I recall Ms Avril Doyle as an MEP admitting that she had omitted a digit. Ten digit numbers have to be filled in. The birthdays of animals have to be inserted. I have four children and I am stuck when trying to remember their birthdays. That level of bureaucracy and its mindless impact on people's lives is a challenge the European Union must address. We should have a form audit agency, expand the role of the European Ombudsman and extend the role of national parliaments. The issue of Communicating Europe is not just about press releases, about making the language easier to understand and about public relations. It is about having a citizen-orientated focus for everything we do in the European Union. If the Irish EU Presidency can leave that legacy behind it, we will have done some service to Europe.
One of the impacts we made in the course of our EU Presidency was that with the Dutch, Luxembourg and UK Presidencies we produced a document on better regulation. Before the European Union makes a new regulation it must ask if it is merely adding to the regulatory burden that falls on small and medium business. It must ask if a regulation is necessary, and whether, if it is adding a regulation to the statute book, it can remove two others. The European Union must ask if it can free the people from the chain of excessive bureaucracy and regulation. The Communicating Europe initiative extends much further and deeper than PR. It is about administrative reform and restructuring in the best sense. It is about looking at every level at which the European Union interfaces with the 450 million people who make up the European Union in its 25 member states. It is about ameliorating those relationships.
My French colleague points out that she is producing programmes to allow young people to better understand how they interface with Europe and impact on it, and to let them see the positive side. We have to do this. This issue arises next Monday in the margins of the General Affairs Council. There was a very generous recognition in the Dutch Presidency programme of the Communicating Europe initiative launched by the Irish Presidency.
Deputy Mulcahy spoke of his disappointment at the manner in which the events on the night of the major decision on the constitutional treaty were reported. We should recognise the positive side as well as the negative. One of the aspects which greatly facilitated the Irish Presidency was the extraordinary role played by the print media. I said this at the Kilcoole conference and more recently in the United Kingdom. I do not know how the European portfolio can be run in a country where there is always an incredibly hostile media. We have been extraordinarily fortunate, particularly with the broadsheets in this country. In particular I note the extraordinary role played by the Brussels-based correspondents, including Denis Staunton of The Irish Times, one of the most distinguished writers on European affairs in any newspaper in Europe. Conor Sweeney and Anne Cahill also do extraordinary work with limited resources. Their two colleagues, the RTE representatives in Brussels, also do a good job. It is sometimes a pity that more coverage is not given to EU affairs, but our major newspapers, the Irish Independent, The Irish Times in particular, and The Examiner have all done a good job. They were very helpful during the Irish Presidency. One of my colleagues told me he would like to see that sort of coverage in his country — insightful, knowledgeable, progressive coverage. He was reading The Irish Times on the day in question.
Deputy Mulcahy and Senator Lydon also asked about enlargement. They mentioned Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia and Turkey. Bulgaria has made remarkable progress and it was agreed during the Irish Presidency that formal opening talks would take place. Bulgaria has completed all the work it had to do in that regard. Extraordinary credit is due to the Bulgarian Government which has made a big effort. My colleague there, Ms Maglena Kuneva, has played an astonishing role for her country.
Romania is slightly behind, facing big challenges, but is working professionally through the various chapters. Croatia has made extraordinary efforts and is now a candidate. The big issue is the decision which will come later this year, regarding Turkey. We await a response on Turkey from the European Commission.
Regarding Turkey's application, the criteria for any country applying to join the European Union have been set down as a result of the European Council meeting at Copenhagen. Any country which objectively meets those criteria is entitled to apply. We all know that there have been incredible efforts in Turkey in recent times. The Turkish Government has done great work recently. We must wait for what the European Commission produces. The Irish position on Turkey has been that any country which meets the objective criteria is entitled to make an application and to progress. I do not know what will be the European Commission findings but decisions will be made during the Dutch Presidency and we will have them towards the end of the year. I anticipate that if the decision is to open negotiations, there will be a relatively long lead time.
Deputy Andrews raised an issue which he has discussed with me on several occasions, namely the UK rebate. This is one of the issues which will be considered in the overall context of the financial perspective. The Commission will be tabling its proposals on the financial perspectives next week and we must wait to see what they are. Ireland will examine them carefully. A timetable is involved and the proposals will be completed not during the Dutch Presidency but during the Luxembourg EU Presidency. The big political issues, including the one to which Deputy Andrews referred, will not come up for decision until next June, during the Luxembourg presidency, though if it strays beyond June it will be in the UK Presidency. It is difficult to speculate on that issue.
Deputy Andrews also asked about the International Criminal Court. Ireland has no intention of signing a bilateral agreement on the court. The European Union has a very strong position on the universalisation of the court, as do we. The Union has opposed the signing of bilateral agreements, exempting any country from the operations of the court. The International Criminal Court is just what it purports to be. It is not a court which applies only to some nations.
Deputy Carey noted a number of issues. He pointed to the feed-in to the European Parliament of euroscepticism. He also mentioned the Irish Presidency. It is worth reminding ourselves that one fifth of all the EU legislation that passed through the European Parliament did so during the three and a half months the Parliament operated during the Irish Presidency. In October 2002, long before the Irish Presidency and just after the referendum, I went with officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs to Strasbourg for two days to meet the leaders of the various groups and the presidents of the committees of the European Parliament. We indicated to the Parliament that we would work very hard with it to ensure that the Parliament got through its full legislative programme. We began our preparatory work with the Parliament more than a year before the Irish Presidency began. The idea was to dovetail our attendance in the Parliament and work in the various Councils with the timetable of the Parliament, and it worked marvellously. We established a quite remarkable relationship with the Parliament, based on my view that the Parliament is an elected reflection of the will of the people of Europe and that any Government holding the Presidency must give it due respect.
I am not sure that this has always been the case in all Presidencies but it was certainly the bedrock on which we built a very good relationship with the European Parliament. We respected the Parliament, talked to it about its timetable and got it to understand our timetable as well. We worked very closely with the committees in the Parliament. The Chairman will see shortly himself that the committee system in the Parliament is the key to success, particularly on the legislative side.
Deputy Carey also mentioned the World Trade Organisation. I said that progress was disappointing, but to be positive, I suppose there have been some more recent signs of positive progress. Rather than being pessimistic I should describe myself as being cautiously but very carefully optimistic. I am certainly not overly pessimistic but a great deal of work must be done in this area.
Deputy Carey and Senator Ormonde also mentioned Afghanistan. I was listening to President Karzai in Istanbul last week and he was very concerned about the atmosphere in which the elections are taking place. He appealed last week to the members of NATO for assistance, support and men and women on the ground to ensure that democracy can take its course in Afghanistan. They have done remarkable work in the job of creating electoral rolls or registers, something our county council registrars might take note of, in difficult circumstances.
I recall from President Karzai's presentation that 35% of the voters registered are women. In a country where women were until very recently forced out of education, forced to wear the veil, forced to be obscure and forced to be non-persons, so to speak, by the Taliban regime, that is a remarkable achievement. We wish the authorities in Afghanistan well. The democratisation process will not be easy to deliver.
Deputy Carey also asked about the issue of drugs, particularly the transfer back into heroin growing and the reopening of the poppy fields. This again was something President Karzai touched on. He touched on the necessity of the international community becoming involved in the type of more normal trade relationships with Afghanistan and investment in Afghanistan to help them break the cycle. The European Union and the United States are working together on putting resources into preventing drug cultivation and export from Afghanistan. Unfortunately, and Deputy Carey is right on this, there has been little improvement on the ground and it is unlikely that there will be until there is more political stability and the stranglehold of the warlords in particular is broken.
A number of people mentioned Burma, in particular Deputy Carey. Ireland, like most states, recognises states, not governments. The regime in Burma is a major part of the problem, but if we are to make progress with Burma, it will be on the basis of engagement and not through isolation. One could say that this contradicts our stance on ASEM, but with ASEM we are simply not prepared to have the type of stand-off whereby we let their ten in if they let our three in, or whatever. We are not prepared to engage in that while Aung San Suu Kyi is still under house arrest, her political party is excluded from the democratic process and there is confusion as to whether its national congress will proceed.
We considered the situation carefully before nominating and appointing our ambassador from Malaysia to there. Before our ambassador presented credentials in Burma he travelled to the country and paid a private visit to Aung San Suu Kyi. The forces for democracy in Burma are very aware of our position. In addition to the meetings held at ministerial level, I also met Ismael Razali in Kuala Lumpur earlier this year to discuss the issue of Aung San Suu Kyi. It is also worth reminding ourselves that Seanad Éireann was the first House of Parliament in Europe to enact a resolution on her imprisonment.
On Darfur, the European Union is co-operating closely with the United States, the United Nations and the African Union. The United States is doing very good work in Darfur which is not recognised often enough. Irish officials will participate in the African Union monitoring mission. I have mentioned that the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, will visit the region, which is probably the best way of seeing what is happening there.
We do know that the famine in Darfur has been the product of politics and civil war rather than a natural famine. The African Union itself is sending 300 troops to Darfur to provide security for food distribution. The African Union does not believe that the situation qualifies as a genocide, which may come as a surprise to many because the word "genocide" has certainly been used in that context.
Serious pressure is being put on the Sudanese Government which is acting in contradiction to all international standards and to the rights and well-being of its own people. The UN Security Council is on standby to act if Khartoum does not meet commitments under an agreement reached last week with the United Nations Secretary General. The European Union is accelerating disbursement of funds and Ireland has given in excess of €3.5 million which, pro rata, is way ahead of others. As I said, the Minister of State is going to the area to see how best we can assist. The European Union and Ireland have played a good role there. One of our Presidency objectives was to raise African issues, including this one, on the agenda.
A number of questions were asked about the European Defence Agency and how participation might be consistent with our position. Participation is on a voluntary basis. Nonetheless, we see that an involvement and interest in the agency is consistent with our desire to remain a core member of the European Union. Membership of the agency will allow Ireland, through its own choice, to participate in projects on a case-by-case basis. There is no requirement or imposition on us. The Chairman has made the point in a common sense way in many contributions in the House that we can choose to go in or stay out. We do so where it is seen to be in the interests of the effective and efficient equipping of the Defence Forces.
It should be remembered what the agency is concerned with. It is about creating efficiency, effectiveness and interoperability. As I said in a debate in the House some time back, if one is going to have an army and equip it, one had better ensure that there is interoperability with equipment. There is no point in us standing on principle and committing our men and women to some dangerous position where they cannot establish radio contact with another force in the next valley because there is not interoperability between radio equipment. People must adopt a common sense attitude towards this.
Our focus, in terms of the agency, will be on the issue of interoperability, particularly where we are committing our troops to peacekeeping missions. The agency's mission itself is to help build the Union's capabilities in the field of crisis management and to assist the development of the Union's security and defence policy. It is not in any sense, as it was portrayed last week in the Forum on Europe, to the discredit of one of the non-governmental organisations, trying to equip Europe with a nuclear capacity. That is a nonsensical proposition. The agency also ends with the rationalisation and increased efficiency of supply which is intended to enhance co-operation and strengthen the European defence industry in its research base, something in which we are not involved. Each member state will participate in the various activities on a case by case basis, as I said, and projects will be funded only by those countries participating. Once again, the suggestion that somehow or other our tax money will be siphoned off into something that we do not support is a nonsense.
