JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS debate -
Wednesday, 20 Apr 2005

General Affairs and External Relations Council: Ministerial Presentation.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Deputy Treacy)

Is cúis áthais dom bheith anseo arís le m'oifigigh ón Roinn Gnóthaí Eachtrachta.

I am pleased the European constitution is receiving increasing attention in both the media and the Dáil and Seanad. That is as it should be. There are advantages in everything. The key thing about politics is that the advantages should equal 51% and if they do, then one is on the right side. We are confident this current interest will give many advantages in that there should be a much more focused and detailed debate on the constitution. As the Taoiseach made clear in the Dáil last week, the Government is concerned to ensure the debate on the constitution is as thorough and well informed as possible.

As members are aware, all 25 member states of the European Union must ratify the constitution before it can legally come into force. The target date which has been set is 1 November 2006. Five member states — Hungary, Lithuania, Slovenia, Italy and, most recently, Greece — have already completed parliamentary ratification procedures. Spain has held a successful referendum. Referendums are to be held in a possible further nine countries, including Ireland. The question of the date for our referendum is being kept under careful review. The target date for completion in all the member states is 1 November 2006, about 16 months from now. No date has yet been set but preparations are ongoing to ensure the necessary arrangements are in place as soon as possible. In various speeches I have made about the constitution, particularly this year, I have said that over the year ahead we will be holding a referendum.

The Bill to amend the Irish Constitution to allow for ratification will be published during this session of the Dáil. I pay tribute to the main Opposition parties, Fine Gael and Labour, for their very positive attitude towards this matter. We hope that a broad, positive consensus can be reached within the Oireachtas and that this will reflected throughout the campaign.

Importantly, the publication of the draft referendum Bill will open the way for the establishment of the Referendum Commission. The Government is committed to giving the commission ample time and resources to carry out its crucial information role, as was the case in the second Nice referendum. The National Forum on Europe is already doing great work, raising the profile of the European constitution, with meetings dedicated to the constitution itself being held around the country. I was pleased to be at one such meeting in Navan. Prior to that there was a meeting in Carlow and a series of meetings has been arranged across the country over the coming months. The forum will be in Gweedore next Monday and will be in Roscommon, Balbriggan, Cork, Galway and Cavan. There will also be plenary meetings of the forum itself. Tomorrow in Dublin Castle the forum is to debate the key security and defence issues.

The Government is also playing its role in the provision of information materials. An explanatory guide and an accompanying leaflet were produced at the time of signature of the constitution. A White Paper on the constitution is currently being prepared and the intention is to publish it in both English and Irish. We will have a White Paper and a Páipéar Bán in early June. The Government will subsequently send an information booklet setting out briefly the key elements in the constitution to all households. Copies of the European constitution are readily available from the European Commission office in Dublin. More documents on the constitution are available than ever before. It can be downloaded from the Department of Foreign Affairs website at www.europeanconstitution.ie. Given the nature of the document, it is not practical or cost effective to send a copy to every household. However, everyone who wants a copy has simply to make a phone call to get one free in the post. I am more than satisfied that those who wish to have a copy will find it easy to obtain one and they are available at regional provincial centres around the country.

While the date for the referendum has not yet been set, the discussion is well under way. I would urge members of this committee and all Deputies, Senators and MEPs not to wait for a referendum date before engaging on this important issue. Each of us has an obligation to contribute to an informed discussion. The European constitution deserves our attention even outside the demands of a referendum campaign. I am mindful of what the Chairman has said. Be assured that all the utterances of the Government are utterances of enthusiasm to ensure the date is set as quickly as possible. Most certainly the referendum will be held during the year ahead.

Chairman

During this year?

Deputy Treacy

There are greater people than I who will make that decision. I would say in the next year.

Chairman

The Taoiseach has made it clear that this will be held prior to November 2006. The Minister started off by referring to October.

Deputy Treacy

I have said consistently in my speeches since last January that most certainly the referendum will be held in the year ahead. The decision will be taken at the highest level of Government as quickly as possible. We must ensure that we have a structured, programmed path. The year ahead is a very open calendar period.

Chairman

: Is the Minister talking about the next 12 months, this year or next year?

Deputy Treacy

I am not in a position to give an absolute indication of the date that will be decided because I do not know. I am like the Chairman, waiting for the great decision to be made.

Chairman

Is the Government waiting for the decisions of the French and others?

Deputy Treacy

No. This is very serious. It will be a decision taken in due course by a sovereign Government in a sovereign country. We want to make sure that we have ample time to debate it, that we distribute ample documentation across the country, that we are able to give an opportunity to this committee, to Parliament itself and the various other institutions and organisations, including the Forum on Europe, the Institute of European Affairs and the European Movement, all of whom are doing tremendous work on this. When we are satisfied that the information is disseminated and that the populace is informed, then a decision will be taken.

Chairman

If the French reject the constitutional treaty, where are we at that point?

Deputy Treacy

: I am very optimistic. The French have been at the heart of the European movement since 1957 and I am quite confident that the leadership they have given over the years will be given again. I am not countenancing a negative decision there. There are six weeks before their decision. We have the utmost confidence in the leadership of the French people and that they will continue to enhance their contribution to the whole European project. There is a good case for a "Yes" vote. There is still time in France. Negative speculation does not help, but I am optimistic that at the end of the day the French people will give leadership to Europe, as they have always done.

Chairman

I ask the question again. If there is a negative vote in France, where does that leave us?

Deputy Treacy

: If there were a negative vote in France, it would be a matter for the heads of state and government to convene a council to discuss the situation. There are still six weeks to go to the referendum. It is a very long time in a political campaign. We are all reasonably experienced politicians and we know it is a huge challenge. The objective case for ratification of the European constitution is very strong in every member state. We are confident that supporters of the constitution will communicate this effectively to the French public as the real campaign hots up. The campaign has only just started in France.

We cannot operate on the basis of a hypothesis. We have to get on with our own work. Legally to enter into force the constitution must be ratified in every member state, including Ireland and France, and if at least four have done so by 1 November 2006 but one or more have not, then the European Council is obliged to consider the matter. Politically a failure to ratify would lead the Union into a crisis. Though there is speculation about possible scenarios, nobody can say with any authority exactly what will happen. It will undoubtedly be bad for Europe, but we would have to assess that situation. There is no point in speculating about something that may not happen. We believe that ratification will take place and that the French people will vote in favour.

Chairman

How much are we spending on this campaign?

Deputy Treacy

In Ireland? Certainly in the millions. It will be a matter for the Referendum Commission to decide how much they wish to spend on the campaign. There will certainly be more money available for the commission than ever before. When the chairman of the commission is appointed and the team is in position, it will be a matter for them in discussion with the Departments of Taoiseach, Foreign Affairs and Finance to decide the figure they require. The Taoiseach has made it quite clear that there will be ample resources available, certainly in the millions.

Chairman

When will those appointments be made?

Deputy Treacy

We have to get the legislation published first. We cannot appoint the commission until then. We hope to have the legislation published as quickly as possible and have the debate in the Dáil and Seanad between now and June. The commission will be appointed then. The Chairman should be assured that the Government is working assiduously in a structured way on a regular daily and weekly basis to ensure that we get all the work done in preparation for a decision in Ireland. The commission will be appointed as soon as legally possible.

Chairman

I appreciate that. The Minister is not committing to any great expenditure until June, by which time we will know the decision in France.

Deputy Treacy

We are precluded from spending money ourselves. The Referendum Commission would spend the money on the campaign.

Chairman

: That is the time line as far as the commission is concerned.

Deputy Quinn

: The ratification of a treaty within the European Union is a matter for each sovereign member state, be it as big as Germany or as small as Malta. Central to the European project is mutual respect for sovereign states, irrespective of their size. Each state must pursue its own path, through whatever constitutional mechanism it has taken upon itself, to come to its own conclusion.

I and all members of the committee understand exactly the position of the Minister of State in respect of the collective responsibility of the Government. Each state must and should pursue its own decision-making process, irrespective of the decision of any other member state. If the French make a sovereign decision in the Republic of France on 29 May, the consequences of their decision will be their responsibility to resolve, just as Danes were responsible in 1992 and just as the Irish were responsible when they rejected the Nice treaty. Nobody other than the French should be responsible for their decision on 29 May. If we were to send out the signal, or even the suggestion, that a "No" vote in one country, by virtue of its size, would bring the process to a halt while a "No" vote in another country would require that country to reconsider its decision, we would be tearing apart the very heart of unity that is the European project. Irrespective of whether the countries involved include Malta, Germany, the Netherlands or France, they are sovereign, make their own choices and live with the political consequences of those choices.

I listened to Dominique Strauss-Khan very attentively at the Institute of European Affairs last Monday. I have no doubt, given the relentless logic he brought to bear on the analysis of what the treaty will do for France, considering its choice between becoming irrelevant and less influential in the European project and remaining at the heart of the European project, that the French will make a sound "Yes" decision. However, as the Minister of State rightly said, that is a decision for the citizens of France. The citizens of this Republic will, as far as the Labour Party is concerned, proceed in the manner outlined by the Minister of State. We will fully accept responsibly for the consequences of our decision, whatever it may be.

Deputy Mulcahy

I also thank the Chairman for raising this topic because it is very important. I welcome what the Minister of State said and commend him thereon. He demonstrated quite clearly that Ireland will pursue its own agenda in its own time. As Deputy Quinn stated quite correctly, that is as it should be.

I do not quite agree with Deputy Quinn's analysis that all countries are equal within Europe politically. They may be equal legally but the reality is that there was a considerable problem when some of the smaller countries took the wrong side regarding the Stability and Growth Pact. When some of the bigger countries did so, the rules were changed to accommodate them despite the objections of the European Commission.

The Chairman is correct to the extent that a "No" vote in France would be of great significance. However, as the Minister of State said, we must pursue our own agenda in our own time. I am sure there will be a vigorous campaign.

A member of this committee once stated every citizen of Ireland should get a full copy of the draft constitution. I agreed with the member at the time but believe the Minister of State indicated this would not be the case. It is not good enough to say a copy will be available to people over the Internet or in their post offices. This is a very important document and may set the legal agenda for the European Union for the next 20 or 100 years. It would cost a lot to send it to every household but is should be possible given that it has always been possible to deliver a telephone book to every dwelling. My colleagues will agree that a message should be sent from this committee to the Government that funding should be made available in this regard. Perhaps I misinterpreted the Minister of State as saying the Government would not do so. If not, he should ask the Government to reconsider its decision and communicate my view to the Referendum Commission.

Deputy Treacy

I agree very much with what has been said by both Deputies, particularly Deputy Quinn. Anybody who has read the draft constitution or represented Ireland at various meetings of the Council of Ministers, as has Deputy Quinn, will note that all member states are equal. All our rights are equal, we have mutual respect, we collaborate and operate on the basis of consensus.

Deputy Mulcahy should understand that there was a major change in the short history of the Stability and Growth Pact when the euro was introduced. The pact obviously had to be reviewed on foot of analyses of the sustainability and performance of the euro. The decisions which have been made recently have provided member states with the necessary flexibility such that, on the basis of subsidiarity, the leverage required for them to be able to stimulate their economies based on the rules laid down is now available to them. This is very important going forward and we must be very mindful of it.

We have considered making copies of the draft constitution available to every household and have taken on board the recommendations of this committee. I have had discussions on this subject with our MEPs, collectively and in some cases individually. Taking into account the requirements that existed in respect of previous documents, including treaty documents, and the fact that citizens were charged for some such documents in the past, we feel, on the basis of all the information available to us, that having ample copies of the draft constitution freely available at different locations throughout the country, making it available on the Internet and giving people the option to obtain it by e-mail or telephone using a freephone line cover all the options available to those who have a strong interest in studying it and who have the time to do so. We have already published relevant documents and the Government is to circulate them to each house in the country. It will then be a matter for the Referendum Commission to decide on the best way of communicating the content of the draft treaty to each citizen. We cannot dictate that or interfere with the commission in that regard. We have no desire to do so, nor will we be involved in making its decision. We will allow the commission to do what it considers best and if it believes a copy of the draft treaty should be sent to every household, that will be its business.

Mr. Ó Neachtain, MEP

Go raibh maith agat as ucht an fáilte a chuir an coiste romham ag an gcéad chruinniú. Is é seo an chéad chruinniú den téarma parlaiminte nua ach ní hé seo mo chéad chruinniú ag an gcoiste. I have to go to an important meeting in Brussels later today and it is very difficult to attempt the art of bilocation. Due to the shortage of flights and the change in the flight pattern, I must leave very soon. The Chairman will excuse me for this.

I agree with the Minister of State and Deputy Quinn that we, as a sovereign state, should do as we see fit in our deliberations on the draft constitution. It is important to avail of the opportunity that exists in the public arena to dwell on Europe. We do not often get that opportunity. There is now public interest and we should recognise the demand for clarification on what the constitution will entail and recognise its importance.

The French will do their thing and I am not of the opinion that they will not ratify the treaty. The French public is acquiring more knowledge because of the ongoing debate and is aware of the political importance of its decision. Although importance is attached to the decision of every country, the French vote is obviously important considering the public interest that has been generated therein.

I look forward to working with this committee when the opportunity arises and hope to have further opportunities to meet it as an MEP. I hope its members will understand that it is not as easy to achieve this as it may seem. It is not easy to do that but during this campaign, whether we are for or against the constitution, I hope we will avail of the opportunity, as the Forum for Europe is doing, to discuss the matter thoroughly and to have the precise meaning of the constitution made available to the public. We must use our offices as public representatives to achieve that.

Chairman

Initially when the referendum was announced, a date in October was mentioned for it. Someone then said it would be next spring or before November 2006. Does that indicate a commitment to going ahead and having this regardless of what anyone else does or does it send a message that we will wait and see? That is the danger here.

Mr. Ó Neachtain, MEP

The pronouncement regarding the constitution being ratified by the member states before November 2006 is the important one. As a member of the European Parliament, I believe the public wants clarification of the constitution and they are looking to public representatives for that. The public knows very little of what the constitution entails. During the European election, national issues were discussed in most media, not European issues. We must put Europe at the centre of this discussion and the referendum offers the opportunity to do that. It is up to the Government to clarify the date. I am willing to discuss the matter at every opportunity.

Senator Bradford

It is fair to say we are none the wiser following the Minister of State's contribution. All of us attend meetings three or four times a week and we must concede that the EU constitution and our participation in the debate is not of interest to most citizens. As a body politic, we have failed to switch on the Irish public to the EU constitution.

Most of the limited public debate about EU constitutional matters in the past month has been about how the French will vote, not about how or when we will vote. I agree with my colleagues, particularly Deputy Quinn, about the French vote — it is a matter for the French. We would not take kindly to any of our European partners advising us how to vote in our referendum. The French must make their own decision, which will then be followed by the Dutch.

The Minister of State and the Taoiseach have said that regardless of the French decision, we will proceed with the ratification process. We need confirmation of when our campaign will start and when the referendum will take place. It is not just a question of getting the public to pass the referendum because it can be successful, we must enthuse the public to a greater degree.

It is important that we set a date for the referendum and start the campaign. The Chairman asked about establishment of the referendum commission and when the legislation will be introduced. The Minister of State said the legislation would be introduced in the next few weeks if it is to be presented before the summer. We must take charge of the debate in these Houses and become active on the Irish referendum rather than worrying about the French referendum. Passing the referendum here is our political project. There has been much talk but little action although there is almost unanimous political consensus on the matter. We should work harder on this than we have until now.

Chairman

The Minister of State is saying the Irish Government has confirmed that it is utterly committed to this process regardless of what any other member state does. Senator Bradford is asking for the plan for the campaign to be set out for us. When will it be initiated?

Deputy Treacy

The campaign is already under way. The matter is being debated and people are becoming very interested in it. The key to this is political debate and how to engage the public. It is critical that there is a collective effort on the part of every public representative to get the message to the people so we can get a solid conclusion to this decision in a broad, democratic fashion rather than through selective democracy with a small number of people turning out. That is a challenge to all of us and we are confident we can achieve that.

We are in discussions to secure final agreement on the wording of the legislation to enable us to proceed with the referendum. We are grateful for the support we have received from the main political parties on this and we expect to publish that legislation and have it debated before the summer recess. We will publish a White Paper in English and a Páipéar Bán in Irish on the EU treaty between now and June. Once we publish the legislation, we will appoint the referendum commission then the debate will open up across the State with all of the agencies involved, including the Forum on Europe.

We are optimistic that there will huge interest and participation in the campaign. A decision will be made on a date that will allow ample time for debate and consultation and for people to make a decision. The date is a matter for the Government to decide but no decision has been made yet. That decision will be taken in due course but we will make it in our own time on behalf of the people to give everyone a full opportunity to participate in the debate and make a final decision by way of referendum.

Chairman

The Minister of State has explained the mechanics of the process as far as the Government is concerned in the Oireachtas. Is there a plan of action for the campaign?

Deputy Treacy

The plan of action part for the campaign is very structured and professional. The Government must ensure we fulfil all the legal requirements. The campaign will be multifaceted, involving all of the political parties and groups in the European movement, the Institute of European Affairs and the referendum commission. It is a broad operation but as we debate it now we are contributing to a campaign that has already begun.

Chairman

Therefore, there is no plan, as such, right now.

Deputy Treacy

If telling the committee that publishing legislation——

Chairman

We talked about this two or three months ago and members of Government parties asked if there was a plan of action. We have not moved on. The Minister of State is saying we are going to wait until after the summer recess and the Páipéar Bán. There is no plan of action.

Deputy Treacy

I did not say that. I do not wish to be repetitive and delay the meeting. We will publish the Bill and a white paper before the summer recess. We will appoint a referendum commission, the debate will take place and a referendum date will be set. That is a serious plan.

Deputy Sexton

I thank the Minister of State for his contribution. He said clearly no date has been set. There is nothing wrong in that. It is our duty as members of this committee to ensure the information available to us is disseminated to the public.

If people are as interested as the Chairman suggests a range of information is available on the Internet and in other fora. However, people are not that interested. The electorate is very sophisticated but it is not exercised about Europe, it is more interested in the bread and butter issues of daily living. When the referendum date is decided the electorate will engage with the issue. We should be prudent and wait until the referendum in France has been decided because we can learn much from that experience. A "Yes" vote will indicate how we should direct our campaign to ensure national issues do not interfere with a referendum on an EU issue. This has happened across Europe in previous referenda. It is important to learn from whatever decision the French take. That does not mean not having a referendum but learning lessons for our own referendum. There is nothing wrong in that, although the Minister of State may not agree. It would be prudent because a large sum of taxpayers' money will be spent on the campaign and we should know where others before us failed.

The Minister of State has said at least half a dozen times in the past half hour that there is no date, and no time scale has been decided. With all due respect, the Chairman is demeaning the debate by repeatedly asking the one question. This is a serious matter and if this committee wants the public, the people in the visitors' gallery and the members of the press here, to take it seriously, we must accept that the Minister of State said there is no time frame beyond a year ahead. It is our duty, across the parties to make a case for the European constitution and why it should be accepted. Demeaning it in the way it has been demeaned today will not help matters.

Chairman

Does the Deputy think that the Chairman of the Joint Committee on European Affairs should ask the Minister of State responsible for setting out the campaign for the constitutional treaty about that campaign and how it will operate?

Deputy Sexton

These meetings drag on with discussion of irrelevancies. The Chairman has as great a duty of care and responsibility as the Minister of State to ensure that this constitutional information on the European constitution is disseminated to the public. A meeting in which the Chairman badgers the visitor to answer his question because the first answer is not to his liking is not constructive.

Chairman

I said we should wait until the French referendum is over.

Deputy Sexton

The Minister of State said it will happen within the year. We should proceed with the matter in hand and the other matters we need to discuss with the Minister of State such as the General Affairs and External Relations Council. It would be nice to know the date of the referendum but we have a responsibility since we first discussed the constitution at this committee to go out and sell it.

It will not be the Minister of State's responsibility until the campaign is up and running. He is playing his part. We should do likewise. The Chairman is taking up far too much time asking a question the answer to which he does not like. The answer is there. The Chairman will not hear a different answer by asking the question in six different ways. We should move on.

Chairman

I shall determine how we proceed. Does the Deputy think we should wait until we know the result of the French referendum and decide then?

Deputy Sexton

There would be no harm in that. That is my opinion.

Chairman

Very well, the Deputy is in favour of that.

Deputy Sexton

We should learn from the mistakes of others. France has been generally well-disposed to the European Union but if, as opinion seems to suggest——

Chairman

The question was whether members feel we should wait until after the French referendum. What harm is there in my asking that question?

Deputy Sexton

There is no harm in asking it once and receiving an answer but when the Chairman asks it six times——

Chairman

The Deputy is the only person who has said it.

Deputy Sexton

When the audience in the visitors' and press gallery is laughing there is something wrong. This is not a serious committee. That is my opinion, which I am sure is as good as that of the Chairman.

Deputy Carey

I do not wish to delay the meeting, particularly as I am not a member of this committee. At the risk of stating the obvious, when the Minister of State comes here he represents the Government. The Chairman and members are correct to ask as many questions as they wish.

There is a section in the constitution on the role of national parliaments and regional assemblies. The Chairman and the committee have started a useful debate to which I will contribute next week. While I would prefer that everyone support the constitution there should be an honest, open and robust debate in which we take the lead. We play just as important a role in the debate as the Government, and we should not play Pontius Pilate and say it is Government's job to deal with the matter.

Chairman

The Deputy is right.

Deputy Carey

We might not always agree with the position the Government takes but we can play a role that no other group in Irish society can play in explaining this constitution to the public. There probably is not a large audience for this information but it is up to us to generate an audience. At the risk of overselling our humility we should not attempt to sell ourselves short in this debate. We are in a stronger position than most to promote or to kill an issue, depending on how we want to play it.

Chairman

It is unclear how we are proceeding with this issue. The Minister of State conceded he has not set a date. As Deputy Quinn said, regardless of what any other member state does we need a plan of action, to move forward in a concerted way. The danger is we do not have that attitude. Asking basic questions has made that obvious. If we are serious about taking on this constitutional treaty when, as Senator Bradford points out, there is little interest in European issues and significant disinterest in the constitutional treaty we must have a plan of action and move ahead. We should not give conflicting messages through the media about when this is happening or what shape this plan and campaign will take.

We will move on to discuss the General Affairs and External Relations Council.

Deputy Treacy

The committee can rest assured there is a plan of action and there will be a referendum on the treaty in which there will be great, enthusiastic participation. The Chairman and his colleagues will play a major role in that.

Deputy Quinn

Habemus referendum.

Deputy Treacy

I am happy to meet again with the committee in advance of the General Affairs and External Relations Council to exchange views on items which are on the agenda for next week's meeting. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, is travelling today in his capacity as envoy of the Secretary General of the United Nations, Mr. Kofi Annan. The Minister is one of five envoys appointed by Mr. Annan to present to United Nations member states and their respective regions the elements of a broad package of reforms and proposals contained in the Secretary General's recent report, Enlarge Your Freedom.

Each envoy must report to the Secretary General on the views, priorities and concerns expressed in capitals to ensure the most effective preparation for, and the best possible outcome from, the major summit that will take place at the United Nations next September.

The Government is determined to do all it can to promote broad agreement ahead of the September summit on reforms that will strengthen the United Nations and measures that will set us on course to achieve the millennium development goals. The Minister's appointment indicates the esteem in which the Secretary General holds him and Ireland's track record of commitment to the United Nations. It is a great honour for Ireland to discharge this role and the Government is determined to do the best it can in this matter.

Next Monday's meeting of the council in Luxembourg will be the fifth under the Luxembourg Presidency. The Minister and I will represent Ireland there. The next day I will attend a meeting of European Affairs Ministers which the Presidency has arranged in Luxembourg. At the General Affairs and External Relations Council on 25 April all EU member states, and Bulgaria and Romania, will sign the accession treaty to allow Bulgaria and Romania to become members of the European Union. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and I will sign the treaty on behalf of Ireland. Bulgaria and Romania will be then entitled to take their seats as active observers in meetings from the following day, 26 April. Both states are due to accede to the European Union on 1 January 2007, if they are ready. The treaty falls to be ratified by every member state in advance of the planned accession date. The earliest ratification of the treaty by Ireland will be in late autumn 2004. For previous accessions, ratification has involved motions in the Oireachtas and an amendment to the European Communities Act 1972.

The General Affairs and External Relations Council is beginning an intensive phase of work on the future financial perspectives. This will include discussions at next week's Council and at two ministerial conclaves on the eve of the May and June Council meetings. The EU Presidency is seeking to meet the deadline of June 2005 which has been set for political agreement on this important dossier. The Council's work is focusing on an evolving framework for the negotiations, distinguishing those issues on which there is broad agreement and those on which further work is needed. The first draft of this framework, the negotiating box, was issued by the EU Presidency on 8 March 2004. This draft was found to be fair and balanced. It does not yet contain the key financial figures which are expected to be tabled only in the final weeks of the negotiations. Discussions at the General Affairs and External Relations Council will be based on a revised draft expected tomorrow. We do not yet know precisely how the EU Presidency intends to focus and handle the discussions on Monday.

Our overall approach in the negotiations is to seek to ensure that the European Union is adequately resourced to meet the expectations and needs of its citizens, as well as its existing commitments, while providing value for money for the EU taxpayer. A main priority is to maintain the existing levels of funding for agriculture foreseen in the 2002 agreement on the Common Agricultural Policy. We have supported poorer member states in seeking to secure significant cohesion funding to address disparities in development in the enlarged European Union. We have also pressed the case for a fair outcome for our regions in transition. In addition, we are seeking to maintain existing levels of funding for rural development. We have prioritised research and development, as well as education and training, in the proposed funding for competitiveness. With regard to proposals on external relations, we have stressed, in particular, the importance of focusing on poverty reduction and the achievement of the millennium development goals.

Ireland remains unconvinced of the case for a general rebate mechanism. We wish to ensure that any rebate mechanisms for net contributions to the EU budget should cost no more in total than the current UK rebate. It is important the principle of solidarity applies to whatever is agreed. Consequently, we have stressed that all member states must contribute to the financing of rebate mechanisms, if these are part of a final package. The committee will be holding a session on the financial perspectives on 11 May to which representatives of several Departments, including the Department of Foreign Affairs, have been invited. This will offer an opportunity to examine the detail of the negotiations.

This month, Ministers will address the Middle East, preparations for next month's EU-Russia Summit and the Sudan under the external relations agenda. The Council's discussion on the western Balkans will concentrate on the Commission's recommendation that the European Union should open negotiations for an agreement with the state union of Serbia and Montenegro. The EU has made a firm commitment to work with the countries of the region towards their eventual integration into European structures, provided they meet the necessary political conditions. Serbia and Montenegro is the largest country in the western Balkans, but it has made the slowest progress in developing an institutional relationship with the EU.

There has, however, been political and economic progress in the state over the past year. The EU has also welcomed the significant moves by Belgrade in recent months to ensure that several former military figures, indicted for war crimes during the terrible conflicts of the 1990s, are transferred to The Hague for trial by the war crimes tribunal. While this progress must be sustained in the following months, the EU has reached the important point of where it can look to the conclusion of an agreement with Serbia and Montenegro.

The Council is expected to request the Commission to prepare a draft negotiating mandate as soon as possible, for approval by the member states. It is hoped in the coming months the Council will also take a decision on the opening of negotiations for an agreement with Bosnia-Herzegovina, which would strengthen the reform process. They would also bring forward the prospect of a new European future for all the people of a region which is moving steadily away from the violence and political instability which resulted from the break-up of the former Yugoslavia.

Over the next year, the major issue in the western Balkans will be attempts to reach agreement on Kosovo. The aim will be to provide for a truly multiethnic society with a constitutional status which contributes to regional stability and to the European future of the region. It is hoped the progress being made in relations with Serbia and Montenegro will help political leaders in Belgrade to engage constructively with leaders in Pristina in the interests of a secure, peaceful and prosperous future for all the people of Kosovo.

The discussion on Russia at the Council will focus on preparations for the EU-Russia Summit in Moscow on 10 May. This summit is particularly significant as it is expected that agreement will be reached on roadmaps for four common spaces with Russia. These will provide a coherent framework for relations between Russia and the European Union in the coming years and will considerably enhance co-operation across political, economic and security spheres. From a European Union perspective, it is hoped the summit will result in intensified dialogue with Russia on the common neighbourhood, in particular in resolving the conflicts in Moldova and Georgia. It is also expected the summit will launch closer dialogue in support of an open and democratic process in Chechnya and that Russia will confirm that consultations on human rights will be held on a regular basis at the highest level.

The situation in the Middle East region will be discussed over lunch. It now appears the Council will adopt conclusions on several issues affecting the region, including Iraq, Lebanon and the Middle East peace process. Discussions are under way at official level to refine the texts which Ministers will consider. It is expected the conclusions on Iraq will welcome the formation of the transitional Government there and to reaffirm the EU's commitments to support Iraq. The conclusions on Lebanon are expected to re-affirm the positions adopted at the spring European Council last month and to note the appointment of a new designate prime minister, Mr. Najib Mikati. The conclusions on the Middle East peace process are likely to reaffirm the EU's long-standing commitment to the international quartet roadmap and to urge the parties to accelerate their progress towards meeting their obligations under the roadmap and the more recent Sharm-el-Sheikh Summit. The summit was a heartening development on which it is hoped the parties will build. The commitments agreed at the summit gave grounds for hope and a real prospect of an early return to negotiations on all issues. The difficulties and the obstacles which must be overcome cannot be underestimated, but we urge all parties to redouble their efforts to fulfil their commitments and create the conditions in which negotiations can resume.

The Council will consider several items concerning Africa including the situation in the Great Lakes. It will consider how the EU can lend further support to ensure that the transition processes in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Burundi are accelerated to lead to the scheduled national elections in both countries later this year. Recent events in the Democratic Republic of Congo are encouraging including the disarmament process almost complete in the lturi region under the supervision of the United Nations mission. There was also the welcome announcement by the main Rwandan Hutu armed militia, still active in the east, that it will cease military action against Rwanda and engage in a voluntary process of disarmament and repatriation. Good progress continues to be made in Burundi towards the holding of national elections at the end of June 2004.

The transition, nevertheless, in the Democratic Republic of Congo still remains at a critical stage, with much remaining to be done, particularly electoral preparations and improving security through the establishment of fully integrated national army and police forces. Ministers are likely to discuss plans for a high-level mission to the Democratic Republic of Congo by Mr. Javier Solana early next month to impress the urgency of hastening the transition upon the Government and the parties to the peace agreements. The Council will also approve the deployment of a small EU planning and advisory mission to advise the Government in the crucial area of security sector reform, an area in which the EU is continuing to lend vital assistance.

The Council will also have a brief discussion on the political situation in Zimbabwe, following the recent parliamentary elections there. Based on the reports of EU diplomats in Harare, including the Irish ambassador, who observed the elections and other information available, no objective assessment can conclude that it was either free or fair. It is to be regretted that the Zimbabwean Government spurned the opportunity presented by the election to introduce meaningful reforms and genuinely comply with the Southern African Development Community guidelines for the holding of democratic elections. The onus therefore remains on the newly-appointed Zimbabwean Government to show serious intent about improving the situation of democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe. Until there is movement towards meeting the EU benchmarks in this regard, I do not believe that, in the event of a review, there will be any basis for altering the Union's Common Position on Zimbabwe, which imposes restrictive measures against the leading members of the ZANU-PF Government.

The Council is also scheduled to have a brief discussion on the situation in Sudan following the adoption of a number of resolutions by the United Nations Security Council at the end of March. These include Resolution 1593 on impunity which provides for referral of the atrocities and serious human rights violations highlighted in the recent report of the international commission of inquiry to the International Criminal Court for further action. This is a welcome step and one which should facilitate the bringing to justice, in the most effective way possible, of those responsible for the most serious crimes committed in Darfur since the start of the current conflict.

The overall political and humanitarian situation in the Darfur region continues to remain serious. The priority remains an improvement in security on the ground and the speedy resumption of political negotiations between the Sudanese Government and the Darfur rebels, with a view to achieving an overall settlement. In both areas, the African Union is playing a critical role and one which Ireland and our EU partners are determined to continue supporting. We remain open to providing further support to the African Union, in the context of an expanded mission in Darfur, proposals for which will be discussed by the African Union Peace and Security Council later this month. In the meantime, sustained international pressure needs to be exerted on all the parties to honour their commitments, improve the security situation and achieve a speedy political settlement.

It is also important to forge ahead with implementation of the comprehensive peace agreement concluded in Nairobi last January, since this will facilitate the search for a political solution in Darfur. The generous response of donors at last week's Sudan conference in Oslo, which saw a total of US$4.5 billion pledged, demonstrates the willingness of the international community to assist Sudan and all its people to emerge from conflict and build a better future for their country. As the committee is aware, Ireland pledged €15 million at the conference.

Members will recall that in the wake of the tsunami which caused such devastation in south-east Asia in December last year, the General Affairs and External Relations Council adopted a wide-ranging action plan to address EU capacity to respond fully and appropriately to such large-scale disasters. On Monday, Ministers will discuss a communication from the European Commission which sets out a number of concrete steps to improve EU capabilities in this area.

Many of the proposals contained in the Commission communication will require further detailed examination at official level. However, I particularly welcome two aspects of the general approach taken by the Commission. The first is that we should focus on improving the mechanisms and capabilities which we already have at our disposal, rather than creating entirely new structures. This is something which Ireland has stressed from the beginning. The EU has a number of instruments which already exist which can respond rapidly to large-scale disasters, in particular the mechanism for civil protection. The Commission communication focuses on concrete, practical steps to improve and further develop the mechanism and I support this approach.

The second aspect which is important is the Commission's clear focus on improving co-operation with the United Nations. While it is important that the EU develops its own capabilities, the last thing we wish to see is the development of parallel structures which compete with UN actors on the ground. We need capabilities that can be deployed rapidly as part of an overall international disaster relief effort, in support of the UN's role as lead co-ordinator in disaster situations. The Commission's proposals are very much in this direction.

From a national perspective, we in Ireland need to look at how we can contribute to further developing the EU's civil protection capabilities. My Department is currently co-ordinating an interdepartmental audit of assets and capacities in Ireland for use in humanitarian emergencies abroad. I would hope that this audit will be completed before the summer.

The Council is expected to adopt conclusions which will authorise the Commission to work jointly with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia to prepare action plans. Inclusion of these countries in the European neighbourhood policy, and the development of action plans, marks a significant step forward in the EU's engagement with the region. Indications are that this item will become an "A" point at Council.

On external relations issues, the Council is scheduled to discuss the proposed EU common position on the 2005 review conference of state parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. This common position has been developed with the objective of the Union co-ordinating its position on a wide range of disarmament and non-proliferation issues which will be discussed at the seventh review conference of the non-proliferation treaty scheduled to take place in New York from 2-27 May. It is likely that this item will be agreed without discussion.

I mentioned earlier that I will be attending a meeting of Ministers for European Affairs which the Presidency has arranged for the day following the GAERC. At the meeting, which is informal in nature, it is expected that the discussion will cover aspects of the future financial perspectives, communicating Europe — a constant topic — and the ratification of the EU constitution.

I will be very happy to listen to the views of committee members and take any questions they may have.

Deputy Quinn

I will confine my remarks to the first part of the presentation by the Minister of State. I invite the Minister of State, his colleagues, Iveagh House officials and my former colleagues in the Department of Finance to consider adopting a major mind shift. I am making considered remarks rather than after-lunch throwaway comments.

Just as this country has aspired to reach the 0.7% GDP contribution to Third World development, we should as a people aspire to being net contributors to the European budget. For too long we have been cursed with the béal bocht or poor mouth approach to European financing. There is a sort of psychological contradiction. On the one hand there is a substantial collective consensus that we should maximise as quickly as possible our 0.7% GDP contribution in terms of solidarity with the rest of the world, but when it comes to European Union financing, there is an attitude of maximising as much as possible. Many Administrations, of which I have been a member of three, have adopted that approach.

I am advocating that we become net contributors for three reasons. First, we can afford to do it. Second, there is already a political movement arising within the European Union to cap expenditure at around 1% of own resources when the ceiling is 1.27%. Third, the enlarged European community of 25 member states, now to be 27, cannot otherwise work. It will not work with a budget figure of 1.27%. The resources are not there. We have been significant net beneficiaries in the past. We were net recipients. We wasted a lot of money, as did the Greeks and Portuguese to an even greater extent, but that did not stop the richer parts of Europe from giving us the money. The mountain which the new member states must confront is much more steep and difficult than the mountain we had to climb in 1973, when Ireland joined the EU.

I am conscious that what I am saying is different to the view one normally hears. If one looks at the presentation paper, the caution and the reserve in the first part, with regard to approaching the financial perspective, which is a product of 33 years of Irish Government culture, is quite different to the attitude to contribution with regard to Third World solidarity. What is the benefit for us? First, it would be a realistic act of investment and solidarity. We would be net beneficiaries. The better the judicial system is in Hungary or the more open the property system is in Slovenia, the safer are the investments there of the Irish Government and of Irish private citizens. It makes sense for us.

Second, the quicker the countries within the European Union rise to the same level of prosperity we have achieved, the better we will all be. Rich neighbours do not go to war against each other or have real rows with each other, but inequality between neighbours and between member states will cause its own friction. Third, it is the Irish who are seen by many of the new member states as one of the most successful examples of participation in the European Union. For us to voluntarily say we want to be net contributors sends a signal to every other member state to aspire to the same status. The message should be that we want to be major contributors rather than major beneficiaries or recipients. I know the Minister of State must operate within certain constraints. I invited the Minister of State to change the mindset in Iveagh House and Merrion Street regarding our contribution to the budget of the European Union and the financial perspectives. Much as the Luxembourgers would love to conclude matters in June, the prospect is that it will not be easy. I ask that he reflect on what I have said.

Deputy Treacy

Deputy Quinn has made an interesting proposal, and I salute him for that. I very much agree with him. The EU has great capacity for positivity. It will be able to exert its position in global affairs in a much stronger and more cohesive way once we have the European constitution ratified. It has the financial capacity and political leadership to make a great contribution. We all have responsibilities, but I have arrived in Iveagh House as one of a team of three led by a much more powerful politician than I. However, I have found a very refreshing and positive attitude there. I have been very impressed by the quality of the people working there. I also worked for short periods in Merrion Street, at one stage as an assistant to the Deputy, and now I have reason to be there as an assistant to another great person. Ultimately, we have a solid and consistent track record. We have been very positive in our attitude and reasonable in our negotiations.

We go to get resources. We must be mindful that there are disparities in inner-city areas of our country and in urban areas, as well as between our regions. We must remember that we are required to ensure equality of opportunity across every region of Ireland. Flexibility is called for. We cannot be in a situation whereby we are on a rigid 1%. That would be very serious for the Union. There must be a certain flexibility, and we will agree a figure above the 1%. We are not part of the 1% club, and neither are we a prisoner of any other area. We are very positive in our attitude to achieving sufficient flexibility to give the Union the necessary leverage. It must have the resources and flexibility, and not only to stimulate economic growth on an equal basis and use different instruments and programmes in all parts of the Union. Where there is a requirement, perhaps through the European neighbourhood policy or in a greater global context, including disasters such as the tsunami, we must be able to respond. That could be an initiative of the EU itself or at the request of the UN. That flexibility must be there.

Ultimately, our political leaders, and the permanent team that represents us in Iveagh House and the other Departments and that conducts negotiations on our behalf at Brussels level and in various other scenarios throughout Europe, operate on the basis of festina lente and caveat emptor. That has served us well, and I am confident that we will be positive and flexible and that we will get the desired result. I suspect that we will fulfil many of the committee’s wishes too.

Senator Bradford

Are we dealing with the whole paper?

Chairman

Yes.

Senator Bradford

I shall say a few words regarding the Minister of State's comments on the Sudan. He said the Council was scheduled to have a brief discussion of the situation there. I will revert to what I have said here on a few occasions. I suppose that his indication of a brief discussion summarises the world's view and contribution to date in that regard. It has been brief, dismissive and ineffective. It is inappropriate to have a brief discussion on Sudan. I hope that next week, when the Minister of State and his senior colleague get down to having that brief discussion, they will try to get some meaningful EU action.

The contribution and record to date of the UN regarding that country makes it irrelevant. It has had no impact, nor helped in any way at all. Someone must take the lead. The African Union has made some efforts, and I suppose it is difficult for it to put the political mechanisms in place. However, it is doing its best. The UN will obviously do no more apart from talk. Through the Minister of State's office and that of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, we must try to ensure that Ireland will lead the way at EU level for a meaningful response to the ongoing, daily tragedy of the Sudan. Tens or hundreds of thousands of people have been murdered, maimed or displaced. The response next week of the EU is to have a brief discussion. That is not the Minister of State's fault; it is symptomatic of the world's response, which has been absolutely pathetic.

On the question of financial perspectives, I have heard the much more high-brow contribution of Deputy Quinn regarding what Ireland should pay into the European Union. I cannot disagree, but, while we can extract some funding at present, the Minister of State is talking about the priority of trying to maintain the agriculture budget in accordance with the 2002 agreement. The Minister himself was at the Department of Agriculture and Food for quite some time and will be aware that a new system of direct compensation as opposed to producer aid is supposed to be the way forward. That system was put in place last year, and I believe payments are due over the next few months.

It was seen as being in place until 2010, but now there appears to be growing doubt and unease among the farming community about the continuation of such eligibility payments. At a time when young people are literally flocking away from agriculture, we must try to put in place a very firm commitment regarding agricultural funding programmes for the next five or ten years. It is important that the Minister of State secure a very firm commitment that the 2002 package, which from a payments perspective is commencing about now, will last for the planned period and that there will not be any mid-term review next year or the year after. If we want to keep Irish agriculture alive and keep young people interested in agriculture as a career, allowing them to plan ahead, we must assure ourselves that what was promised and signed up to in 2002 will be delivered.

The non-proliferation debate is to receive a brief mention next week. We discussed it yesterday at the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs. We note that the former US President Jimmy Carter voiced his disquiet about the fact that the debate is now being virtually ignored at international level. There was a time when the whole question of non-proliferation was a big international political topic, but it appears that most countries are now switching off from that debate and that we are sleepwalking back to the bad old days of increased development of nuclear weapons. It is important that, while we are having that debate — I see it is to be agreed without discussion — the Irish position is seen to be clear, with our taking a very strong stance on the argument against nuclear weapons development. Anyone who wanted a brief overview should read what former President Carter said, a man whose record was one of standing up for peace, human rights, security and common sense. In view of how worried a sensible former US President is about nuclear weapons, we should reflect on it.

Deputy Treacy

Referring again to the financial perspectives, we are already acting on the assumption that we will become net contributors over the course of the next financial period, and we accept that as evidence of our economic success. We all know and agree that it came about as a result of our membership of the EU. Without that, we would not have achieved the standards of success, the GDP, or the quality of life we have. We owe that to the EU.

Solidarity with the new member states is central to our approach to the negotiations. We are observers at the cohesion meetings, some of which I have attended. Our team attends them regularly. We very much feel solidarity with those member states and support them on every occasion when it comes to securing sufficient funds for cohesion. We proceed from the need to equip the Union to meet the challenges of the years ahead, and we expect that the financial perspectives to be agreed will reflect that. On the CAP, we are absolutely committed, and at every meeting, whether cohesion, GAERC, or any other, we lay down our position pertaining to the agreement reached in October 2002.

We laid our position on the line in respect of the agreement reached in October 2002. That agreement is sacrosanct and is binding on the Union until 2014. Negotiations will have to take place from 2010 onwards to gain support for that. Agriculture is one of our foremost priorities on the expenditure side in the current negotiations. We will fully support that October 2002 agreement. There is no doubt about the resources that are available or about our single entitlement payments right up to the end of 2013. On that basis, there is no reason for anyone to have any doubts or to be alarmed about the situation. It is firm and there is a commitment——

Senator Bradford

Why are we then concerned about the main priorities to be maintained?

Deputy Treacy

The Union now comprises 25 members. There are certain priorities and emphases, as well as particular interests, that are important for the new accession states. Nobody can stop them raising issues. Everything that is of interest to them will be raised by the new member states, which, as stated earlier, have enormous requirements in certain areas. They will try to create a broad, wide-ranging debate to eke out the best possible deals for themselves. We cannot blame them for that but we are adamant that we are totally committed to the Common Agricultural Policy. We believe we have support for it and we are confident it will be sustained into the future.

As regards the Sudan, the political and humanitarian situation in the Darfur region is a matter of the deepest concern for Ireland. We have raised this on numerous occasions. All Ministers, not only the Minister and Ministers of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, speaking at international forums have clearly indicated where Ireland stands on this matter. Ireland welcomes and supports, financially and logistically, the African Union's observer mission in Darfur, which has played an extremely valuable role there. There is still need for an improvement in security on the ground and the speedy resumption of political negotiations, between the Sudanese Government and the Darfur rebels, with a view to achieving an overall settlement.

We remain open to providing further support to the African Union in the context of an expanded mission in Darfur. We welcome the 31 March decision by the UN Security Council to refer the situation in Darfur since mid-2002 to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. This will mean that those accused by the international commission of inquiry on Darfur of extremely serious violations of rights and international humanitarian law can now be brought to justice by this court. We call on the Sudanese Government to co-operate fully with the International Criminal Court. We have done that in the past and we will again do so next week.

We also welcome the 29 March decision by the Security Council to adopt target sanctions, including a travel ban and assets freeze, against key individuals involved in the conflict in Darfur and to apply the United Nations arms embargo already imposed on the militias and rebel groups in Darfur to the government of Sudan. I also welcome the Security Council's decision of 24 March to establish a UN peacekeeping operation in Sudan, to support implementation of the January 2005 comprehensive peace agreement for southern Sudan, which ended the 20-year civil war there. Ireland, along with other contributing countries, has been invited by the UN to send personnel on this important peacekeeping mission and this request is currently being considered by the Minister of Defence.

The Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Conor Lenihan, visited Sudan, including Darfur, in early April to discuss the needs of the country at first hand. Last week the Minister of State represented Ireland at the donors conference in Oslo where the grave humanitarian situation in the Sudan was discuss with other international actors. At this conference, Ireland pledged €15 million in support of Sudan's humanitarian and rehabilitation needs for 2005 and future years. The Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, made clear to the Sudanese Government representatives the serious attitude that Ireland is adopting to the situation and asked for their complete co-operation.

The committee also raised matters of concern pertaining to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Ireland, along with its EU partners, continues to regard this treaty as the cornerstone of a global non-proliferation regime and the essential foundation for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament. In conjunction with its EU partners, Ireland gives high priority to the achievement of the objectives set out in the EU strategy against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction adopted by the European Council in December 2003. We have agreed that to meet this challenge will be a critical part of the EU's external action and a key element of our efforts will be to support the multilateral institutions charged with verification and upholding compliance with the treaty.

We are convinced that disarmament and non-proliferation are mutually reinforcing and that both must be vigorously pursued. Ireland was privileged to be the first country to sign and ratify the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Since then, efforts to strengthen the treaty and to ensure respect for its provisions have been our highest priority in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation.

Senator Quinn

I would like the Minister of State to raise one issue under the heading of financial perspectives. The issue of value for money is waiting to explode. It is going to affect many who vote in referendums throughout Europe. The EU budget is approximately €100 billion per year. The EU Court of Auditors has not signed off the accounts for ten years. There is grave disquiet over the possibility of very bad value for money and when Mrs. Marta Andreasen, the EU's chief accountant, two years ago talked about the budget being "completely vulnerable to fraud and error", she was sacked.

When an Austrian Member, last year, videotaped Members of the European Parliament signing on for attendance when they were not actually doing any work, the EU Parliament decided to ban journalists from filming in the Parliament building. This is a matter that is waiting to explode. Any company, business or organisation which operates for ten years without being able to sign off its accounts is entirely vulnerable to an explosion of mistrust and in grave danger of not just that, but of much worse. Last year, Mr. Siim Kallas, the anti-fraud Commissioner, signed off on what is called administrative expenditure but this accounts for only 6% of EU spending. An image has developed of gravy trains, fat cats and wastage. Can we manage to bring this back to where accounts are signed off by the auditors so that questions will no longer arise?

I wish to recount a story involving Sir Kenneth Cork, one of the foremost liquidators in Britain. He wrote an article about companies that he could see getting into difficulties. He stated that one of the signs that a company might run into difficulty is when it builds a new head office. The one sure sign of difficulty, however, would be if a fountain was put in the foyer of the head office. I do not know whether there is a fountain in the foyer of that brilliant new head office in Brussels. Perhaps the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, can remember. The image I am concerned about is somewhat different. I worry about the explosion that could occur if the accounts for EU expenditure to the tune of €100 billion a year are not audited. I would like an assurance that some effort will be made in this regard in the coming year so that at least we get annual accounts.

Deputy Treacy

Senator Feargal Quinn has raised an important issue. Liquid resources, liquidity, etc., are critical to the Union and, of course, transparency is important. Perhaps the reason for the fountains is as a symbol of transparency, to ensure that it is available. I cannot swear to it but I believe there is a fountain at one side of the new building, I know the auditors visit a good many EU member states. They also operate on a regional basis, as regards different sectors of the Union's affairs. It is important that each year there should be a concluding document pertaining to the year before, and each subsequent year, verifying an audited conclusion of transparency and sustainability in the affairs of the European Union. The budget is undoubtedly massive and Ireland is fully aware of the importance of value for money considerations. By and large, we operate a stringent operation here that is very clear. The EU has acknowledged that we give good value for money in using European taxpayers' money in a positive way to stimulate economic growth and provide the necessary infrastructure that is so important to us. We often stress the importance of value for money considerations at different meetings. As future net contributors, we intend to watch this aspect very closely. I intend to raise this issue and hope to have an answer before 31 May on why there has not been a definitive report made available on the work of the auditors. There is much room for improvement by the EU with regard to its financial provisions. Now that the financial perspectives are under discussion, there is no reason there should not be a discussion on auditing.

Senator Quinn

My point was not about Ireland, but about the EU and the Commissioner.

Deputy Andrews

I have always believed that Ireland has been a much greater contributor to the EU than we think. Ireland gave up its fishing rights when it joined, whereas Iceland never joined because it feared the consequences of that. That is never factored in to whether we are contributors to the EU. Iceland belongs to a different economic grouping, whereas we had to join in 1973 as we were joined at the hip with the UK. However, we always were net contributors, especially prior to receiving cohesion funds in the 1990s. I do not think we should do this to safeguard overseas property investments by private individual speculators. It is not a good way to guide the Government's foreign policy. If someone speculates in property, particularly overseas, then he or she is a weather vane in a gale. If it goes up or down, that is his or her problem. People took a clear view on Eircom speculators in the past and had little sympathy for them.

The Minister said the Government is not convinced of the necessity for a general rebate mechanism. Does that mean the Government has taken a position against the UK rebate? Is there separate funding for development aid? This matter was raised before at this committee. I felt it would be a genuine vehicle to deliver the millennium development goals. What is the Irish position? Who made the proposal on an EU tax? I understand the Government position is to oppose it, but I am not familiar with the details.

Deputy Quinn

I was not trying to defend speculation. I was defending the solidity of the institutions within the EU. The former Soviet bloc countries have had serious problems with the objectiveness of public administration. Their court systems have not had the same tradition of jurisprudence objectivity and separation of powers that we have had. That requires training. A number of Irish businesses do not invest — I do not mean speculate on property — in central and eastern Europe because they do not believe they can rely upon a secure, objective and impartial regulatory system, including the courts and local authority referees.

Deputy Andrews

Perhaps I misunderstood the Deputy regarding investments. I thought he was speaking about property investments.

Deputy Quinn

If we want the Common Market to work, the rules, regulators and protectors within the market must be brought up to speed. Corruption is a big problem in central and eastern Europe. The only way it will be rooted out is by massive investments in training of workers in the administrative systems.

Deputy Treacy

Deputy Quinn is right. There is a big requirement in the new member states for investment in public administration. It was part of the agreement they made with the EU in their accession treaties.

The Common Fisheries Policy is an area where Ireland has sought better terms for its fisheries operators. These efforts are taking place against a background of declining fish stocks across the EU. Not everybody is prepared to accept the reality of this and we have to make a common effort to ensure we sustain fish stock levels for the future.

Proposals under the external relations heading provide for development spending to account for a significant proportion of expenditure. The Commission has proposed that 46% of the €95 billion available for external relations actions would be allocated to the new development and economic cooperation instrument. In addition, the European neighbourhood and partnership instrument would have a development component under the proposals, as would the existing instrument for humanitarian aid. Our concern is to ensure the significant funding available for development objectives will be directed primarily towards the achievement of the millennium development goals and to the least developed countries. The proposal amounts to an increase, in absolute terms, in the money available for development.

The proposal on EU tax came from the Commission. Ireland is totally opposed to this. In our negotiations on the European constitution, we made it clear that we wanted to maintain unanimity on tax issues. We see this as the major lever to maintain the principle of subsidiarity as it gives strength to national parliaments. We do not see much support for this proposal and we do not expect that it will be ratified at any time.

The UK rebate is an historic situation, in which a former UK prime minister got a very generous deal. It is a matter for the UK to handle during the negotiations on the financial perspectives. We are opposed to an expansion of the rebate as that might mean other member states could negotiate a rebate for themselves. This is not sensible or practical. There is room for different views on the current budgetary financing arrangements, including the UK rebate. We are fully engaged with the Commission's proposals in this area. Our main concern is to ensure the arrangements devised for national budgetary contributions do not cost more than the current UK rebate and that all member states are required to contribute. There must be a totality of commitment and contribution.

Senator McDowell

The Minister of State observed in his presentation that the Government retains the absolute priority that has traditionally been accorded to agricultural spending. However, there is an ever more convincing argument for a changed perspective in this regard, not least because we will shortly become a net contributor. Only 8% or 9% of the workforce are now employed in agriculture which means more than 90% of the population are consumers rather then producers. We must bear this in mind in our future dealings with the EU.

Do the Government and the Union have a view on the final status of Kosovo? It seems likely some form of low-level negotiations will begin with Serbia and Montenegro in the near future about eventual membership of the Union. Resolution of the final status of Kosovo must be a sine qua non in this regard. We must avoid at all costs a situation similar to that in respect of Cyprus, whereby the Union accepted a divided country. Kosovo is now effectively independent under UN stewardship and the Union should clearly state its preference that Kosovo should be autonomous at least and preferably independent. We must seek to deal with the Serbian Government on that basis and ensure this is a precondition for any serious negotiations on the entry of Serbia and Montenegro into the Union.

Deputy Treacy

I agree very much with Senator McDowell's points regarding the situation in Kosovo and the comparison he makes with Cyprus is pertinent. Recent decisions could allow this situation to raise its head in a stronger manner in the future. This is an important year for the people of Kosovo, which has been under UN administration in accordance with Security Council Resolution 1244 since the end of the conflict in 1999. The UN Secretary General is shortly expected to nominate a special representative who will take charge of a comprehensive review of the implementation of standards in public administration, the rule of law, human rights and the protection of the rights of minorities. The results of this review are expected to be presented to the Secretary General in September.

A positive review will be followed by the opening of a process under the direction of a special envoy of the Secretary General to agree the status of Kosovo. These negotiations will inevitably be complex and difficult and will require the resumption of dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. This process will have implications for the entire western Balkans region and its outcome will be subject to the approval of the UN Security Council. The EU is firmly committed to a multiethnic and democratic Kosovo in which the rights of all communities are fully protected.

The EU is also working closely with the UN mission in Kosovo and with the special representative of the Secretary General, Mr. Soren Jessen Petersen, in preparation for the crucial review of the implementation of standards. The EU will also co-operate closely with the United States and the wider international community to ensure any process to address the question of Kosovo's final status will also contribute to the stability of the western Balkans. Whatever the outcome of that process, the EU will support the people of Kosovo in the building of a multiethnic society, secure within the region and working towards the objective of eventual integration into EU structures. There must be a strong, solid and structured Kosovo before that integration takes place and the EU will work with the UN and the international community to achieve that.

I do not agree with Senator McDowell's points regarding the Common Agricultural Policy. There is no doubt the employment figures, GDP and population have changed and that modernisation and mechanisation in agriculture have reduced the numbers working on farms. However, the capacity of agriculture to grow the economy in different sectors and its significant contribution to net foreign earnings and exports mean it is critically important that we continue to sustain agriculture into the future. The resources available to us under the CAP are essential to the existence of a major cashflow within our economy because farmers are major indirect consumers who pay a significant amount in indirect taxes to the Exchequer. As the agricultural economy grows, the numbers employed may drop but its capacity to consume and contribute are critical twin levers in the future of our economy, as they have been in the past. The CAP must be maintained in order to sustain those levers into the future.

The Government has decided Ireland's priorities for the negotiations on the financial perspectives should include the following: supporting the existing agreement of October 2002 on the CAP; seeking to maximise our allocation for rural development; engaging in a review of net contributions by member states to the EU budget while arguing that the total cost of any new arrangement should be as close as possible to the cost of the existing EU rebate; and rejecting suggestions for an EU tax, an issue for which we have much support in our total opposition.

Ireland will also support cohesion and structural funding for the new member states and for Greece and Portugal. These funds were critical to Ireland's economic success and each member state should receive the same opportunity and support as were afforded to Ireland in the past.

Where cohesion policy applies to the richer member states, our objective is to ensure the best possible provision for all the regions in Ireland. We will also endeavour to prioritise funding on research and development, education and training within the proposed funding on competitiveness. We have played a major role in the European framework programmes, which are major instruments of support for research and development. Ireland is committed to harnessing our intellectual capacity and ensuring there are adequate resources within the Union to support its development for the benefit of Ireland and fellow member states in coming years.

Deputy Sexton

As someone particularly interested in rural development, my concerns in regard to future financial perspectives relate to the disparities that still exist within and between the Objective One and transitional regions. Will the Minister of State indicate the progress made in regard to the situation of the regions in transition? What level of funding can we expect for these regions? Second, what is the EU's commitment in practical terms to supporting Iraq?

Deputy Treacy

We are pleased that elections have taken place in Iraq and that a political leadership is in place which offers a strong representative mix to the different sectors and ethnic groups within Iraq. We are committed, through the EU and UN, to ensuring democracy prevails and that adequate support is available to ensure peace, harmony and prosperity in Iraq. The EU will continue to underwrite and undertake a police training mission outside Iraq for the Iraqi police force. Following much debate, a strong commitment has been made in this regard. This initiative will help to bring strong international and European standards to police administration and management in the future and should help inculcate a respect in the Iraqi people across all regions for law and order and for a properly trained and controlled force. This is an important development for the future and Ireland and the EU are committed to working assiduously in this regard.

The European Commission has contributed more than €600 million for reconstruction plans and technical assistance throughout Iraq. It is important this money is utilised for the right issues, requirements, services and facilities, in stimulating peace and prosperity and bringing normality back to the Iraqi people who have suffered significantly in recent years. There is much regard for the EU's efforts in terms of the cash transfers that have been made available, the technical assistance that has been deployed and the commitment on police training. We believe the Iraqi people appreciate the European Union is present in a very positive way and working for them.

Ireland has contributed over €6 million to humanitarian development in Iraq, an important fact about which we are very proud. As a small country we have shown our commitment to assisting areas of the world where there is serious conflict. It is our consistent goal to ensure we work assiduously to bring peace and harmony to that area and country and to all of the Iraqi people as soon as possible.

Mention was made of the financial position, the focus on cohesion for new member states and the transition period. These issues are dear to my heart and to the hearts of all politicians. We support the Commission's proposals to phase in payments for regions such as the BMW and phase out payments for stronger regions such as the south and east. No conclusions have yet been arrived at and we are a long way from getting figures. Many of these issues will be resolved as part of the final package governing all aspects of the financial negotiations. We are a long way from achieving this, but many things could happen between now and the end of June. It may be possible to reach agreement if a final draft is put on the table which includes figures and proposals and is fairly detailed and focussed with regard to all the regions of Europe. It is very hard to make a call on the matter. There is much to play for and we are optimistic we will get the necessary result for the BMW region and the country as a whole.

Senator Lydon

What is the EU's current relationship with Syria? What is Ireland's relationship with Syria? If President Assad expressed a wish to visit Ireland, how would he be received? The Minister of State may not have a prepared answer regarding this issue and may defer the question.

Deputy Treacy

Any visitor to Ireland would be well received. A trade agreement between the EU and Syria is under consideration. Proposals regarding the terms of that agreement are awaited from Syria and Lebanon.

Senator McDowell

Does Senator Lydon know something we do not? Is there a proposal to invite President Assad?

Senator Lydon

I will be meeting with his wife shortly and will talk to her about it. I think it is a possibility.

Chairman

Has it anything to do with the situation in Lebanon?

Senator Lydon

Yes.

Deputy Treacy

The withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon is critical. There is no plan at official level to invite President Assad to Ireland.

Senator Bradford

That person, however, would be welcome.

Deputy Treacy

Any visitor, whether on an official or unofficial visit, is always welcome. However, official invitations and receptions are important matters and would require serious consideration over a reasonable period of time.

Chairman

I thank the Minister of State for appearing before the committee.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.20 p.m. and adjourned at 4.35 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Wednesday, 27 April 2005.