Trudeau about it.

Global Footprint Initiative

Micheál Martin

Question:

9. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will provide an update on his commitment to double Ireland's global footprint. [25355/18]

Mary Lou McDonald

Question:

10. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his commitment to double Ireland's global footprint by 2025. [26447/18]

Alan Farrell

Question:

11. Deputy Alan Farrell asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent launch of Global Ireland – Ireland's Global Footprint to 2025, with specific reference to the need to diversify export markets in the context of Brexit. [26543/18]

Brendan Howlin

Question:

12. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach the position regarding his commitment to double Ireland's global footprint; and his plans for visits abroad to support same. [26545/18]

Peter Burke

Question:

13. Deputy Peter Burke asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the launch of Global Ireland - Ireland's Global Footprint to 2025, with reference to the need to strengthen and deepen Ireland’s international presence. [26548/18]

Michael Moynihan

Question:

14. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Taoiseach if there is an implementation plan or costing attached to the plan he launched on 11 June 2018 to double Ireland's global footprint. [26558/18]

Micheál Martin

Question:

99. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the plan he launched on 11 June 2018 with regard to doubling the number of staff across the globe by 2025; if it has an implementation plan; and if it is costed. [26439/18]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 to 14, inclusive, and 99 together. On Monday, 11 June I launched Global Ireland, the Government's strategy to double the scope and impact of Ireland's global footprint by 2025. This represents the most ambitious renewal and expansion of Ireland’s international presence ever undertaken.

Investing in our international presence in this way will enable Ireland to be more ambitious in advancing its strategic international objectives, promoting its values and exerting its influence, both within and beyond the European Union. Global Ireland 2025 sets ambitious targets to accelerate progress in diversifying and growing Ireland's exports, inward investment and tourism, particularly in response to the challenges posed by the UK's departure from the European Union.

Under the initiative we will expand and strengthen our diplomatic and enterprise agency presence across the European Union and its neighbourhood, as well as in the UK; strengthen our presence in the United States, including a new flagship Ireland House in Los Angeles, and increasing our presence elsewhere in the Americas, including Canada, Latin America and the Caribbean; expand our presence in the Asia-Pacific region, including a new flagship Ireland House in Tokyo; develop our relationship with Africa beyond our traditional focus on aid to building new multifaceted partnerships; strengthen our presence in the Middle East and Gulf region; deepen and widen our connections with our diaspora throughout the world; ensure that our distinctive culture and heritage reaches new generations and audiences across the world; enhance our digital footprint through a communications strategy to increase visibility, raise awareness and enhance Ireland's reputation; publish a White Paper on Irish Aid, reaffirming our commitment to delivering 0.7% of gross national income, GNI, to development assistance by 2030; and promote Ireland's values of peace, humanitarianism, equality and justice, including through our campaign for election to the UN Security Council, which the Tánaiste and I will launch at the United Nations in New York on Monday 2 July.

The rationale for and urgency in undertaking this initiative now is abundantly clear. Technology is transforming lives and driving change in every corner of the world. Geopolitical and economic power is shifting south and east. The global trading environment is turbulent, with challenges to the rules-based systems on which we as a country rely. Closer to home, the United Kingdom, our nearest neighbour and trading partner, is preparing to leave the European Union.

In addition, the challenges that the world faces, whether climate change, security, tax in the digital age or migration, demand multilateral responses. Global Ireland will equip Ireland to shape and influence these critical debates and to take full advantage of new opportunities.

Implementation of the plan is already under way and will be overseen by a Cabinet committee, supported by a senior officials group chaired by my Department. Priority actions each year will be identified with corresponding decisions about investment to be finalised in the annual estimates process.

A number of significant decisions have already been taken since the initiative was announced last year, including the establishment of new embassies in Chile, Colombia, Jordan, New Zealand, Ukraine, Liberia, Morocco and the Philippines and new consulates in Vancouver, Mumbai, Frankfurt, Cardiff and Los Angeles.

Being a citizen of the world in the 21st century requires a strong and effective international presence, both physically and virtually. Global Ireland sets out the building blocks for Ireland to achieve that. The initiative will, of course, inform the Government's approach to overseas visits and engagement. For example, while my visit to Madrid last week was primarily an opportunity to meet with the new Prime Minister, I also attended an event with the Spanish-Irish Business Network and met our agency staff who are working there on the ground and had an opportunity to give them our thanks for promoting trade, tourism, inward investment and education in Ireland.

We waited nearly a year for the Global Ireland document to be published but last week's document was more than a bit of a let-down. Fundamentally, there is no implementation plan and there are no costings in the plan.

I and my party have been calling for a significant expansion in our diplomatic, commercial and cultural footprint since well before the Brexit referendum. We have argued strongly that we do not have the personnel available to develop the scale and depth of relations which we need, particularly in the aftermath of Brexit. We do not have an issue with supporting the expansion as announced.

There are two major problems with the document launched last week. First, it is a stitching together of individual proposals from different Departments and agencies. There is no real clarity as to exactly what our strategy is for operating where we have representation and there is too much focus on headline projects which are welcome but secondary to how we use our presence in general. Second, and incredibly, there is no implementation plan setting annual targets and committing funding. I know the Taoiseach said he will budget for this but I find it strange that a year on we do not have an implementation plan or any costings. In the past two months the Taoiseach and his party have extensively briefed newspapers about a supposedly secret committee that is costing Opposition proposals.

The Taoiseach said he would have zero tolerance for uncosted promises. Of course, this misses the fact that many of the proposals the Taoiseach was criticising have also been made by Fine Gael Ministers and the Taoiseach himself. It is okay for the Taoiseach to make these promises uncosted but not for others to do so.

Why is there no specific year-by-year implementation plan or detailed costings for this plan? Without these there is no basis for assessing the credibility of the plans or the level of real commitment being made for the future by different Departments. Will the Taoiseach address this immediately and publish the costings behind the plan?

I welcome the eventual launch of the Global Ireland 2025 plan. It had been mooted in public on no less than two occasions by the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste. Fair play to them for getting a couple of bites at the cherry.

I agree with the Taoiseach, especially in light of Brexit, on the need to extend our reach for the purposes of investment, tourism, trade, links with our diaspora and valuable cultural exchanges. I support all of that. The Taoiseach referred to the opening of new missions and embassies. Of course, this had been announced previously. When will they become operational? The Taoiseach referred to other agencies like IDA Ireland and Fáilte Ireland. What additional supports and resources are planned for them?

I have a question on a similar matter. John Concannon headed up the strategic communications unit in the Department of the Taoiseach. I understand he is now working on the State's bid to secure a seat on the UN Security Council for 2021-22. Will the Taoiseach confirm what that work entails?

As has been said, the publication of the report is welcome, as are the improvements in cultural and business opportunities the State will be afforded once the plan is implemented. There is a fair question, however, on when some of these proposals are to be implemented, especially in respect of the new missions announced. As the Taoiseach has pointed out, opportunities will present in terms of the State broadening its footprint in the coming years, especially in the event of Brexit, and there will be implications for certain sectoral employment firms in this State and their ability to branch out further afield.

I wish to inquire about Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland. Will their footprints be included in this as well? I appreciate that with missions and embassies come personnel. Are there any additional proposals for IDA Ireland or Enterprise Ireland offices? This is especially relevant in Asia where complementary services should be provided to the counties with which our trade has increased substantially in the past two or three years. I would welcome a comment from the Taoiseach on that point.

The Taoiseach listed several new locations for diplomatic missions to be opened. Are we preparing the additional staff now so that we will have a sufficient, robust, trained and experienced cohort to move into these missions? Some of these are small missions and would not have a cohort of mentoring staff available.

I note the proposal for Japan includes a new Ireland House that will cost €23 million. I was in Japan and I saw the two buildings we have currently in Tokyo. I know the price of building land there. In fact, if a building is devoted to a diplomatic purpose, the occupier gets a decrease. Is the concept of Ireland House to be a uniform concept now? Are we going to migrate to that concept everywhere?

The perception of Ireland is relevant for our footprint. Everywhere I go, including at international conferences I attend within my political group, I constantly have to address the issue of tax haven Ireland. Recent academic research and analysis from the University of California, Berkeley and the University of Copenhagen suggest €100 billion in corporate profits were shifted into Ireland in 2015. The research estimates that Ireland is the biggest recipient of such corporate shifts, bigger than all the Caribbean islands together. These are real issues. I realise they have been rejected by the Department of Finance, but perception is very real and we need to formulate a robust answer to that charge.

The Taoiseach might recall that his predecessor, Deputy Enda Kenny, believed in one of the perceptions of Ireland derived from our peacekeeping role through our military. Certainly in my time in the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform he was a champion of the replacement of the flagship of the Naval Service with a multi-purpose vessel that could have a hospital facility. He believed that move could project positivity for Ireland in conflict zones. The Taoiseach wears a dual hat as he is Minister for Defence as well. Is there any progress on that as part of the global positive footprint for Ireland?

I welcome expanding diplomatic trade and cultural links with countries around the world. Undoubtedly, that is a good thing to do in an increasingly globalised world, especially in a world where people like Donald Trump are trying to dig people back into nasty little nationalist trenches.

In tandem with those links, our reputation is important. I heard the discussion earlier about Trump and I welcome the criticisms of the barbaric treatment of young children being separated from their parents. Some 12,000 of these children are now encaged in the most horrific conditions. The Taoiseach did not answer Deputy Coppinger's question about whether he considers this as a line that has been crossed or action that goes too far. She asked whether the Taoiseach should withdraw the invitation of the Government to Donald Trump to come to this country if we want to improve our international reputation. Reference was made to our humanitarian reputation and our reputation for humanitarian values. Is it not time to make a firm statement that Donald Trump is not welcome in this country and will not be invited to put his footprint, to use that term, in this country while thousands of children are encaged in a most barbaric fashion, separated from their parents and criminalised for simply being migrants?

It does not appear in the document, as published, but Global Ireland 2025 is costed. I gave the figure at the launch event. The plan is costed at €300 million. That is not in one year. That is €300 million increasing incrementally every year until it reaches €300 million in 2027. The expenditure will not necessarily be exactly one eighth of the total every year, if that makes any sense. It will go up. The full cost by 2025 will be €300 million.

There are certainly targets although not annual targets. I will give three examples.

Is there an implementation plan?

There is a target to double our exports to the eurozone. There is a target to double the number of international students studying in Ireland. There is a specific target around tourism to treble the revenue coming from the new markets in the Gulf and Asia.

I do not think Deputies need to be concerned about implementation. This is something that I am going to drive. My Department and the Tánaiste will drive it as well. Let us consider what is happening. The plan lays out our intention to increase the number of embassies and consulates throughout the world by 26. All those I mentioned in my earlier reply will be done within the next two years. In fact, ambassadors have been appointed in some cases and are training up. They are ready to go and be deployed to some of these new locations. We look forward to seeing that happening.

Deputy Farrell asked about the agencies. They are very much at the centre of this. We are expanding our diplomatic presence in Frankfurt because it is the emerging economic capital of Germany. It makes sense for Ireland to have a much stronger presence there for IDA Ireland and for Enterprise Ireland. This is just one example of that. There is also the appointment of cultural attachés to some embassies and the appointment of Bord Bia staff to some agencies, especially in places where Ireland wants to increase its food exports.

There is also the Ireland House approach in Tokyo and Los Angeles, which is where the embassy is on one floor and the agencies on another floor. This is to try to integrate our entire presence in those countries. The Ireland House concept, which is a very good one, has to be considered on a case-by-case basis, which often depends very much on the country. The United States of America, for example, has its political capital in Washington DC but economic activity happens in places such as New York, Texas and Los Angeles, so it does not make any sense to have everything under one roof in the United States of America. This is similar to Australia, where the political capital is Canberra but the economic and business activity tends to happen in Sydney and Melbourne. It does make sense in a place such as Japan where Tokyo is the financial capital and the political capital.

John Concannon will be working on the UN Security Council campaign from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and his role will be to lead on the promotional and communication aspects of it, but not the political aspect, obviously, which will be handled by politicians and diplomats.

There is no recent progress to report on the multipurpose vessel, but Ireland is renewing its fleet. This is very much happening.

With regard to the invitation issued to President Trump, the invitation was issued by my forebear and the invitation stands. There is, however, no date for a visit and no preparations have been made for a visit.

So it is not a real visit.

As I have said before, I favour the politics of engagement rather than the politics of boycott or the politics of no platform. It is better to engage with people one disagrees with than to refuse to speak to them. If we are to get any outcome at all or any positive result, it is best done through engagement. We all have to talk to people all the time with whom we do not necessarily agree-----

It worked for Justin Trudeau.

Particularly in planning.

-----or with whom we radically disagree on occasion.

Deputy Boyd Barrett asked about the decriminalisation of cannabis. Canada has voted to do that and it plans to do it by next September. I am aware that a number of US states have legalised cannabis, all the way down the west coast in places such as Oregon, Washington state and Colorado. The predictions from those who opposed the legalisation generally have not come true. It has been reasonably successful in the US states where it has been legalised. It has not been done in any European country yet, except for some special arrangements around coffee shops in Amsterdam. I have no doubt it is an issue we will consider. The Minister of State, Deputy Catherine Byrne, has appointed a group, which is now sitting, to examine more broadly the issues around the decriminalisation of cannabis. The group has asked for public submissions and I will be interested to see what recommendations this group comes up with.

Medicinal cannabis is now available in Ireland on licence. The Minister for Health has issued seven-day licences. He has not refused a single licence when that application has been made with a prescription from a specialist. It is our intention to expand the medicinal cannabis access programme, based on prescriptions from medical specialists who are willing to take the risk of prescribing it as a medicine and who will monitor the patient. This aspect is very important because if cannabis is to be treated as a medicine, we must make sure it has the same standards as a medicine with regard to production, supply and monitoring.

It should include GPs.

This is being worked on by the Minister for Health. The Cannabis for Medicinal Use Regulation Bill 2016 was rejected at the Joint Committee on Health which decided the proposed legislation was not fit for purpose and should not go forward. Amendments have been promised, but the last time I checked with the Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, the amendments that had been promised from the author of the Bill had not succeeded. It should be borne in mind that among the major problems with that legislation is the fact it goes much further by proposing the amendment, in effect, of the Misuse of Drugs Act. It does not establish cannabis as a medicine to be regulated by the Health Products Regulatory Authority like any other medicine. The Bill proposes to amend the Misuse of Drugs Act and may have the effect of legalisation. It also proposes to create two new Government agencies, one an institute for cannabis and the other a regulatory body. If cannabis is to be a medicine, surely it should be regulated by the Health Products Regulatory Authority like any other medicine.

Top
Share