JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS debate -
Wednesday, 16 Jul 2003

Vol. 1 No. 36

General Affairs and External Relations Council.

Chairman

We will take Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5. No. 2 is the proposal by Deputy Quinn on the use of the European flag. It is suggested that the joint committee, having agreed the above resolution, further agrees that a copy of this report should be laid before the Dáil and Seanad and agrees that a copy should be sent to the Dáil and Seanad Committees on Procedures and Privileges. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. 3 is correspondence. We have received a reply from the Secretary General of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment which we will circulate. This reply is from the private secretary to the Minister on the council report on the implementation of the common strategy of the European Union on Russia. It is proposed to note this. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Are the minutes of the last meeting agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Mulcahy

I have two separate points. Is there any update on the legal adviser issue? I think the Chairman may have met with somebody from the University of Limerick who is undertaking research on all EU scrutiny committees. The question of independent legal advice has arisen many times during our discussions with colleagues in other countries on EU scrutiny. We should try to deal with it.

Chairman

The only advice I have is that the legal adviser to the Houses would make herself available from time to time. This is an issue which predates the current committee and its powers. I am in the hands of the committee as to how best we might follow up this issue. The matter has been raised many times. Perhaps we might try to meet with the Clerk of the Dáil to consider the matter.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

It is an issue which should not be rushed. We should keep it on the agenda. In the light of the new arrangements for the running of the Houses through the Oireachtas Commission, it is probably an issue that would be raised in that context. I imagine we would not get any decision on such an approach until the new procedures are in place. I recommend we look at the issue again in the context of the Oireachtas Commission.

Chairman

I suggest we invite the Clerk of the Dáil to attend the committee in private session in, say, September and we will flag this issue with him.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

Yes, he will be the Secretary General of the new commission.

Deputy Mulcahy

I mentioned it specifically because we are all aware that under the Convention there is to be a new yellow flagging procedure. That will not make sense or will not be operable on our part unless we have independent authoritative advice on European constitutional law.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

What is the timetable for further committee meetings during the summer period?

Chairman

It is proposed to have a meeting next week to wind up on the Convention.

Deputy Quinn

What date?

Chairman

Next Thursday, 24 July 2003 at 12.30 p.m.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

Could the meeting be held earlier?

Chairman

We could, perhaps, move the scrutiny meeting back to 9 a.m. but that is a very early start. We will set the meeting for 10 o'clock and will try to complete the scrutiny meeting by then.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

So we are taking the scrutiny meeting at 9.30 a.m. and the meeting re the Convention at 10 o'clock?

Chairman

Yes. I welcome the Minister of State to the meeting. The list of eight items discussed at the Council on 16 June was recently circulated to members of the committee. In accordance with the normal procedures, I will ask the Minister of State to make a presentation to be followed by questions, separately, on external relations and then on general affairs.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Mr. D. Roche)

Thank you. I will deal with general affairs and external relations in my opening comments because the agenda is a little thin on general affairs.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to appear before the committee and to brief members in preparation for the Council meeting which takes place in Brussels on 21 and 22 July. I will attend the meeting in place of the Minister for Foreign Affairs who is travelling to an EU-Asia meeting on the opening day of the Council.

The main item on the General Affairs agenda will be a public debate on the Presidency programme. Given that Ireland will assume the Presidency on 1 January 2004, we will be taking a particular interest in the Italian programme and in facilitating and assisting the Italians with what is quite a well laid out programme. Ireland wishes to be as supportive as possible of the Italian Presidency in implementing its objectives. This includes work on the Inter-governmental Conference which the Presidency intends to convene formally in Rome on 4 October 2003, a littleearlier than expected.

In external relations, the first issue is to deal with the Middle East peace process. While violence in the occupied territories and Israel continues, there have been a number of positive developments in the peace process in recent weeks. Ministers will meet the Israeli and Palestinian Foreign Ministers during the course of next week's Council meeting and will be briefed on the perspectives from both sides. The new European Special Representative for the Middle East, the distinguished Belgian ambassador, Marc Otte, will also attend the meeting. On 30 June, Ministers for Foreign affairs welcomed the ceasefire announced by Hamas and the Israeli decision to withdraw from the Gaza Strip and from Bethlehem.

It is important that there should be clear and firm international support for the efforts of the parties in the peace process. Undoubtedly there will be those on both sides who will work to undermine the ceasefire and to destroy the road map for peace. As we know from our experience of peace process and peace making, incidents of terrorism and provocation are almost inevitable and they should not be allowed to derail the process. Even in the face of terrorism and provocation, it must be remembered that the only alternative to pursuing the road map is an unending cycle of violence. We must encourage both Israel and the Palestinian Governments not to allow violence to deflect them from the task of building peace.

The role of the Quartet - the United States, United Nations, European Union and Russia - in supporting peace efforts will be vital. We look forward to assisting in that work over the next year in the Troika, as the holder of the Presidency of the European Union and as a member of the Quartet. The initiative of the Arab League Foreign Ministers at their Beirut meeting in March of last year remains important and must be an element in a comprehensive peace settlement. I remind members that the initiative of the Arab League Foreign Ministers was a gesture of intent to assist in the peace process. I recently met all the Arab ambassadors accredited to Ireland and this was an issue that was discussed. I have no doubt of the sincerity of the Arab League's concerns in this regard.

During his visit to the region, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, met President Arafat. This is in line with Ireland's analysis and with the European Union view that to try to boost Prime Minister Abbas by undermining President Arafat would be counter-productive. The view is shared by all Arab leaders, including Mahmoud Abbas.

Ireland has long taken a deep and sympathetic interest in the affairs of the region, as evidenced by its participation in UN peacekeeping operations for over a quarter of a century. We shall continue our efforts and look forward to working constructively with our European and international partners.

In recent weeks, considerable concern has been expressed over the potential of Iran's nuclear programmes. The issue is on the agenda. The Government shares the widely-held concern to strengthen non-proliferation in this very sensitive region. For this reason, Ireland supports continued dialogue on the issue between the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran. In that context, we welcome the fact that Dr. Al Baraday has been invited to return to Iran and that his meetings there appear to have been useful and constructive. We hope this week's visit to Iran by experts from the IAEA will be equally productive. The EU will continue to press for action by Iran on human rights, non-proliferation, support on dealing with terrorism and support for the Middle East peace process. We continue to believe that engagement and dialogue with Iran represent the best way forward.

At the forthcoming Council, Ministers are due to consider the question of a United Nations resolution on the death penalty. If a decision is taken at the Council to table a resolution at the forthcoming UN General Assembly on the abolition of the death penalty, Ireland will strongly support the resolution and will work with other like-minded states to seek its adoption in the General Assembly. In common with its European partners, Ireland considers that the abolition of the death penalty contributes to the enhancement of human dignity and the progressive development of human rights. We are committed to working for the universal abolition of the death penalty and to taking systematic action in this regard in our relations with the Third World and at appropriate international fora. The draft constitutional treaty which was recently signed at the Convention on the Future of Europe makes it clear that the death penalty will be banned throughout the European Union and that is to be welcomed.

The Council is also due to consider the most recent developments in Iraq. The Government continues to be concerned at the deterioration in that country. We welcome the inauguration of a new governing council as a much-needed first step towards the handing over of power to the Iraqi people. The Government has made clear from the outset its conviction that the Iraqi people have the inalienable right to a representative Government of their own choosing. The sooner this can be achieved, the better for everybody. It is hoped that once the first step has been taken, there will be steady and rapid progress towards that end.

In common with the wider international community, the Government also takes the view that the United Nations should play a central role in the reconstruction of Iraq. We welcome the greater definition of the UN role which emerged from the discussions in the Security Council, particularly in asserting the emergence of representative political institutions. It is important that the Special Representative be given a clear mandate which will prove to be effective. The effective discharge of that mandate will be important in winning international acceptance of the legitimacy of Iraq's future political structures. We believe that the Special Representative's experience will be invaluable. Members will be aware that the Special Representative succeeded Mary Robinson in her post.

On the issue of the International Criminal Court, which is another agenda item, Ireland has been actively involved in the negotiations of the Rome Statute and since then has been regarded as a strong supporter of the ICC. This is borne out by the successful election earlier this year of Ireland's nominee to the position of judge in the International Criminal Court.

As a member of the European Union, Ireland has been active in the Union's efforts to ensure that as many states as possible sign and ratify the Rome Statute. Equally, it has been one of the strongest advocates within the Union of making the EU guidelines known to countries that are contemplating bilateral, non-surrender agreements. These issues have been in the news in recent days. We wish to ensure that these countries are aware of the elements such an agreement must contain and must avoid if it is to be compatible with the Rome Statute. Accordingly, Ireland is supportive of the Netherlands proposal to stiffen the language to do with the ICC and will be engaged at official level with partners in the political and security committee in tightening up the language ahead of its adoption at the Council.

In any discussion on the ICC, Ireland will stress the importance of reiterating the Union's support for the International Criminal Court but doing so in a non-confrontational manner, to avoid unnecessary transatlantic friction, while at the same time acknowledging the very real commitment shown by many states to the Court in difficult circumstances.

The Council will discuss the future of the current EU stabilisation and monitoring mission in the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia. Launched in March this year, Operation Concordia is generally perceived to have been successful so far. It has played a useful, complementary role in the EU's overall approach to the Balkans. In the former Yugoslav republic, authorities have requested a short extension of the mission under the same terms, beyond its scheduled conclusion at the end of September. I anticipate the Council's response to this request will be favourable.

The prospect of a possible EU police mission as a follow-on to Concordia is likely to arise during the Council meeting, at the request of the FYROM authorities. The details of such a potential further role for the EU remain to be fleshed out. It is likely that the Council will direct that this work should be brought forward. I expect that the Council will revisit this matter at an early stage in the autumn.

Ministers will be invited to approve formal Council conclusions on the theme of EU-UN co-operation in crisis management. This is an important and welcome initiative by the Italian Presidency. While the text remains to be finalised, I anticipate that Ireland will be able to give it full support.

Discussion of the agenda item on Africa is likely to focus on two issues, the first of which is EU-Africa relations in general. The situation in the Great Lakes region, including the EU-led temporary stabilisation force in the north-eastern province of Ituri in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Operation Artemis, will also be discussed. The EU high representative, Mr. Solana, is scheduled to visit the Great Lakes region on 15 and 16 July for meetings with the President of the DRC, Mr. Joseph Kabila, the President of Rwanda, Mr. Paul Kagame, and the President of Uganda, Mr. Yoweri Museveni. He will then report to the UN Security Council on Operation Artemis.

The EU-led temporary stabilisation mission in the north-eastern DRC province of lturi, Operation Artemis, has been under way since mid-June and is scheduled to conclude on 1 September next. The basis for the mission lies in Chapter VII of the UN Charter, particularly UN Security Council Resolution 1484. This resolution authorises the deployment of an interim emergency multinational force to contribute to the stabilisation of the security and humanitarian situation in the city of Bunia. The EU's intervention followed a direct request from the UN Secretary General to help the response to the ongoing crisis in the area, especially in Bunia. I welcome this further concrete evidence of close co-operation between the EU and the UN in the area of crisis management. Five members of the Defence Forces are participating in Operation Artemis. While the mission has been successful in helping to restore calm to Bunia so far, the overall security situation is reported to remain volatile. Close co-ordination between the EU force and the UN mission in the DRC will be necessary on an ongoing basis.

The role of the EU in the Democratic Republic of the Congo will not end on 1 September next. Initial consideration is being given to providing possible further assistance to strengthened UN observer operations there from mid-August, including by supporting local Congolese police forces. The political and security committee is discussing longer-term EU political support for the peace process in the DRC, including support for the transitional Government. In the meantime, negotiations are continuing at the UN Security Council on strengthening the mandate and increasing the force of the UN observer force in that country.

The EU Presidency will report on EU Troika meetings at the summit of the African Union which took place last week in Mozambique. Both sides of the EU-Africa dialogue recognise that the participation of Zimbabwe remains an obstacle to the early holding of a summit. There is agreement to continue the process by having further discussions on the eight agreed areas of priority.

Another item on the Council's agenda is the draft Council conclusions on the preparations for the 5th World Trade Organisation ministerial conference, to be held in Cancun between 10 and 14 September next. The conclusions highlight issues of particular importance for the EU in the lead-in to the conference. It is standard practice for EU member states to outline the key issues of critical importance to them and the broad-based stance they will take in negotiations during the conference. The Council is expected to reaffirm the EU's fundamental commitment to the multilateral trading system and to a successful conclusion to the Doha development agenda.

Members of the committee may wish to note that, as Ireland is now part of the Troika, I will attend the association council meeting withJordan and the co-operation council meetings with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, due to be held on 22 July. I will be very pleased to take any questions committee members may have about these matters.

Chairman

With the agreement of the committee, we will dispose of general affairs first, as it is such as light area. We will then give the lion's share of the meeting to external relations matters. Four items arise under the heading of general affairs - the public debate on the Presidency programme, the adoption of the provisional agenda, the Parliament's resolutions and the progress of work on Council configurations.

I understand there was some discussion recently about the funding of stem cell research. I do not know the current state of affairs in relation to this sensitive issue, but I suggest that this committee should invite the relevant Minister for a discussion, perhaps in September. Do we know what the Presidency programme will be?

Deputy Roche

Yes. The Italian Presidency programme is very well laid out. Its main headings are the Intergovernmental Conference, external relations, ESDP, financial affairs, justice and home affairs, etc.

Chairman

I asked for a copy of it but it is not in my brief. It has not been circulated to members.

Deputy Mulcahy

It would be nice if it were circulated.

Deputy Roche

I understood that it had been sent to the committee, but I apologise if this is not the case. It was supposed to have been circulated to members.

Chairman

It will be circulated to the members. It is important that we have it. Deputy Jim O'Keeffe wishes to ask about general affairs.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

Does the Minister of State have any comment to make as part of the public debate on the Presidency programme? Does he have any advice to offer Mr. Berlusconi regarding how he should conduct his affairs until the end of the year?

Deputy Roche

As the Deputy knows, Mr. Berlusconi is the leader of a great nation. He does not need advice from me.

Chairman

I have to return to Rome in October.

Mr. Jim Fitzsimons MEP

I thank the Minister of State for his contribution. What are his views on the likelihood or otherwise of the final European treaty being agreed during the Irish Presidency? If this comes to pass, would it not be right and proper to delay the final agreement until the ten accession states become full members of the Union? In other words, perhaps we should not arrive at a final agreement until after 1 May 2004.

Deputy Roche

The first point that should be made in direct reply to the question is that the success of the Convention in dealing with an extraordinary amount of issues surprised everybody. The draft constitutional treaty that has been produced is a fine and readable document. Every democrat will be willing and able to subscribe to it. Various member states will have difficulties with a number of outstanding issues, but I do not anticipate that any attempt will be made to unpick the work of the Convention. The Government does not believe that any such attempt will be made. The work of the Convention should be seen as a really good starting point for the Intergovernmental Conference, but I do not mean to suggest that we should try to unpick it. I have said that the work of the Intergovernmental Conference should be to improve what was produced by the Convention and to iron out certain issues that remain for a number of states.

The Italian Presidency has suggested a very ambitious programme. It has suggested that the formal opening of the Intergovernmental Conference will be on 4 October and that the first working session will be later in October. It has suggested that it will be able to get through the work of the Intergovernmental Conference in nine weeks. With the best will in the world, even with the wind at their back, that is very ambitious, though not impossible. If most of the issues have been dealt with and the work of the Convention has been accepted in the fine treaty it represents, the Intergovernmental Conference could be much shorter than many commentators believe. The balance of probabilities, however, indicates the Intergovernmental Conference will continue into the Irish Presidency.

To take the second point made by Mr.Fitzsimons, MEP, it is absolutely vital that new member states participate if the process is to mean anything in the new Europe. That issue has been resolved and the new member states will participate right up to the end. The formal arrangements for signing will not be put in place until after the states have become members of the EU on 1 May.

I draw the attention of the committee to the final paragraph of page 3 of the programme of the Italian Presidency. Under the heading "Intergovernmental Conference", reference is made to the signing of the new treaty in Rome between 1 May and the elections to the European Parliament. I am sure that is a statement in respect of the Italian signing ceremony. Under the arrangements we put forward at Thessaloniki, there will be signing ceremonies in each member state. This novelty is an Irish initiative of which I am very proud. It means the treaty which is to be the constitutional treaty for thepeople of Europe will be brought to each capital to be signed. Finally, as is the norm, the treaty will be deposited in Rome. This procedure has been endorsed at subsequent meetings. The arrangement is that the country in office when the work of the Intergovernmental Conference is completed will be the first country to sign the treaty. The draft treaty will then be moved from country to country to be signed in turn in ceremonies to be arranged by the individual member states which are appropriate to their circumstances. This process constitutes a gesture which ensures that every country and citizen of Europe feels they have ownership of the process.

Deputy Quinn

The Minister of State is very welcome. Prior to his attendance, the committee agreed unanimously and without debate a proposal whereby the flag of the European Union will be flown alongside the national flag at all venues across the country during the Irish Presidency.

Deputy Roche

I congratulate the committee. This issue has been discussed very often and I am pleased an Oireachtas Committee has taken the initiative. I compliment the members.

Deputy Quinn

My colleague Mr. Fitzsimons, MEP, raised a point of concern to some of us. I share the Minister of State's view that it is optimistic to speak of a nine week period. The process of negotiation will continue during the Irish Presidency but must end by 1 March. Formal ratification cannot legally take place until the accession states have become legal members of the EU. Is there a danger during the eight weeks between the signing off of the legal documents and ratification? We are all politicians, some elected, some permanent, and we are all citizens. We all know there are dangerous periods for those who wish to open a document between the time its ink is left to dry and the time it comes into effect. Will the Irish Presidency be aware of the dangers? Does the Minister of State wish to comment?

Deputy Roche

At the end of the Intergovernmental Conference, the work that has to continue is the finalising and proofing of the legal texts. It would be quite improper for anybody to interfere with anything politically decided at the Intergovernmental Conference. Obviously, one has to be conscious that in transposing something from a political decision to a final legal text a great deal of care must be taken. The legal text must reflect the political decision exactly. I believe this is the point the Deputy makes.

Between Thessaloniki and the end of last week technical changes only were to be made at the Convention. I understand that this is behind the Deputy's point. One or two of the changes made went beyond being technical. The fact that we were in general agreement with them does not take away from the trespass on principle. There is a difference between the nature of Thessaloníki and the events of last weekend. When the Intergovernmental Conference is concluded there will be vigilance to ensure that the legal texts accurately and completely reflect its work. It is an important point. When transferring into legal text in several different languages, it is a challenge to ensure the final text in all languages reflects the letter and nuance of the political decision.

Senator Mooney

We all compliment the Minister of State on his work at the Convention, especially on the initiative on like-minded states in respect of which he took a very active role.

I rely on media reports for the following and I seek clarification from the Minister of State. Late in the day, the French proposed and had accepted a protection for their film and audio-visual industries. The Minister of State has been quoted as saying that Ireland supported this initiative, but the interpretation has been that it was entirely French. In fact, the initiative has Europe-wide effect and represents an attempt to counter-balance the continuing cultural domination from Hollywood and the United States of America.

Deputy Roche

The Senator is correct. A change was made in this regard and the issue was one of three resolved during the last 12 hours of the conference. It was generally perceived to deal with a French issue. The French position was that there should be a continuation of unanimity in commercial agreements relating to the arts and intellectual property. The publicity attending the final decision has suggested it went further than it did. It has been a little over sold. One of the last amendments we tabled was very much in line with the French amendment. At one stage, I considered countersigning the French amendment, but did not do so due to a textual change made at the last minute.

We are happy with the change which was made, but it is not the end of this particular story. I suspect the French will return to this issue at the Intergovernmental Conference where attempts will be made to tie down issues. The change was made to protect European culture from the commercial culture which has dominated for so long.

Chairman

We move to the meat of the meeting which is external relations.

Deputy Carey

I welcome the Minister of State and compliment him on his comprehensive address. As I suspect many questions will be put to him, I will confine mine to a small number of areas.

I welcome the commitment of the Council of Ministers to ensure the success of the continued fight against the death penalty. Will the Minister of State consider broadening the matter slightly to include the question of land mines? The issue is closely related to the death penalty in that several accession and candidate countries have not yet signed up to the convention. A number of existing member states are not signatories of the convention either. I am opposed, as I am sure are we all, to state executions or executions by paramilitary bodies from whatever wing of the political spectrum.

Like the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, Senators Bradford and Mooney and others, I met with the non-resident Arab ambassadors on Monday to conduct wide-ranging discussions on Iraq and other issues. Has the EU formed a view as to how a representative democracy reflecting the wishes of the Iraqi people and representing an Arab understanding of democracy could be brought about, or how the Iraqi diaspora could be involved in a representative government?

The point has been made that after the sanctions in Iraq began to take effect many of the best and brightest of scientists, administrators, academics and so on left the country. It appears that some 50 people a day are now applying for visas to return to Iraq through the Jordanian embassy in London. We should strongly encourage a system of representative governance with the support of the United Nations and the EU.

We regard the International Criminal Court as a significant move forward. I am concerned at the concerted attempt by some countries, including the United States, to undermine the legitimacy of that court, which will not be to the advantage of humanity. Will the Minister of State comment on how he sees the campaign to support the legitimacy of the court being underpinned? I have a number of other questions which I will raise later if I have time.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

I am happy with the briefing we received. It would have been helpful if we had the conclusions of the presidency but the general briefing was good and I compliment those who prepared it. I am also happy with the Minister of State's presentation in which he touched on the main issues.

I wish to raise an issue that is not on the agenda for the Council meeting but which I believe should be on it. I refer specifically to North Korea. Why is it not on the agenda? It is now the most unstable situation in the world. It is clear that it has an irrational leader, a starving people and a nuclear capacity which it has made threats to use. This issue does not appear to be on the EU agenda at any level. I am happy with the quartet arrangement we have in conjunction with the Americans in regard to the Middle East. America is also trying to organise a quartet arrangement in regard to North Korea on which it wants to work with China, Japan and South Korea. Europe has enormous interests in that area and it would also be interested in having a say in trying to prevent a nuclear holocaust emerging from that area.

Why is North Korea not on the agenda in light of the difficult situation that is now emerging? What role, if any, can the European Union play in trying to ensure that we do not have a nuclear blow-out in North Korea?

Deputy Quinn

I have a brief question in regard to the Doha round and the stitched-up deal on the so-called reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. What is the assessment of the Minister of State and the Department of Foreign Affairs with regard to the potential success for a truly developing round of trade negotiations, bearing in mind that the recent decision on the reform of the CAP does not go half far enough to open up European markets to third country producers?

Deputy Mulcahy

I welcome the Minister of State's statement. With regard to the Middle East, I note the assertion that to try to boost Prime Minister Abbas by undermining Mr. Arafat would be counterproductive. That is a view I fully support. I ask the Minister of State to pass on my compliments to the Minister, Deputy Cowen, on his recent well-received visit to the Middle East.

The Minister will be busy, as will the Minister of State, leading the European part of the quartet in this area next year. Are there plans for any specific initiatives with regard to the Middle East in particular?

I support the statement on the Government's conviction that the Iraqi people have the inalienable right to a representative government of their own choosing and the sooner that this can be achieved the better for everyone. We all noted the inauguration of the new governing council, which, as I understand it, is a group made up of different interest groups and sectors of the population. It appears to be the case that if there were a free and democratic vote in Iraq it would herald a victory for one section of the community. It appears to be the US position that this will not be allowed to happen. Is this how the EU views it? Is there a potential conflict between the EU position for universal suffrage and free elections as quickly as possible and the US view that it wants a government that is representative of different sectors?

We are all distressed by the continuing violence in Iraq but, as I said at the time, the UN should have the lead role in Iraq. There would be a greater feeling of legitimacy on the streets of Baghdad and other towns in Iraq if there were an UN-sponsored peacekeeping mission. As someone who supported the Government stance in regard to the war, I make no bones about my position. Is there a timeframe, or is the EU going to demand a timeframe from the US, for the handing over of power in Iraq? The shorter the timeframe the better for all concerned.

Deputy Haughey

I have two brief questions. The first one arises out of something Deputy Mulcahy said, which is the position regarding EU-US relations. Will the Minister of State comment on those relations at this point, the efforts being made to improve relations and if that subject will be raised in any way at the General Affairs and External Relations Council?

My second question relates to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. We heard in the presentation of the possibility of an EU police mission to follow on from Concordia. Will the Minister clarify the Irish position if a police mission is organised by the EU? Are we likely to participate in it and can we do so legally? Do we need to establish the views of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in that regard?

Senator Lydon

I have read and heard it said that the International Criminal Court will not amount to much unless the Americans buy into it, which they appear to be unwilling to do. Does the Department have any views on this matter? Where do we stand on it? The United States wants us to co-operate in various ways with regard to NATO bases, landing rights, etc. The International Criminal Court is a very important body and will obviously do good work. Is there any way in which we can get the Americans to row in?

Chairman

I noticed on the agenda that the Middle East, the International Criminal Court and Iraq are to be considered in restricted sessions and that Iran and the death penalty are to be dealt with over lunch - we all know what "over lunch" means. Nobody will be present. I have attended the meetings and know when sensitive issues are being discussed. It seems that a good portion of this agenda is being heard in private. I wonder, in the context of the upcoming Intergovernmental Conference, if this trend will continue. Will the Minister of State comment on this issue?

Does the European Union intend to commit the rapid reaction force to trying to bring about law and order in Iraq? Has the European Union expressed concern at the lack of provision for the proper governance of Iraq? It appears that no real consideration - certainly no effective consideration - was given to post-invasion governance. The first appointed US governor had to be changed very quickly and circumstances seem to be very much up in the air. Has the EU raised this or is it the Minister of State's intention to do so?

If the death penalty is being discussed over lunch, it is clear that there are sensitive issues involved. I note that the last occasion on which this was raised at the General Assembly was in 1999, although we have been raising it at the UN Commission on Human Rights. Will the Minister of State indicate the likelihood that the EU will table a motion at the UN General Assembly on the death penalty? I know there has been resistance to this on the part of some countries, led by Saudi Arabia.

Given the new arrangements between the UN and EU in respect of the western Balkans, is it intended to modify Ireland's legislation to allow us participate in the peacekeeping force?

Regarding EU-Africa relations, the report on the Great Lakes region indicates that the Congo is clearly an area of terrible turmoil, huge destruction and genocide. I do not know if 8 million people have died, but the number is certainly very high and quite extraordinary. John O'Shea of GOAL has been the leading figure in highlighting the issue of whether bilateral aid or Government-to-Government aid should continue. He has not suggested terminating Government-to-agency aid. Will this be a major issue on the agenda next week? If not, will the Minister of State make it such, bearing in mind the extent of the loss of life and the continued mayhem that prevails in the Congo?

Deputy Roche

On the Chairman's observations on the agenda, "restricted session" means that there will be fewer officials present. I believe this means that there will be more political debate.

Deputy Carey mentioned the issue of land mines and associated it with the death penalty. If one is killed at the end of a rope or maimed or killed by a land mine, I suppose it makes no difference to one, but it is obvious that the two issues are distinct. Ireland has been very active in the field of disarmament. I do not believe that the two issues can be linked. It is time that the EU examined the matter because some member states are quite remarkably involved in what I regard as an appalling industry.

Deputy Mulcahy, the Chairman, Deputy Carey and others asked questions about the ICC. We have strongly supported the ICC. We have to understand that there are member states which do not take the same view as we do. One state that holds a less enthusiastic view than ours is the United States. There is a difference between the view taken in Europe and that taken in the United States. We made our position abundantly clear in our contacts with the United States and we have shown that we understand the nature and extent of its concerns regarding the ICC, but we are very concerned that the ICC be properly constructed and that it make a meaningful contribution.

Our view has been that the Rome Statute contains adequate safeguards to meet the concerns that have been publicly enunciated by some states, including the United States, which clearly take a different view. I believe the United States is fully aware of our willingness to understand its viewpoint and of our anxiety that the EU should promulgate its own guiding principles in respect of the ICC. The EU anxiety to move the ICC process forward should not, in any way, be seen by the US as an attempt to thwart its foreign policy. Its views on the matter are different from ours and the different positions are well understood by all. To return to Deputy Carey's point, it is a pity that there is not the same enthusiasm for the ICC everywhere as there is here and in Europe.

Deputy Jim O'Keeffe raised the very interesting question about North Korea. We have heard very disturbing stories about it in recent days, particularly regarding a worrying pronouncement by its authorities in the past 24 hours. This will obviously come much later on the agenda. I believe the Deputy is correct in contending that the EU should keep an eye on this area. Some years ago, a certain study pointed out that missiles from North Korea, given the range that was available, were as much a threat to Europe as they were to Japan, for example. This is a significant matter. The question of non-proliferation will have to be dealt with more sensitively than other similar issues were dealt with recently.

Some questions were asked about Iraq. The first point was made by Deputy Carey and concerned the human capital of Iraq - the people that make any country work. Very disturbing stories have been published in recent times about professionals, doctors, scientists and the people who make a society work being siphoned out of Iraq. The longer it takes to re-establish a civil society that works, the more difficult it will be. The EU obviously needs to think, in so far as it can, about how structures can be created to help a civil society to grow.

An extremely interesting paper by JavierSolana was published at the time of the Thessaloniki summit, in which he referred to pre-emptive engagement. I discussed this with Deputy Quinn and he was as enthusiastic as I was. The paper seems to elaborate a new role for the EU, with a focus on trying to build civil society, democracy and justice systems that help address the injustices that have, all too frequently, created the difficulties in the world.

The Chairman referred to the neglect or the failure of the occupying powers to reconstruct the physical infrastructure of Iraq. We accept that there are a number of contributing factors and we understand that an attempt is being made to tackle the problems. However, if one reads the newspapers every day, it is clear that this is part of the discontent which is making it difficult to re-establish a civil society there. Quite what the EU could do, given that we are not yet on the ground there, I do not know.

Deputy Mulcahy made the point in regard to the Iraqi people's inalienable right, which is one which is shared by everyone, irrespective of our views in the recent past. Everyone shares the view that the most appropriate way to deal with the Iraq problem is to empower the Iraqi people to take possession of their own country and society, patrimony and facilities and support them rather than hinder them in any way.

Deputy Quinn mentioned the question of Doha.

Chairman

I asked about the good governance of Iraq and the preparation for it as well as the possibility of the EU rapid reaction force becoming involved. Is the latter under consideration?

Deputy Roche

I do not think there is any consideration of the latter. My point in regard to the Solana paper is that it is not just focused on Iraq. It is seeking to work out a new non-interventionist role for Europe to help people resolve their problems in their own way and recognise that sovereign states have the right——

Deputy Quinn

Did the Minister of State refer to it as pre-emptive support as opposed to pre-emptive strike?

Deputy Roche

The term was pre-emptive engagement. It triggered a fuse in my mind because it is an ideal phrase in that it sets out a challenging role for the EU. That would link into precisely the point the Chairman is making about whether the EU should consider if it has a role in the building of a civil society in Iraq. Clearly, the EU should assist in any way it can.

Deputy Quinn made a point in regard to the CAP. While there has been understandable criticism of the CAP, it is not the worst demon. When the United Nations development programme report was published in Dublin, I drew Mrs. Mary Robinson's attention to an extraordinary table which showed that in parts of the developed world, the agricultural subsidy per cow is ten times the average income in some of the poorest states in the world, which is an astonishing figure. The multiple of ten occurred in Japan rather than Europe, which was third in line in that regard. However, the CAP has cleared one of the issues which impeded progress in Cancún. Excuses were made that Europe was somehow impeding progress in this areas. The change in the CAP makes that charge less relevant. The positive side of the changes in the CAP is that one is not just producing for production's sake. For example, the United States was using the excuse of the CAP for pursuing less progress than would otherwise be the case.

Deputy Quinn

Is it the view of the Minister of State's Department and the Department of Foreign Affairs that the privately negotiated deal by agricultural ministers - I use the words advisedly because they were basically in conclaves themselves - that the outcome of that difficult set of negotiations will enhance the prospects for a successful outcome at Doha or not enhance the prospects?

Deputy Roche

The answer is "Yes". The changes in the CAP will make it easier for progress at Doha. If there is to be any impediment, it is less likely than previously to be the EU Common Agricultural Policy. I apologise for taking the Deputy's question up wrong - he is quite correct and I understand the point he makes.

One of the factors is that the US will have to reassess its approach to agriculture - and not just the US alone. The UNDP report of last week is frightening when one realises just how correct many NGOs have been. There is graphic proof. The changes in the CAP in that regard are positive and will be helpful.

The Chairman asked about the western Balkans, the triple lock mechanism and our being incapable of participating in an operation which was intended for peace-keeping which the Irish people generally subscribe to. He is correct and that episode illustrates the danger of vetoes and the imperfection of the United Nations. The reason the triple lock comes into play in the Irish case is that for some obscure reason, China indicated it would be exercising its veto and the UN could not move on to giving the full endorsement to the intervention on Europe's doorstep. I am not sure the time is right for us to start talking about the triple lock issue. However, the Chairman is correct in saying that this illustrated the danger that arises in the UN situation as it exists at the moment when, for reasons that have nothing to do with the issue at stake, there might be an intervention.

Deputy Haughey

Is a police mission legally possible in such circumstances?

Deputy Roche

Participation by the Garda in Operation Concordia is being considered, but it is too early to say what the nature of that participation will be. There is no mandate or size for that operation. However, if and when it comes forward, this committee will be informed.

Deputy Haughey

This may be going off the point but how do US-EU relations stand?

Chairman

Before we move away from that point, the brief stated that ministers will be invited to approve draft Council conclusions which will provide a further basis for strengthening EU-UN co-operation in the area of crisis management. That may mean on a lesser basis that a resolution. Our difficulty, according to the Attorney General's advice, appears to be that there is no formal resolution.

Deputy Roche

That is the advice. There must be a UN resolution, otherwise any intervention, no matter how well-intentioned or popular, would be subject to a challenge and we suspect that would happen.

The point in the briefing note to which the Chairman drew attention is that there is an on-going exploration about how the UN and the EU can better co-operate in these areas. If one looks at the horrors that followed the break up of Yugoslavia, to everyone's amazement and Europe's disgrace the threat happened on our doorstep and there was no clarity as to how action should be taken. That is part of the general approach.

Deputy Haughey

Are EU-US relations likely to be an issue to be discussed?

Deputy Roche

Not as such.

Deputy Haughey

How are things in that regard?

Deputy Roche

Things are doing well. There is a fair amount of fence mending but it is not a specific item on the agenda or for lunch.

Senator McDowell

I was not totally clear on the response in regard to Operation Concordia. Do the Defence Acts cover the Garda? Could we take part in a policing mission without the triple lock?

Deputy Roche

We could participate. I made the point that we had not yet reached the stage at which that was being discussed.

Senator McDowell

Would be legally possible for us to do so?

Deputy Roche

I think it would. Given the nature of the issue and the sensitivities that arise, one would check legal advice at the time. For example, there were differing views as to our participation but the cautionary principle was applied because there was a danger that the Government could be challenged half-way through a mission.

Senator McDowell

Am I correct in saying the Minister for Defence indicated that the Government would be prepared to examine the legal provisions?

Deputy Roche

The Minister made a personal comment at the time the people would generally have been supportive of action. It is equally clear that our Defence Forces can play an important role in that regard because that is the one area in which they have really shown their mettle over the years, of which we are very proud. Here was something that Irish people would have a generally positive approach to, which the Defence Forces were capable of doing and where there was clearly a need for their type of expertise, yet technically we were prohibited.

If it were to happen again it would have to be looked at.

Chairman

The Attorney General's advice was not that it was unconstitutional but that there is a difficulty with the Defence Act 1954. The Houses could have just——

Deputy Roche

His view was that the triple lock could not apply because of the difficulty with the Defence Act. On service overseas, the Garda Síochána Acts simply require Government approval. That is the answer to your direct question, Chairman.

The precise position regarding the need for a UN mandate is currently being explored by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. It is not anticipated at this stage that it would be an issue in the context of the FYROM police mission, which was Deputy Haughey's specific question.

Chairman

There are a couple of questions that have not been addressed. Deputy Quinn has a question. I asked about the Congo and about whether it was the intention of the EU to take a resolution to the UN General Assembly on the death penalty.

Deputy Roche

The Chairman asked about the death penalty. The Ministers are debating that on Monday. In 1999, the European Union had to withdraw a proposed resolution because a number of states take a diametrically opposed view. The United States, for example, would not support our view on the death penalty. Certainly many of the Arab states would not support our view. Strangely enough, a very significant number of the non-aligned states would not support the European view on the issue of the deathpenalty.

In 1999, a number of amendments were proposed which would effectively have eviscerated the proposition. Before it would repeat that exercise the EU would have to be very careful because the defeat in 1999 was not something one would want to repeat. A defeat in that regard actually supports the advocates of the death penalty.

The Chairman asked a specific quesion about the Congo and about the general view as expressed by GOAL, for example, regarding bilateral aid to Uganda. This matter has been discussed and there is some controversy about it. However, my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, visited Uganda recently. The whole purpose of his mission was to ensure that funds which go from the Irish taxpayer to Uganda do not end up being used in a war across borders. This is a difficult issue but we are very content that the audit we have done on the expenditure makes it clear that the funding is going where intended.

There has been a wider debate, not just in Ireland, about support for Uganda, and a very interesting point was made by President Clinton in Dublin last week. He pointed out that whatever about its activity over the border into the Congo, Uganda, in critical and sensitive areas like the fight against AIDS, has proven to be a very good user of the aid packages it has received. One would want to be very careful and think long and hard before doing anything that would disturb what appears to be successful.

Uganda, above all others on the African continent, has been the most successful country in terms of its anti-AIDS programmes, and these programmes are supported by bilateral programmes.

Chairman

On the central issue, is the European Union becoming more exercised about the Congo? There is a very serious problem there.

Deputy Roche

The Chairman is right. I think he mentioned a figure of eight million deaths. A figure of four million has certainly been mentioned, with an upper estimate of something of the order of eight million. I personally believe that the European Union has some significant moral obligations in the Congo and in Africa as a whole.

In terms of tangible support for the peace process, consideration is being given, including by the political and security committee, to how the EU can support the peace process in the Democratic Republic of the Congo beyond the military support currently being provided, which is very much a sticking plaster operation. As the committee will know, the French troops are there at the moment and have done a very good job in taking what was a very dangerous situation down a notch or two. The whole area, however, is very unstable and priorities need to be addressed. There is an interest, particularly at political and security committee level in the European Union, in having a look at what can be done in that area.

It seems to me, however, that there is no readily available solution for what is historically an unstable area where horrific things have happened. The European Commission has approved a package for humanitarian needs in the DRC. There is €35 million in that package in 2003 and the funds are being channelled through partner organisations and in the field by the humanitarian aid office. I think what the Chairman has in mind is something more elaborate than the current intervention.

Chairman

I am sure the Minister of State and other members of the committee share my view that on this issue we should be pressing the European Union to its limits to take steps to try to ease the humanitarian crisis that is the Congo. Look at the scale of the crisis proportionately. About 60 million people died in Europe in the two world wars. In proportion to the size of the area the devastation is enormous.

Deputy Roche

It is, particularly if one goes back and takes into account what happened in Rwanda, just across the border, and the instability there. The EU obviously supports the peace process but to translate that broad support into concrete action on the ground requires a lot more thinking. Priorities in the period ahead include the establishment and proper functioning of a transitional Government in that area. The proposal for a transitional Government is supported by the EU. There will obviously have to be the organisation of elections and the promoting of stability, particularly in the eastern province. There is a proposal for an international conference on peace, security and democracy in the region, which would have EU support. Other than that, I think the question is about specific EU-led action. I do not think there is anything more specific than these.

Chairman

I urge the Minister of State to press the EU on it in every way he can because it is a matter of huge concern.

Deputy Quinn

My question is not related to the previous discussion. It is really about the future and is addressed to the Minister of State, his two colleagues beside him and, indeed, to the entire Irish public service. The next Irish Presidency will be horrendously onerous because of the scale of the 25-member state European Union - think just of the sheer logistics of interacting with different people. How can this committee help? Perhaps the Minister of State might consider how we can share his burden without getting in his way.

I have not consulted with any of my colleagues but having had some experience of the past when we had a Union of ten and then of 12, a Union of 25 simply makes the mind boggle. We have the smallest foreign service of any member state, after Luxembourg. The sheer physical stretch upon everybody will be enormous. In so far as this committee can take up some of the burden in a way that does not compromise the political leadership of the Government, I would simply ask the Minister of State to consider it and come back to us with whatever he thinks might be appropriate.

Chairman

For the information of the committee, I have been in touch with the Department of Foreign Affairs to try to get the Minister, both Ministers of State and senior officials into the committee in early September to discuss the organisation and priorities regarding the Presidency. It is an issue we will consider soon after the recess.

Deputy Roche

I am very grateful for that. I know Deputy Quinn has in mind the fact that all parties worked together on the Irish team in the Convention, and it was a remarkable success. I mentioned here before that we were the only country where the lead role was played on the parliamentary side by two senior politicians from Opposition parties, supported by Deputies Carey and Gormley. It was a unique and valuable exercise. It meant that not only did Ireland have linkages with national representation but also with all the political groupings. Ireland was the only State that adopted that approach.

The decision of this committee that the European flag will fly there during the Presidency is a welcome one. In other EU states, both the national and EU flags fly over government buildings. I do not understand why it has not happened in Ireland. I have indicated my frustration at this in the past. In September when we discuss the Presidency programme, it would be good to take up the offer made by the Chair and Deputy Quinn.

Deputy Mulcahy

I support the point made by Deputy Quinn. We must remember that 1 May 2004 will be an historic day with the entry of ten new EU member states. Many of them suffered the burden of communism for 30 to 40 years. Now they are joining the whole European project. During the Presidency, the Dáil should be involved not just in assisting the Government but in concentrating public debate on the Convention. The Dáil also should be involved in a ceremonial way on 1 May. One idea would be to invite prominent figures from the new member states who were instrumental in regaining their state freedom to address the Dáil. Václav Havel and Lech Walesa are two figures who come to mind. There was a rush by the Italian Government to get new EU membership done and dusted during their term of the Presidency, leaving the Irish Presidency with the crumbs. However, that is not the case now and 1 May will be an historic day for Europe. The Dáil must play some role in this process.

Deputy Roche

It would be a matter for the Dáil to evolve a way of marking 1 May 2004. The Government will certainly be considering how we mark it. It will be an extraordinary and historic day. We are fortunate to see it as the divisions that kept Europe apart will end. A new era will begin that day. We are also fortunate that it happens during the Irish Presidency. It is appropriate because it was the Irish people who turned the key in the Nice referendum to allow enlargement to go ahead unimpeded. It will be appropriate for the Houses of the Oireachtas to play a role in marking this day. I often believed it was flattering and diplomatic when people discussed Irish membership of the EU. However, it is not as there is huge admiration for the journey that Ireland has taken over the last 30 years. There is appreciation for the role we have played in Europe since becoming members. Among the ten new EU member states, there is an anxiety to emulate the Irish success in Europe.

The Oireachtas should play a significant role in marking 1 May. Between 1 May and 9 May, there is a considerable period of time when the Oireachtas can do so. The first day of what will effectively be a European National Holiday will be 9 May. At the Convention, we agreed to the European anthem - "Ode to Joy", the EU flag and 9 May to be a EU-wide holiday. I am not in a position to give details, but I have given some consideration to marking this occasion. Cynicism should not be allowed to interfere with it. It is an historic occasion. The EU from the eastern boundaries of Poland, the western boundaries of Ireland, from the Arctic circle right down to Cyprus and Malta, will be one. I am proud of the role the Irish people played in this development. It should be celebrated in an appropriate way without going over the top. It is an interesting suggestion from the committee that the Oireachtas should play a role in this. I am interested in discussing any ideas Members have.

Deputy Quinn

I know we are into free range suggestions, but as the Minister of State has put it so succinctly and enthusiastically, I suggest that this committee should invite the St. Patrick's Day Festival organisers to consider the reunification of Europe as its dominant theme.

Chairman

Perhaps as an act of unification we should bring back the snakes.

Deputy Quinn

What if we had a procession of floats from all the different countries instead of high school bands from Arkansas? They can come too, but they are not part of the Union.

Deputy Carey

An association agreement.

Deputy Roche

I do not want to anticipate anything that might be done around 1 May.

Chairman

I note from the agenda that the Structural Funds report and the Cohesion Fund report for 2001 have been circulated. We should table those for consideration with a briefing note and put them on the agenda for a future meeting.

Deputy Carey

We have reports here on the 2,518th and 2,519th sessions of the General Affairs and External Relations Council. We also have the agenda for the 2,522nd and 2,523rd meetings. Where are the missing meetings as there must have been a 2,520th and 2,521st session?

Deputy Roche

I can assure the Deputy I do not have them. I did not notice there was a discontinuity in the numbers.

Chairman

I understand it was in another format

Deputy Roche

Earlier today the inter-departmental committee - the Convention Oversight Committee - had its last meeting. Members would have met some of the officials from the committee from time to time. It should noted that our diplomatic corps and other Governmental Departments are small. There was an extraordinary effort put in for the last year. Deputies Carey and Quinn are aware of the extraordinary work done. As an ex-public servant, I am proud of the work our public service did. we were the best briefed representatives in the Convention. I look forward to the same professional approach in the Intergovernmental Conference.

The joint committee adjourned at 4 p.m.sine die.