Vol. 1068 No. 3
163. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade for an update on his Department's recent engagements with the Government of Ukraine in respect of the ongoing conflict and efforts made to reach a ceasefire. [27399/25]
We all condemn Vladimir Putin's war of aggression on Ukraine and its recent intensification. It has resulted in a considerable loss of civilian life and many reprehensible attacks on civilian infrastructure. It represents the largest land conflict in Europe for nearly 80 years. Progress towards a ceasefire has been extremely slow. We all hope for a peace, but one that is sustainable. What is the Tánaiste's current understanding of the situation?
I thank the Deputy. Ireland’s support for the Government and people of Ukraine is steadfast. This remains a key focus of my Department’s engagements with Ukrainian interlocutors at political level; with the Ukrainian Embassy in Dublin through the Irish Embassy in Kyiv; and at EU and international level, where I continue to raise Ukraine as a matter of priority.
The Ukrainian foreign minister regularly joins the monthly meetings of the Foreign Affairs Council to provide an update on the situation in his country. On 20 May, the council discussed how the EU could step up its military support for Ukraine, play a constructive role in any potential peace process and contribute to security guarantees as part of a peace agreement. This followed an informal meeting of the council in Lviv on 9 May, as well as a ministerial meeting of the core group for the establishment of a special tribunal to ensure that those responsible for Russia’s aggression face justice. The Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, attended these meetings as a further signal of the Government’s steadfast support for Ukraine. In April, the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, visited Odesa to open an underground school shelter co-funded by Ireland and then travelled on to Kyiv for meetings with Ukrainian interlocutors focused on Ireland's commitment to supporting Ukraine, including on its EU accession path. On 6 May, the Ukrainian foreign minister joined the Global Ireland Summit virtually, where he provided an update on the latest developments and current needs and expressed appreciation for support offered by Ireland to Ukraine to date. Across these engagements, Ireland has underlined our commitment to working with Ukraine and our partners to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace that protects Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity in line with the principles of the UN Charter, and provides the necessary security guarantees so that we do not see a return to Russian aggression in the future.
Ireland has provided extensive political, humanitarian, non-lethal military and economic support to Ukraine since February 2022. This includes €138 million in humanitarian assistance and stabilisation supports. Recently, Ireland committed €100 million bilaterally in non-lethal military support to Ukraine.
Obviously, it is incredibly frightening when you are dealing with the reality of underground schools. There is huge desire internationally for peace but the fear is Vladimir Putin is just playing along. The Ukrainian Government obviously has a desire for peace, but I imagine it would have to be on a sustainable basis. It has an appetite for real negotiations. We have seen attacks on energy infrastructure, civilian infrastructure and on the home city of President Zelenskyy, Kryvyi Rih. We all condemn these attacks and it is difficult not to be somewhat cynical about the attitude towards peace of Vladimir Putin. During a recent set of peace talks in Istanbul on 16 May, Russia sent a low-level delegation. How serious are they? We have many issues with the US Administration but it was previously inclined to offer latitude to Russia. It seems to be running out of patience. Does the Department have an expectation of what may come from the next round of negotiations on 2 June?
I very much welcome what the Deputy says because it reminds us of the fact there is only one aggressor here. It is Russia. It is Putin. There is a President of Ukraine and a President of Russia. The President, Government and people of Ukraine are willing and ready to accept an unconditional ceasefire for a period of time to provide space for proper talks and negotiations on a lasting, just, enduring peace. Russia talks about peace but there is always a caveat, hurdle or obstruction. All the time while talking about it, obstructing and refusing to accept an unconditional ceasefire, it continues to bomb civilian infrastructure and attack Ukraine, its civilians and its energy infrastructure. I have been in Kyiv and met people whose homes have been destroyed by Russian shelling. Russia talks about peace but it is never just yet. That is why the world cannot let up and why, I think, we will need further sanctions against Russia, including at EU level.
I welcome the Tánaiste's criticism of Russia's warmongering and cynical approach to peace talks. It is important that the international community escalate pressure in that regard. The Irish position has been that Ukraine must be at the negotiating table. There is an absolute logic to that. The European Union needs to be at that negotiating table also. Does the Tánaiste believe more is required from the EU to build international pressure on Russia? That means moving on whatever sanctions can work. I assume the United States will take a position. We will deal with many issues where we are in no way happy with how America is operating in the world but it can play a decent role here. There are means by which the European Union, America and the international community can build a peace process and a sustainable peace.
The Deputy is right. We cannot walk away from supporting and standing by Ukraine. We all want peace. We all want to see the killing and the war end. We want to see the prisoners released. We saw some degree of a prisoner exchange recently. However, we do not want a peace that rewards aggression or that rips up the UN Charter. We do not want a "peace" that does not involve Ukraine. Therefore, the most important thing to do is keep the pressure up. That is why we have to support further sanctions against Russia. We welcomed the adoption of the 17th package of sanctions on 20 March. This package builds on significant bodies of sanctions the EU has put in place since the launch of Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022. These sanctions are clearly having an economic impact but given Russia's continuing aggression in Ukraine, we need to see further sanctions. The Commission and member states are now working on proposals for an 18th package and these proposals are expected to focus on reducing Russian revenue from the energy sector, as well as further measures to prevent Russia from accessing battlefield goods and technology.
164. Deputy Duncan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will call for an emergency special session of the UN General Assembly and table a resolution calling for collective measures to allow for the delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza and protection of its citizens; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27478/25]
The Tánaiste will recall the House yesterday approved a motion developed by the Labour Party and formally supported by Sinn Féin, the Social Democrats, the Green Party and others, mandating the Government to call for a special General Assembly of the United Nations to promote and instigate certain collective measures in respect of Gaza. Given the motion has effectively been adopted, how does the Government plan to implement it?
Exactly. I would add that I spoke very much in favour of that motion yesterday. I said I not only was not opposing it but also wanted to see it taken forward. I believed it a constructive addition to the discussion. Government and Opposition need to work more together on the common values we share and our desire to see an end to the genocide taking place in Gaza, perpetrated by the Israeli Government.
Before coming to the Deputy’s question, I wish to take a moment to express my deep sadness at the shooting dead of two staff members of the Embassy of Israel in Washington on 21 May. I condemn this attack in the strongest possible terms and send my condolences to the families of those killed.
When it comes to Gaza, I fully share the Deputy's deep concern at the appalling humanitarian situation. I have consistently condemned any arrangement for humanitarian assistance - I think that is at the heart of the Labour Party motion - that does not ensure access for the entire population. Recent days have seen a small amount - if you could even call it that - of aid being permitted to enter Gaza. It is completely out of proportion with the scale of humanitarian need, which continues to grow.
Alongside that, it is linking humanitarian aid to political and military motivation, which you can never link to access to food and basic humanitarian aid. I, along with international partners, continue to apply pressure on this point and the motion in the House yesterday was helpful in that regard. Close co-ordination with like-minded partners is central to the work we are doing.
A shared priority with European and regional partners at this time is the UN high-level International Conference for the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution. The conference will take place in New York in June and will be co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia. The conference was mandated by way of a resolution adopted on 18 September 2024 at a reconvened tenth emergency special session of the UN General Assembly on Palestine. That will provide an opportunity for Ireland in person and at a very senior Government level to raise the issues we have discussed. We are already beginning to raise those issues. I had a meeting with my officials today. I will come back in on that point.
It is important that the motion be implemented and that the will of the House be accepted by the Government and implemented at every opportunity. We have used the opportunity of the special General Assembly well. In recent times, we called for the upgrading of Palestine's status in the context of the UN General Assembly and the UN more generally, which is to be welcomed.
Ireland has led the way internationally on Gaza. There are no two ways about it. This time last year, we took the decision to recognise the State of Palestine. Collectively, across the Chamber, our views were prescient in respect of the EU-Israel association agreement. Other countries are now starting to pay attention and are catching up with Ireland. There will be an opportunity next month for us to continue to show courage and leadership in this space by doing exactly what the motion called for, that is, UN-backed and -administered aid immediately into Gaza, a ceasefire and the development of a UN-backed peacekeeping force.
That is absolutely the case. I do not mean to be pedantic, but as I said yesterday, there has in the past been an emergency special session of the UN General Assembly on this issue. If it is reconvened and becomes the vehicle by which we can bring forward the resolution discussed yesterday in the House or another mechanism is required, we are all open to working on this and the outcome is the same.
I appreciate what the Deputy has said. I do not view Gaza as a partisan issue because we all want to get to the same place of a two-state solution, an end to the genocide, accountability for the war crimes that have been committed, the release of the hostages and the flow of humanitarian aid. To be honest, we need some of the big countries to move. I know from my engagement with my European counterparts that their populations are concerned, as Irish people are. I hope that, in the build-up to the UN special conference next month, some of the big European nations - and I have noticed a change in their tone and comments in recent days - take a step forward and recognise the State of Palestine. We should not underestimate the importance that would have on the global stage. I call on those countries, as I am sure the Deputy would, too, to join us in recognising the State of Palestine.
I absolutely would. A window is now opening because we have seen a step change in the UK, France and Canada over the past week or ten days in respect of their perspective on Gaza, the genocide, what is happening there and what needs to happen. We have also seen a step change in Germany, especially in our sister party of the Social Democratic Party of Germany, SDP. The Chancellor has made interesting remarks about the completely unacceptable behaviour of the Israeli regime and state.
Ireland will be chairing one of the working groups at the two-state solution conference next month. In order for the two-state solution that this House and State officially support, we need a viable Palestinian state. Quite frankly, the ethnic cleansing and genocide that have been perpetrated by Israel are designed to obliterate the notion and the understood legal position of the aspiration for a two-state solution. At this point, the Tánaiste may not be in a position to be crystal clear about our priorities when chairing that working group but he might put on the record what function we will have, which working group we will be chairing, if he is aware, and what opportunities we can exploit and use to ensure there continues to be momentum behind the motion adopted in the House yesterday.
I thank the Deputy. He is correct that Ireland will be pleased to play a central role at that UN conference. We have been invited by France and Saudi Arabia to co-chair one of the working groups. With Türkiye, we will be co-chairing one of the eight working groups that form part of the conference. Final details of the work programmes for each working group are to be established in the coming days. Intensive work and close political co-ordination with European and Arab partners are continuing, including through a meeting of the Madrid group, of which Ireland is a part, last Sunday. That was a precursor to the UN meeting.
The UN conference will provide an important opportunity to advance discussions on concrete initiatives, which is an important phrase, towards implementing the two-state solution, such as the implementation of the Arab recovery and reconstruction plan for Gaza, which will include addressing the need for security arrangements on the ground that respect Palestinian sovereignty and take account of Israeli security needs. A lot has happened in recent days that has been drowned out because of the horrific actions of the Government of Israel. The Arab plan talks about a future for Gaza without Hamas. There is a considerable amount of work with which we could move forward if Israel were to stop its war crimes and let the aid in and the hostages out. We can then have an exciting discussion about recovery and reconstruction.
165. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade for an update on his engagements with the EU-Israel Association Council, following the recent meeting of the council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27400/25]
We are watching genocide on a daily basis. It is incredible to many of us that there remains business as usual in trade, even preferential trade, between the EU and Israel. Too many countries have failed to raise their voices, as the Tánaiste has already mentioned to some degree. We have seen movement but we need more. We need the humanitarian conditions that exist in the EU-Israel association agreement to be put in play. If that is the will of many of the people of the EU states in question, then we need the states to follow through.
I agree with the Deputy. Following a meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council last Tuesday, the EU High Representative announced that the EU would finally conduct a review of Article 2 of the EU-Israel association agreement. This is an important decision that reflects the grave concerns held by member states regarding the situation in Gaza. We went from two countries - Ireland and Spain - calling for this to 17 countries at that meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council.
The EU remains steadfast in its calls for the release of all hostages by Hamas, the urgent resumption of negotiations and, crucially, a free-flowing surge of humanitarian aid. However, we are now seeing agreement from a clear majority of member states on the need to exert more effective influence on Israel to reverse course, halt its military operations, to put it mildly, and to cease its obstruction of lifesaving aid. Such a step is about using the European Union's influence to effect positive change on the ground. As the House is aware, Ireland and Spain called for this step to be taken in February 2024. Since then, the situation has only become immeasurably worse with catastrophic consequences for the civilian population and a real risk of famine.
It is my strong view that if Israel is deemed in breach of its obligations - and how can it not be? - such a finding must be followed by concrete action. The human rights clauses in these agreements are not just there for padding. They are not discretional extras. They must have impact. There must be a consequence to breaching the human rights clauses in the agreement. This is a position I have reiterated clearly, alongside my counterparts from Spain, Slovenia and Luxembourg, in a joint letter to the High Representative in advance of the Foreign Affairs Council meeting. We underlined in that letter the need for a review to be undertaken urgently. Based on this work, the High Representative, working with the Commission as a whole, should bring forward concrete proposals for appropriate measures. As I have made clear in the Dáil this week, it is Ireland's view that the operation of the association agreement should be suspended pending the outcome of a review of Israel's compliance.
At this point, there is considerable urgency. We see what people are facing in Gaza. We are talking about the starvation of one in five people. More than 54,000 people have been killed. The most recent figure was 3,924 deaths since the so-called ceasefire. This is a terrible term to use, but Israel okayed 800 truckloads of aid last week. We hear that only 500 made their way in. It is obvious what Israel is doing.
We welcome the fact that we are now talking about a clear majority but we need a timeline for this review. We need to see the appropriate measures the Tánaiste has spoken about as soon as possible. We must ensure we do whatever we can.
I agree that there is an issue with these clauses. There needs to be a better means of dealing with these issues into the future but the people of Gaza do not have time for us to get better rules. We need to deal with what we have in front of us at the moment. What is the Government's plan? What is the plan of the European Union? Does the Tánaiste foresee this happening in a reasonable timeline? I do not know what "reasonable" means in this context.
The Deputy is right. It is offensive, to put it mildly, that it has taken this long to get to the point of reviewing the association agreement. It is as clear as day that the human rights clauses of the association agreement are being breached. I understand there needs to be a review to establish that, and I get that, but this is something that we called for in February 2024.
I welcome the fact that there is now a clear majority of member states, big and small with different political governments in power, that have recognised this now and joined the Irish, Spanish and Dutch position on this. The fact that there are 17 member states shows how Europe is speaking up about how these atrocities need to end in a way other parts of the world are not. I want that review to be quick. I hope it can be. I expect it can be. We have waited long enough for it to commence, now it needs to conclude in an efficient manner. I accept this is not the majority position in the European Union but our position is that the agreement should be suspended.
In the meantime, we will go ahead with our own domestic legislation and I encourage other European member states to look at what we are doing and also consider banning trade from the occupied Palestinian territories.
In fairness, we have to put whatever pressure we can on the EU-Israel association agreement but we also have to deal with what we can domestically. On the occupied territories Bill, when will the scheme be sent to the committee? It is anxious to do the pre-legislative scrutiny, but the committee is not permitted to schedule scrutiny until it has received the Bill. The Tánaiste is well aware of the appetite that exists for the Bill to be enacted by the summer recess. On what date will the committee get the Bill from the Tánaiste and his Department? He keeps talking about legal issues. He says he is open to there being delivery on the issue of services, but we need this expanded upon. What are the legal issues?
I do not want to revisit Tuesday's debate. We tabled Israeli war bond legislation. A large number of people have an issue with the Central Bank facilitating the sale of those bonds. We got the OPLA to do look at the Bill. If the Government disagrees with the Bill, is there another means of dealing with the matter so that we can ensure that our Central Bank is not facilitating this?
Every day, the Government looks at what more we can do and is happy to always constructively look at that with the Opposition. I, too, do not want to revisit that debate other than to say the Minister for Finance outlined the Government's position based on legal realities and on the legislation not achieving what we believed Sinn Féin thought the legislation would achieve. However, there is a hell of a lot we actually agree on as regards Gaza. I know that it sometimes does not suit people politically to agree, but this issue it is so important that we have to lean into what we actually agree on and what we can get done.
The Deputy asked a direct question on the occupied Palestinian territories Bill. I cannot give him a date in June but I can tell him it will go to the foreign affairs committee as early in June as possible. In fairness to my officials, they only got the formal Government decision on Tuesday. They now have to draft the Bill. As the Deputy can imagine, they are working away on the general scheme. I have spoken to the Chair of the committee. It will be for him and the committee to decide what they wish to do in terms of how they wish to schedule it. There is a lot of cross-party unity of purpose in terms of a Bill. As I said to Frances Black, I hope one of the outcomes of this Bill is that it genuinely inspires other parliaments and governments to table similar legislation.
166. Deputy Jennifer Whitmore asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the engagement he has had with his “like-minded” European counterparts on the EU-Mercosur free trade agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16073/25]
The looming threat of Mercosur is causing enormous stress in the agricultural community. What level of engagement has the Tánaiste had with like-minded European counterparts, by which I mean those who also do not want to see the Mercosur free trade agreement go through, and will he make a statement?
I thank Deputy Whitmore for raising this issue. I share her view and her awareness in terms of the anxiety and concern that there is from farmers, climate activists and many people about this Mercosur free trade agreement. I believe we all share the view that free, fair and open trade is something that we in this country support. It is something that we have done well from economically and beyond that. It is an important part of our economic model. We all get that, and recent developments in the global trading environment have highlighted even more so the importance of market diversification, including an expanded set of EU free trade agreements that support more opportunities for exports and investment, help support jobs and growth at home, maintain strict EU standards on food safety, animal and plant health, and support better environmental and human rights standards around the world.
However, we have always been clear that such agreements have to defend our must vulnerable sectors and that farmers' livelihoods must not be undermined through weak or ineffective environmental standards in other countries. Our position is and remains that which was clearly outlined in the programme for Government, which states that the Government will work "with like-minded EU countries to stand up for Irish farmers and defend our interests in opposing the current Mercosur trade deal.". In our trade negotiations, we have always been guided by standing up for and defending the interests of Irish farmers while also trying to secure enhanced market access opportunities for them and Irish agrifood exports.
Since the Commission announced the conclusion of negotiations, officials from my Department and other Departments, including the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, have been working together to carefully analyse the text of the additional legal instrument addressing sustainability commitments. I wish to assure the Deputy that my officials and I have continued to engage at EU level at every opportunity with the European Commission - I had a meeting directly with the trade Commissioner, Maroš Šefčovič, on this - and counterparts in EU member states, including like-minded countries. We discussed this recently at a Foreign Affairs Council trade meeting. We did this to voice our concerns with the agreement and to interrogate the outcome of negotiations.
I specifically had a meeting with the French foreign minister, Mr. Jean-Noël Barrot, on 14 April that was exclusively on the topic of the Mercosur agreement where we both reiterated our opposition. This engagement is ongoing.
I thank the Tánaiste. France is one of the leading countries in opposition to this. It has said it does not want to see European farmers being used as an adjustment tool for trade. Similar to the Tánaiste, they question the environmental concerns about the deforestation of the Amazon and the weaker agricultural standards in Mercosur countries.
Poland is backing France in a blocking minority within the European Council. Will Ireland also formally join that blocking minority? At this stage, we need to get some formal systems and processes in place so that our agricultural and environmental sectors' fears are allayed and they know Ireland is doing everything possible. The Commission wants to finalise this deal by the year's end. It is important that we formally join France and Poland to oppose this deal.
Our opposition to the agreement is as strong as France's and, potentially, Poland's will be. Let me reflect on whether and when we will formally join that group and revert to the Deputy, but I have been clear in my conversations with the French Government about our opposition. I do not see any sign of the French Government's position changing on that.
Technically, the agreement is undergoing what they call "legal scrubbing" at the moment. It will then be translated into all official EU languages. There is some uncertainty over what form the final Commission proposal to member states will take. It could either be a mixed agreement, which would require unanimous member state approval, or it could be a split agreement with the trade elements applied on an interim basis. As the Deputy mentioned, this is when a blocking minority would come in because it would then require qualified majority voting.
In the interim, relevant Departments will continue their detailed analysis of the agreement. We will continue to work with like-minded countries and make our points to the European Commission about the concerns we have. It is expected that the Commission will present the final agreement package, combining the 2019 agreement and the additional legal instrument, in late quarter 2 or early quarter 3 of this year.
If it is split and trade is dealt with separately, my understanding is that it will cause us concerns.
Regarding European partners, has the Tánaiste had any conversations with the Netherlands and Italy? My understanding is that their framing of this is softening. Is the Tánaiste or is the State also trying to have conversations to get them back to a position where they are opposing it?
I am concerned about recent reporting in The Business Post that said the Department was saying it was not as worried about the Mercosur deal and it was not as bad as people thought. Will the Tánaiste provide some comments on that? That is a very worrying message to be sent out to the sector. On the face of it, it would indicate Ireland was not fighting as hard as it should against the agreement if there was a general acceptance within the Department that it was not as bad as it could be.
We are continuing to engage. I had a meeting with my Italian counterpart, Antonio Tajani, a while ago on this. I intend to seek to speak to him again on it because I read some commentary in a report I got back from Italy recently about some broader discussion in Italy on it. I have not heard directly from the minister on it, so I do not wish to misrepresent Italy's position.
In fairness to the European Commission, it is a statement of fact to say that the new legal instrument is trying to make improvements. That is true. The new deal makes the Paris Agreement an essential element. There is a new deal around concrete commitments to tackle deforestation. There are commitments on trade, women's empowerment and the development of a sustainable supply chain. I acknowledge that the Commission is endeavouring to make the agreement better, but I am also not convinced that the additional legal instrument provides the necessary legally binding assurances that Ireland has insisted upon since way back when. It is for that reason we continue to oppose the agreement.
We have always been willing to work and engage. There have been some improvements but does it meet the threshold of the legally binding assurances we need? It does not.
167. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade for an update on Ireland's engagements with the EU regarding draft reciprocal trade tariffs. [27401/25]
We have seen further highly provocative statements by the US President. Some of this is calculated, I have to assume, to spook and bully. We have obviously seen an element of a timeline further down the line with regard to us facing tariffs but it seems, unfortunately, we cannot dismiss them. What is the latest position with respect to engagement with the EU on countertariffs?
Ireland’s consistent position remains that we need substantive, calm, measured and comprehensive dialogue with the United States. I am pleased to say this is also the position of the European Union, which has shared a constructive proposal for scoping out a negotiation between the two sides. At the same time, we understand the need for the EU to undertake further internal preparations in case negotiations are unsuccessful. This often gets misrepresented. The European Union does not want to see tariffs or trade barriers. In many areas, we are offering zero for zero in terms of tariffs but we would be pretty darn foolish to go into negotiations without negotiating from a position of strength. We have to have a backup plan and do preparatory work if the United States continues to wish to harm our economic interests. This is a sensible and measured approach.
It should be remembered that to date, the EU has not imposed any tariffs on the US while EU and Irish exporters are subjected today to 10% tariffs on exports. We have shown extraordinary restraint in the face of great provocation. We must also be upfront in that there are still risks of further sectoral tariffs, including due to the section 232 investigations on pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and now aircraft and aircraft parts.
On 8 May, the European Commission published its draft list of proposed rebalancing measures against the US. The list concerns imports from the US to the EU worth around €95 billion. It covers a broad range of industrial and agricultural products. In addition to the list of proposed rebalancing measures, the Commission published a much shorter list of EU goods exported to the US, and public consultation is currently open for comment until 10 June.
Since this dispute began, I have been in frequent communication with Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič and I recently met with the Commissioner and fellow trade ministers at an EU Trade Council meeting in Brussels on 15 May. My officials and I are also engaging with business stakeholders to understand potential impacts, including through the Government trade forum, which I chair. We will continue to convey these to the European Commission and urge stakeholders to participate in the EU’s public consultation directly.
Our message is clear: the EU is ready to move forward. We urge the US to engage rapidly and to reach a fair and timely solution.
We all get the idea - tariffs and trade wars are bad for all concerned. What has been proposed by the President of the United States could fold a huge level of world trade. It would not be beneficial to America, Ireland or the European Union and would have a huge impact on the global economy, none of it good. I do not think anyone has come up with a way to win a trade war.
I agree that we need cooler heads to prevail but a large number of people work in the multinational sector. Some of those sectors invested in the US market, and they will be very concerned. My primary question relates to the EU's response. Could we get more of an update on what this retaliatory package would look like? We all welcome that areas such as pharma and dairy would not be included. I accept that the European Union, like any other outfit, is going to come up with something that would impact America. We would obviously like to protect whiskey businesses and whatever, but when we are talking about 50% tariffs, there is not going to be a whole pile of protection for everybody. We just hope that it is more bluster than it is reality.
I think the Deputy is right and I also hope that is what it is. I learned a long time ago not to respond to every Truth Social post or every tweet. We need to be calm and substantive in our engagement here. I welcome that President von der Leyen and President Trump spoke on the phone the other evening. That provided more of a window of space for engagement. I welcome that engagement.
I also note the federal court ruling in the US that some of the tariffs imposed by the US Administration exceed President Trump's authority and that the US Administration is now appealing this ruling, so much uncertainty remains. A number of points remain unclear but what is very clear is that the European Union and Ireland will continue to do everything possible to reach a negotiated, mutually beneficial agreement with the US.
The Deputy is right, though. If we get into a situation where tariffs become the norm, that would be extraordinarily worrying. Even 10% tariffs on certain sectors of our economy and other economies in the European Union would have a real and very negative impact. We are working on this around the clock. We need to keep on pushing for a negotiated solution. We will work with the Opposition and keep it briefed, as we have done, as these negotiations progress.
I will accept that there will not be clarity on the question of what exactly the package is going to look like. I have no doubt about that but I will ask the question. We are making the case for those sectors we would like to protect but every other state in the European Union is making the same arguments. It is necessary that we represent Irish views, needs and wants.
We also have to deal with the fact that we have to build up our indigenous sector. We know the issues as regards the failure to invest in infrastructure and, some would say, our excessive reliance on tax incentives. It is vital that we engage with the EU on key products and exports, that we explore new markets, develop supports for jobs in sectors under threat and tackle energy costs that are undermining our business and competitiveness. We know the issue that exists with respect to housing - the Tánaiste hears it from ISME, IBEC and others - and then investing in our infrastructure. Will the Tánaiste give an outline of the state of play regarding preparations for supports for businesses and diversification and any engagements there are with those sectors, particularly medtech and pharma, as well as others we believe will be impacted?
First, on what the countertariff measures might look like, it is open to consultation until 10 June. The Government will make its views known. It is also open to every sector and person to make a submission, and we are encouraging people to do that. What we saw the last time we engaged on this was that we actually made some progress in removing some items from the list of retaliatory measures that were of particular concern to our economy, farmers and drinks industry.
Pharma is an area of major concern. I met with all the pharma companies recently through the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association. Similarly, I met the medtech and aircraft leasing industries recently. At our Government trade forum, we are diving into different sectors of the economy at each meeting as well. The Deputy is right, though, as regards controlling what we can control.
On market diversification, the Minister, Deputy Burke, and I will bring forward a new plan on that issue within the next month but I got Government approval to progress the ratification of CETA, the trade agreement with Canada, this week as an example of market diversification. In July, the Minister, Deputy Burke, will also bring forward a competitiveness plan as to how we support small and medium enterprises.
168. Deputy Noel McCarthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to outline the increase, if any, in staff numbers in the Passport Office this year; the staff positions in the Passport Office that were filled as a result of any increase; his Department’s plans to further boost staff numbers in the Passport Office ahead of the busier summer holiday period; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27613/25]
I thank Deputy McCarthy for the question. The passport service is experiencing a high level of demand for passports as our citizens prepare for upcoming summer travel plans. Thanks to operational and staffing plans implemented by my Department, I am pleased to say that the passport service is successfully responding to the current level of demand, and we have issued over 440,000 passports and passport cards to date this year. All turnaround times are at their target level and there is no backlog.
This time of year is particularly busy for the customer service hub based in Balbriggan. I was out there recently meeting staff, and I am pleased to say that agents in the hub are responding to almost 2,400 phone and webchat queries per day, which is an extraordinary number. Ensuring that the passport service has enough staff to respond to demand is a key priority for my Department and is kept under constant review. The passport service undertakes advance workforce planning based on the forecasted demand for passports and my Department’s management board approves this staffing plan annually.
As a result of this extensive planning process, the passport service is well resourced to meet forecasted demand for 2025. There are currently 858 staff working in the passport service, which represents 98% of the approved staffing target. This includes 133 temporary clerical officers who have joined the passport service since November 2024. We now have the highest number of sanctioned staff ever in our passport service.
Having recently visited the largest passport office in Balbriggan and seen the work being done there by staff who are responding to customer queries, managing huge volumes of documents and processing applications from start to finish, I say "thank you" to them for the work they are doing. I am satisfied that the current level of staffing is appropriate to meet demand for this critical citizen service.
I encourage people, as we all should, to please check their passport because that can help with meeting the demand. We can always try to help people in difficult situations. It is much easier if people check their passport, and they will be much less likely to get in trouble with the family as well. You do not want to be the one who tells them they cannot go on their summer holidays.
I welcome the Tánaiste's response. I acknowledge the important work of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the passport service in overseeing a considerable increase in the number of passports issued over the past five years. I also welcome the rise in staff numbers over the same period.
As public representatives, we often see a large rise in the number of passport queries in the run-up to the school holidays and I have no doubt this is one of the passport service's busiest periods of the year. That is why it is important additional staff are hired during this period, which the Tánaiste has acknowledged, to ensure the current turnaround times are kept and no processing backlogs emerge. What percentage of additional staff recruited for the summer period will be permanent appointments?
In addition, it is my experience from engagement with the passport service that sometimes production issues can unfortunately emerge. As such, is the Department giving any consideration to further increasing passport production facilities in the State?
I will double-check that I am correct but my understanding is that of the 858 staff, approximately 133 are temporary clerical officers. I will double-check the split between temporary and permanent staff.
I thought the Deputy might have a particular interest in Cork so I checked and found that 117 staff are working in the Passport Office in Cork. It is not possible to have any more staff in Cork because the building is now full. However, the second bit of good news I have for the Deputy is that there are plans to move the passport service in Cork to a new building. I believe that will be ready next year, which will give us an opportunity to further expand our footprint and staffing numbers in Cork as there is need and demand for that.
From budgetary and staffing points of view, I am satisfied we are in a good place. We will review this if we need to step up a bit. We can do that but at the moment, all of the projections are that staffing and demand are aligned. We need to continue to keep a very close eye on that.
I wholeheartedly welcome the news about the possible move to a new building in Cork that will open next year. Are any efforts being made to increase the time period when an adult renewal application is instead considered on a first-time basis? Currently, a passport renewal is considered a first-time application if the previous passport was issued more than 15 years ago. I thank the Tánaiste for the continued work the Passport Office is doing.
I thank Deputy McCarthy. I will check with the Passport Office if it plans to look further at that. There is always a passport reform process under way. We have seen a number of reforms. We have come a very long way from the Covid backlog and all the challenges then to now having a system that is very efficient. It is a good example of public service reform and also of digitisation. I meet so many of my constituents, and I remember this from getting my own passport, who say you take the picture on your phone while standing in your kitchen, send it off online and you are often shocked at how quickly the passport arrives in the post. That is not to say there cannot be improvements. I hear stories from colleagues about how the process interacts with the gardaí who are witnessing the forms. Gardaí are very busy so are there better ways to do that. There are challenges, and rightful ones, about making sure we have very robust procedures for getting a first-time passport for a child because we need to get child protection right. Then there is the point the Deputy made about when is a passport considered a first-time passport for an adult as well. Let me take that point away, examine it and give it some consideration. We are in a reasonably good space here and I thank all of the staff who worked to make that a reality.
