I welcome the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, and the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, and thank them for making themselves available to the joint committee. I also thank their predecessors, with whom the committee enjoyed a high degree of co-operation. We hope this exchange of views will be of benefit to the committee, the Minister and the Minister of State and also to all those outside.
Forthcoming General Affairs and External Relations Council: Discussion.
I appreciate the Chairman's warm welcome and look forward to working with the joint committee on an ongoing basis.
I am pleased to have this opportunity to meet the committee so soon after my appointment as Minister for Foreign Affairs and glad to be joined by my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power. I am conscious of the excellent work being carried out by the committee. It provides an important forum for Members of the Oireachtas to express their views on issues on the European Union agenda. I welcome the opportunity provided by these meetings in advance of General Affairs and External Relations Council meetings to listen to members' contributions and outline the Government's approach to the items on the Council agenda. They reflect in a very direct manner the importance we all attach, both in the Government and the Oireachtas, to heightening awareness of and engagement with the work of the European Union.
The debate on the Lisbon treaty has witnessed much discussion regarding the role of the European Union institutions. The institutional balance between the Council of Ministers, European Parliament and European Commission has served Ireland well since we joined the Union. Preserving this balance was a top priority for Ireland during the negotiations on the treaty and we secured this objective. We have always favoured a strong and effective Commission. This is the reason the Government has been pleased to support the changes proposed in the treaty providing for a more streamlined Commission, the membership of which will see small and large member states treated as strict equals. This has not always been the case. Members will recall that until four years ago the five largest member states had two Commissioners, while other member states had one each. The strict equality between member states provided for in the treaty constitutes a genuine achievement for countries such as Ireland.
The Council of Ministers is also a vital institution. The meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council next week is my first such meeting in my capacity as Minister for Foreign Affairs. I have, however, attended a number of Council meetings in my previous portfolios, most recently as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. My experience which has been shown by results is that the Council of Ministers is a place in which Ireland and other small states can make a real impact. Our consistent national approach at the Council is to voice our concerns, seek support from partners and build alliances through which we can advance our national interests. This approach has paid rich dividends during the years. After all, the European Union is a union of member states and solidarity and compromise among its members are its hallmarks.
Opponents of the Lisbon reform treaty often suggest our European Union partners and the EU institutions have it in for Ireland and are only waiting to do us down. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our record during the past 35 years proves the Union is made for smaller countries such as Ireland. It ensures we have a real say in shaping the economic environment in Europe in which we operate. We are involved in making the rules that govern, for example, the European Single Market within which Ireland has prospered. When we bring ideas to the table, they are listened to. For instance, in recent months Ireland's support for the European Union operation in Chad has been central in enabling the Union to provide desperately needed humanitarian support for hundreds of thousands of refugees. In the economic sphere we also pressed successfully for the Union to introduce measures to reduce the roaming charges levied on customers by mobile phone companies. As many will be aware, the European Commission pursued this policy with vigour on behalf of member states.
It is important for citizens to know that Ireland has a full seat at the Council table. All legislation bearing a European Union stamp is debated by Ministers or has been enacted under rules agreed by Ministers. The idea that European Union legislation arrives unseen in this country is very wide of the mark. Treaty opponents allege the treaty will create the conditions for public services, specifically health and education, to be privatised. These claims are based on a fundamental misreading of a particular treaty article relating to the Union's common commercial policy. Public services are given special status in a new protocol under the Lisbon reform treaty. This protocol affirms that the provisions of the treaties do not in any way affect the competence of member states to provide, commission and organise services such as education and health. This means these services will remain under the effective control of each member state. Those who have asserted our social services are under threat of privatisation because of the Lisbon reform treaty appear to believe European countries with highly developed social services would allow these services to shift from their national control. Neither they, nor we, would allow such a development to take place.
The General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting in Brussels next week will be the fifth GAERC meeting under the Slovenian Presidency. As members may be aware, the May Council traditionally deals with European Security and Defence Policy issues and is consequently attended by foreign and defence Ministers. My colleague, the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, will be in Brussels for these discussions next Monday. It is also the practice for development co-operation Ministers to attend one meeting of the Council per Presidency. This month the Council will consider a range of issues relating to the European Union's development co-operation policy and my colleague, the new Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for development co-operation, Deputy Peter Power, will represent Ireland during these discussions.
He will brief the committee on these agenda items following my statement.
The draft agenda for the June European Council was recently made available to member states in Brussels. It will be discussed and developed over the coming weeks. Items for discussion at the European Council will include taking stock of the ratification process as regards the reform treaty. The Council will also look at the progress of preparatory discussions on certain issues related to the implementation of the treaty. The European Council will take place a week after the referendum and the Taoiseach will naturally wish to be in a position to report a successful outcome to his colleagues.
As regards issues related to the implementation of the treaty, nothing can be decided unless and until the treaty has been ratified by all 27 member states. Given that a small number countries are due to ratify the treaty in the closing months of this year, it is necessary to make some preparations so that the treaty can be smoothly implemented once it has been ratified by all member states.
Such practical preparations for the entry into force of a new treaty are normal practice. The preparations are entirely without prejudice to the fact that entry into force of the treaty depends on ratification by all member states, including Ireland. No decisions can be taken until after the treaty's entry into force.
A full agenda on external relations will begin with a discussion of the western Balkans. The Presidency has indicated that this will focus on political developments in Serbia, notably the outcome of the parliamentary elections which took place on 11 May, and the current situation in Kosovo. On Serbia, there will be an exchange of views on the outcome of the recent elections, which, though inconclusive, saw an increase in support for the pro-European Union DS party of President Tadic, at the expense of the radical opposition and Tadic's former DSS coalition partners, led by outgoing Prime Minister Kostunica.
The Council is also expected to review recent developments in Kosovo, focusing on the challenges facing the transition from the current UNMIK civilian mission to the EULEX ESDP rule of law mission, due to be completed by 15 June.
Ireland strongly supports the European perspective of all the countries of the Balkans. Notwithstanding the current tensions between Serbia and the EU over Kosovo, we are clear that Serbia's future lies with Europe. We therefore welcome the signature of the stabilisation and association agreement with Serbia en marge of the last General Affairs and External Relations Council, which marked an important advance in Serbia’s relations with the EU at an otherwise difficult time. Ratification and implementation of this agreement will remain dependent on full co-operation by Serbia with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.
We also welcome the democratic and fair manner in which the recent parliamentary elections in Serbia were conducted. While the negotiations to form a new government are ongoing, it is encouraging to note that pro-Europe political parties made a strong showing at the polls. This augurs well for the future of Serbia's relations with the EU and its longer-term European perspective. We are ready to look at other ways of building closer ties, including through increased people-to-people contacts. We hope the next government in Belgrade will be ready to build on the improvement in relations with the European Union, to engage in practical co-operation with the international community on the Kosovo issue, and to take steps to address the remaining impediment to advancing Serbia's European perspective.
Ireland shares the collective determination of the international community to help build a safe and secure Kosovo, with guarantees for the promotion and protection of the rights of all communities and their members. Close co-operation between the elements of the international presence in Kosovo is vital if we are to achieve our goals. More needs to be done therefore to secure a smooth transition from the current UN mission, UNMIK, to the EULEX mission and to ensure that the international presence can operate effectively throughout Kosovo, including Serb majority areas in the north. While the situation on the ground is quite calm, the obstacles to a straightforward hand over from the UN to the EU have not yet been overcome and there is a need for all involved to work together pragmatically.
The Council will then discuss Afghanistan ahead of the Paris conference on 12 June and the upcoming review of EU policy. Conclusions will be adopted. Afghanistan remains an important foreign policy issue for the EU and for many of our partners nationally, with EU member states providing some 24,000 troops to the NATO-led and UN-mandated ISAF force.
The goal for the EU and the wider international community, in co-operation with the Afghan Government, remains to extend stable, legitimate government and the rule of law to all parts of Afghanistan. Despite some considerable achievements, grave economic and security challenges remain, above all in the south of the country. It is particularly important that the Afghan Government makes further meaningful efforts to engage seriously and pro-actively in this exercise and to address key issues of concern such as drug production, corruption, institutional reforms and the weakness of the rule of law. This is likely to be a key item of discussion. Ministers will also wish to examine improving coherence in, and co-ordination of, the international effort in Afghanistan, including with the Afghan authorities.
This will be followed by discussion of the tragic situation in Somalia, which continues to suffer from an ongoing political and humanitarian crisis. This will be timely, particularly given the current efforts of Prime Minister Hassan Hussein to negotiate with members of the opposition, and given that a UN Security Council resolution was recently adopted. Ireland and the EU believe that a purely security approach to Somalia's problems, in the absence of dialogue, is not likely to be successful. Pressure needs to be put on all parties to this horrific conflict to alleviate the human suffering being endured by millions of Somali people, and to allow unrestricted humanitarian relief be delivered to those who need it most.
This will be followed by discussion of the situation in Zimbabwe. The significant public concern in Ireland found an echo in the large degree of consensus on this issue when it was debated in the Dáil last week. We are utterly appalled by the vicious attacks which have been perpetrated against opposition supporters and activists, with the compliance and often active support of the authorities and of the army. As a result, Ireland was one of several member states which has insisted on adding the issue of Zimbabwe to the Council agenda.
We now know that the second round of voting in the Presidential election will take place on 27 June. Ireland will promote continued pressure on Zimbabwe's neighbours to improve the conditions on the ground before that election takes place. I welcome the willingness expressed by the Southern African Development Community and the African Union to provide monitors to observe the second round of the election. The very presence of international monitors, wherever they are from, can deter some of the worst violence against innocent people. In the current pervasive atmosphere of intimidation and violence, it asks enormous courage of the Zimbabwean people to use their democratic right to vote. We must do whatever we can to ensure that they are able to make a free and informed choice about the future of their country.
The Council will review developments in the Middle East peace process and will adopt conclusions underlining the strong support of the European Union for the continuing negotiations between Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas. The promotion of a negotiated two-state solution remains one of the main objectives of the European Union's foreign and security policy. We have warmly welcomed the firm commitment entered into at Annapolis last November to reach agreement on the most sensitive final status issues by the end of 2008. However, there is serious concern that events on the ground will undermine the political process. We are particularly concerned about the unsustainable political, humanitarian and security situation in Gaza, and about the continued expansion of Israeli settlements.
The European Union has made it very clear that settlement construction anywhere in the occupied territories is illegal under international law and threatens the viability of a two-state solution. There must also be a genuine and complete freeze in settlement activity and the lifting of restrictions on the movement of Palestinians across the West Bank.
We believe that all parties now have an obligation to take urgent action to sustain the political process. There must be an end to all violence in and from the occupied territories. The European Union strongly supports the efforts being led by Egypt to broker a ceasefire in Gaza which could form the basis for a wider agreement and which would enable progress towards ending the dangerous internal Palestinian divisions.
We want to see an end to rocket attacks from Gaza, which I condemn, and an end to Israeli military operations in the occupied territories. The Government has called consistently for an end to the policy of isolating the people of Gaza, which is not only unjust but politically counterproductive.
I particularly want to stress that while we fully respect and understand Israel's security needs — and the recent rocket attack on Ashkelon shows the scale of the problem it faces — on all past evidence it would be wrong and dangerous to think that the problems in Gaza could be resolved by massive military force, with the resultant further large-scale civilian death toll.
The Council will also discuss the situation in Lebanon in light of the dangerous violence of recent weeks which took the lives of more than 60 people and threatened a slide back towards the dark days of civil war. The European Union is determined to support the sovereignty and independence of Lebanon and has consistently called on all of the country’s neighbours to demonstrate their commitment clearly.
It is vital now that the political deadlock of the past 18 months be resolved. We welcome the role being played by the Arab League and the talks between Lebanese parties which are now taking place in Doha. The current crisis can only be overcome through dialogue and through an agreed solution which allows Lebanon's democratic institutions to function again.
Intensive discussions are continuing in Geneva and elsewhere in the WTO negotiations. Pascal Lamy, the director general of the WTO, hopes to convene a WTO ministerial meeting in Geneva with the aim of finalising the details of an agreement on agriculture and non-agriculture market access, NAMA. The timing of a possible ministerial meeting remains very uncertain.
Revised negotiating texts on agriculture and NAMA have issued in the past 24 hours. Both texts will now be the subject of very detailed examination by all the parties to the negotiations. It is clear that we are at a critical stage in the negotiations. Achieving any agreement remains a very challenging task. Balance in the content of an agreement rather than calendar considerations must now drive the negotiating process.
Ireland, like all parties to the negotiations, wants a WTO agreement. We have been dissatisfied with the way the negotiations have been conducted in the agriculture pillar. It is our unstinting view that a final WTO agreement must not place a disproportionate burden on any one sector.
At next week's meeting of the Council of Ministers, I will again highlight our national position. I will stress the need to secure an outcome to the WTO negotiations that is fair and does not sacrifice European agriculture. In the period ahead, the Government will continue to use every opportunity to press home Ireland's concerns about the WTO negotiations. Working closely with other member states, we will pursue a positive outcome for Ireland and for Europe. We will spare no effort in our defence of Ireland's interests, including those in our vital agriculture sector.
The situation in Iraq is also on our agenda. I expect that the Council will adopt conclusions emphasising the importance of constructive engagement by all of Iraq's neighbours following their conference in Kuwait in April. We will also look ahead to the first annual review conference of the international compact with Iraq which the Swedish Government will host in Stockholm on 29 May.
Ministers will consider the situation in Georgia in light of tomorrow’s parliamentary elections as well as a series of provocative steps by Russia in support of the separatist region of Abkhazia within Georgia. Late last year progress towards democratisation faltered. Presidential elections won by the incumbent President Saakashvili in January were contested by the opposition. It is expected that the opposition will also view the parliamentary elections as less than fair. The Council will adopt conclusions which, in addition to referring to the elections, are likely to address again the issue of Russian actions that support Abkhazia and undermine Georgia’s sovereignty over the region. Ireland supports continued EU attention to Georgia. The EU must do all it can to lower tensions in this volatile region where even small incidents have the potential to spiral out of control.
As I already noted, the May Council traditionally includes a joint session with Ministers for Defence to review the development of the Union's Security and Defence Policy. The ESDP aims to give the EU the capacity to undertake humanitarian and crisis management operations, both civilian and military, dealing with the whole range of so-called Petersberg Tasks.
Since the first ESDP operation was launched in Bosnia in 2003 — the ongoing EU police mission — the Union has launched 20 ESDP operations, both civilian and military, across Africa, the Balkans, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
Some 11 operations are ongoing. Nine are civilian rule of law missions, including policing, border monitoring and security sector reform, and two are military. There are currently civilian operations in Bosnia, Afghanistan, the Palestinian Territories, Democratic Republic of Congo and Iraq while the military missions are in Bosnia and Chad.
The majority of ESDP missions, therefore, are civilian operations. By way of example, the EULEX mission has provided training to date for more than 1,300 Iraqis working in the criminal justice rule of law area. A very successful three week secondment of Iraqi prison governors to the Irish Prison Service, focusing on juvenile and women's prisons, human rights and best practice, took place in November 2007. As I indicated, Ireland also intends to contribute members of the Garda Síochána and a staff member from the Department of Defence to EULEX Kosovo which was launched earlier this year and where deployment is ongoing.
This aspect of the European Union's work has not received the degree of credit, or profile, it deserves. The external work of the EU has often been crudely misrepresented as some form of militarisation project when the opposite has been the case. It has been very effective in protecting vulnerable people and in helping to build governance and administrative systems and the apparatus and mechanisms of governance which ultimately lead to stable states that can provide a decent quality of life and security for their people. This is a positive dimension to EU external policy to which we contribute significantly as a country.
On the military side, with the ongoing EU mission in Bosnia, attention is very much focused on the deployment of the UN-authorised mission to Chad, under the operational command of Irishman Lieutenant General Pat Nash. Over 2,400 troops are already on the ground in Chad, including nearly 400 Irish troops. It is expected that the mission will reach full operational capacity by the end of June. We have already received positive reports about the activities of the mission as it carries out its mandate to provide security and protection for an estimated 400,000 refugees and internally displaced persons and to allow refugee returns and facilitate humanitarian assistance.
Decision-making with regard to the European Security and Defence Policy, ESDP, is subject to unanimity and the positions of militarily non-aligned or neutral states such as Ireland are fully protected. Participation in any peace support operation, EU or otherwise, is a sovereign decision for Ireland and is subject to the requirements of the triple-lock of Government decision, Dáil approval and UN authorisation. The arrangements in this area under the Lisbon treaty fully maintain this situation. The wording of the proposed amendment to the Constitution being voted on next month will carry forward the prohibition on participation in a common defence inserted in the second Nice referendum. This is the reality of the ESDP as it continues to develop. It is a long way from the malign fantasies conjured up during previous referendums and, despite the mounting body of evidence to the contrary, by some during this campaign also. We can and should be able to continue to make a pragmatic and useful contribution to the ESDP, consistent with our values and traditions.
The Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, will now brief the committee on the development issues to be discussed at next week's GAERC.
Before we move on, does the Minister wish us to deal with his questions or will we deal with both issues at the same time?
We can take the two together.
I am grateful to the Chairman and the committee for their welcome and am looking forward to working with them at future meetings. It is a great privilege for me to appear before the committee to speak about next week's meeting and to listen to the committee's views.
I look forward to attending the General Affairs and External Relations Council next week at which a number of important issues are due to be discussed by development Ministers. Among these are the following: the rights of the child in the European Union's external action; the European Union's progress towards reaching the millennium development goals; and the ongoing negotiations on the economic partnership agreements with African, Caribbean and Pacific countries. I also anticipate that the plight of women in armed conflict, the escalating food crisis and the desperate situation in Burma will be raised.
Despite some progress towards meeting the millennium development goals, millions of children around the world still live in abject poverty, with no food, no shelter, no education, no health care and no chance for a better future. Unless measures are taken now to put children at the heart of development policies, the likelihood of achieving the millennium development goals will be significantly reduced. Ireland has a particular focus on the promotion and protection of basic human rights, which in turn provide the framework for promoting and protecting children's rights. As the committee is aware, in Ireland we are in the process of examining proposals to alter and amend our Constitution to put children at the heart of it, an area in which I have taken a personal interest in recent years.
I want to refer to the millennium development goals. It is important that agreement is reached now on the crucial actions that need to be taken by both the donor community and partner countries to improve the quality of development assistance. The year 2008 is a critical year for action on the millennium development goals. We know that progress is slower than we would like, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Development co-operation must be seen to produce better results and make a real difference to the lives of poor people. We need to set ourselves ambitious targets and be clear on what we need to do collectively to achieve these. Ireland is playing its part, not only in the volume of aid we provide but also in the high quality of our overseas aid programme. We will continue to act as advocates within the European Union and the wider international community for renewed efforts to tackle world poverty and meet the millennium development goals. Ireland's official development assistance reached €869 million last year, its highest ever level and a 6.7% increase on the figure for 2006. We remain on target to meet the 0.7% target by 2012.
Economic partnership agreements, EPAs, will be a major item for discussion at the GAERC. The Council will be invited to take stock of the EPA negotiation and implementation process. We will also examine how the European Union can contribute to ensuring EPAs effectively deliver on their development and regional integration promises. They are a new type of multilateral agreement intended to combine both trade and wider development issues in a unified framework. Committee members will be aware that EPA negotiations between the European Union and six regional groupings of African, Caribbean and Pacific, ACP, countries began in September 2002. The aim of the negotiations was to achieve World Trade Organisation compatible agreements by 31 December last. Following protracted and difficult negotiations, only one of the original regional groupings, the Caribbean grouping, signed a full EPA with the European Commission. Twenty other African, Caribbean and Pacific countries have initialled interim agreements in smaller sub-groups or individually. Thus, trade disruption was avoided.
Looking to the next stage, it is envisaged that the interim agreements will act as building blocks to full regional EPAs. Increased EU market access and support for regional integration through the EPAs are intended to bring real trade growth and broad based economic development in the ACP countries. Throughout the negotiation process Ireland has consistently maintained that EPA negotiations should result in agreements that are supportive of ACP countries' development needs and their poverty reduction efforts. In approaching this Council meeting I have had regard to the Addis Ababa declaration on EPA negotiations adopted last month by the African Union Conference of Ministers of Trade and Finance. This declaration reiterated that African EPA groups remained committed to conclude full development oriented EPAs. However, it also highlighted certain contentious issues in the interim EPA agreements. I see the Council meeting as an opportunity to acknowledge these concerns and identify ways to address them.
I recognise that if ACP countries are to take full advantage of the trading opportunities afforded by EPAs, greater and more effective trade related assistance should be made available to them. I look forward to the Council meeting discussing concrete ways of ensuring a co-ordinated delivery of EU trade related development assistance to ACP countries. Regional integration and the implementation of EPAs require adjustments and reforms in ACP economies and policies. I want to see the European Union's aid for trade assistance used effectively to support our ACP partners in these processes.
The Slovenian Presidency of the European Union, with Austria and Germany, commissioned a study entitled, Enhancing the EU Response to Women and Armed Conflict with Particular Reference to Development Policy. The report highlights women's multiple and diverse roles as decision-makers and actors in conflict prevention, resolution and peace-building. While recognising the progress that the European Union has made in integrating women and conflict issues into key documents, the study reports that there has been little tangible progress on the ground. The report recognises that sexual and gender based violence is one of the most persistent issues related to women and conflict. I am very happy to welcome the report. We will work against gender based violence with all our partners internationally. Ireland has a firm commitment to gender equality which we want to promote throughout the Irish Aid programme because we recognise it as a fundamental development challenge.
I anticipate that we will have an opportunity to discuss the scourge of HIV-AIDS. At the meeting next week we will hear from the new executive director of the Global Fund, Professor Michel Kazatchkine. Established in 2002, the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and malaria has emerged as a key financing mechanism channeling additional funds to the control of these diseases, the world's biggest infectious disease killers, causing more than six million deaths each year. They have also resulted in the reversal of decades of health and development progress in many countries and the continuing devastation of families and communities around the world.
Members will be aware that the fight against HIV and AIDS and other communicable diseases is a core priority of the Irish Aid programme. Irish Aid has significantly increased its financial commitment, with €100 million, or 10%, of the total overseas development budget being spent every year on addressing these issues. Ireland has been a strong advocate and supporter of the Global Fund for AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria from the outset. Between 2002 and 2007 it provided €80 million in support. We plan to allocate €90 million to the Global Fund in the three year period 2008-10. The Global Fund is the single biggest recipient of Irish Aid funding for fighting HIV and other communicable diseases.
We will also have the opportunity to discuss the important issue of rising food prices and food security in developing countries which I know is an issue of concern to the committee. The director general of the FAO, Dr. Jacques Diouf, is expected to attend, as is the deputy director of the World Food Programme, Mr. John Powell. The impact of rising food prices is felt most by the poor, particularly the very poor, largely the urban and rural poor in food importing developing countries, over 50% of whose meagre income is spent on food. A sudden sharp increase in food prices poses a major threat to their already fragile livelihoods. As we have seen, the urban poor, in particular, have begun to demonstrate publicly in certain countries because of their plight.
The Government recognises the crisis which has been engendered globally by the steep rise in the price of staple foodstuffs. The challenges faced by the World Food Programme are considerable. This worrying situation requires an exceptional response from the international community. The Government recently pledged €3 million to the World Food Programme's special market mitigation account. This brings Ireland's allocation to the programme to over €20 million so far this year. With an annual contribution in excess of €22 million, Ireland is already the sixth largest donor to the United Nation's central emergency response fund, CERF, which channels funding quickly and efficiently to those most in need. In the current food price crisis the World Food Programme is already the largest recipient of assistance from the response fund.
Food security in general is a priority issue for Irish Aid, for which I have responsibility. Arising from the White Paper on Irish Aid, a special hunger task force, comprising 15 national and international experts, was established last year to advise the Government on where and how Ireland could best contribute to efforts to reduce global hunger. It is timely that the task force is conducting its deliberations in this rapidly evolving context of increased food prices. Its final report and recommendations are expected around the middle of this year. The programme for Government commits us to act on its recommendations.
The situation in Burma remains a cause for the most serious concern. It is not an exaggeration to state this is a real unfolding humanitarian crisis, the full extent of which simply cannot be ascertained at this stage and may be beyond many expectations. At the meeting next week we will hear a report from the Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, Louis Michel, who has just visited the region. I hope progress will be made in the coming days before the meeting is held next week. The key challenge facing the international community in responding to Cyclone Nargis is access for both humanitarian supplies and workers. There are indications that in response to pressure from their neighbouring states in the Association of South East Asian Nations, ASEAN, the Burmese authorities have agreed to an increased flow of aid through regional organisations. I do not believe it matters how or through whom the aid is channelled to the survivors of the cyclone. The humanitarian imperative is that aid should get to them as soon as possible. We will continue to monitor the situation and, with our EU partners, will seek to ensure the authorities in Burma live up to their undertakings to their neighbours.
Ireland has made an initial pledge of €1 million for emergency relief in Burma. This will be channelled through established partners in emergency response, primarily NGOs which already have operations in the country. With Norway, we also participated in an emergency airlift from the UN depot in Brindisi and donated supplies including plastic sheeting for temporary shelter, mosquito nets, kitchen sets and blankets from our humanitarian stockpiles. These emergency supplies are already on the ground and are being distributed to those in need. I am happy to hear members' views and answer their questions.
I welcome the Minister and the Minister of State. I thank them for their comprehensive presentations and I wish both of them well in their first GAERC meeting next week. I have no doubt they will do us proud.
My first question is about the Lisbon treaty and the lack of understanding among the general public of the European project. From canvassing, we are finding it easier to explain some of the provisions of the treaty related to reform, but people are still not sure what it is we are reforming. After this treaty is dealt with, a debate on the issue should take place. As soon as the referendum is over, we may end up putting it all to one side again. Through interaction with the Department of Education and Science, it is important that we try to develop a process to inform the next generation about the foundation of Europe and to develop better understanding of the European project.
I welcome the Minister and the Minister of State, and I congratulate them on their new appointments. Deputy Power and I served on committees together and he certainly made his contribution.
I was delighted that the Minister made some remarks to debunk some of the assertions made about the Lisbon treaty, especially those on European security and defence policy. The information needs to be put into the public domain that the majority of EU missions are civilian missions. In fact nine of the current 11 missions are civilian missions.
There is also a canard about the privatisation of public services in the treaty. There is a new protocol in the treaty, a new article in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and a new legal basis to protect public services that did not exist before. Article 188(c) clarifies that the veto will remain for negotiations such as the current round of WTO talks. We discussed it earlier at this committee and the Minister would do well to point it out.
The Minister of State spoke about overseas aid. It is welcome that we are moving quickly to reach the target of 0.7% of GDP by 2012. In the context of the treaty, there is a new commitment to the eradication of global poverty, development co-operation, which is not tied to any conditions and is on a new legal basis, humanitarian aid and the new humanitarian aid corps for young Europeans. This should be placed in the public domain now. These are major initiatives created by the EU. There has been some criticism of the economic partnership agreements to the effect that they are not sufficiently supportive of the ACP countries' development needs. I am delighted to see that the Minister has included a clause stating that Ireland is supportive of these countries' needs and the poverty reduction efforts.
The other points concern the Minister's brief, that we do not implement the treaty until everyone has signed up. We discussed the new role of national parliaments. I presume that no serious discussions will take place until the final ratification so there is enough time to put in place Ireland's position vis-à-vis the restructuring of the Dáil and of our business to accommodate that role. It is important that we put in place the necessary structures so that we are ready to go from the start after the treaty, which hopefully will be passed.
I seek clarification on Ireland's role regarding the western Balkans. It was heartening to see the Serbian elections, which were positive with regard to Ireland. Does Ireland's role with regard to Kosovo remain the same? Can it remain the same under the existing UN mandate? What is the future for Irish military and civilian involvement there?
A great number of allegations were made with regard to the first round of voting in Zimbabwe. The next round is due on 27 June. There are no EU monitors present. Is it possible to appoint UN or EU monitors on this occasion? The Southern African Development Community and the African Union seem to be exclusively monitoring the elections. Do these organisations have the resources to conduct business throughout the entire country? What assistance can be given and will these matters be discussed at the upcoming meeting?
There is a serious question mark about the Middle East peace process which the Minister for Foreign Affairs will discuss with his colleagues in Brussels. Israel is continuously constructing illegal settlements in areas where it was agreed that construction would not continue. This was a matter of international law. Nevertheless, the EU maintains its trade agreement with Israel. Greater muscle could be used by the EU in this respect because it is the major international trader with Israel. We should use this fact to bring about the negotiations we are seeking.
I welcome Deputies Martin and Peter Power and congratulate them on their appointments as Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs. I wish them well in the months ahead.
I agree with the Minister of State that it does not matter how or through whom we get the aid in to Burma. It is important, as outlined last week in the Dáil, that we put in place, through the EU or the UN, systems to ensure we can channel aid into countries where natural disasters occur. We must ensure there is in place a standard procedure to channel aid into countries with whom we do not generally have good relations. It is obvious to me, on reflection, that we should have used countries neighbouring Burma or the EU as a mechanism through which to get aid in. We must be firm in our response and ensure this issue is raised at EU level.
Will the Minister consider allocating funding to the World Food Programme which is an effective programme? This could, perhaps, be done by reallocating funding from our programme countries. This service which has operated well and provides good value for money is currently under pressure and will not reach those who need support if the level of funding remains as is. I am aware that Trócaire has been in contact with the Minister and has raised a number of issues with him in this regard. What concerns me is the EU missing its aid target under the millennium development goals. I note the Minister covered most of the issues raised by Trócaire in his speech.
The former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, attended the last meeting of this committee. I may have misread the situation but as I understand it Ireland, notwithstanding the permanent representative from Italy, was the only country of the 27 EU member states not represented by either a Minister or Minister of State from the Department of Foreign Affairs at the meeting in Luxembourg on 29 April. That strikes me as unusual given we now have so many Ministers. I believe the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy McGuinness, attended that meeting. There has been much controversy about the need for Ministers in this area. We now have three including the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Ministers of State with special responsibility for overseas development aid and European affairs. I accept the current Minister and Ministers of State have only been in their new jobs for a few days and may not be in a position to respond to some of my questions. I am happy to receive a note on them at a later date.
With regard to the points raised by the Minister, I welcome the developments in Serbia. The results of the election were surprising but welcome. Aligned to this is the signing of the agreements with Serbia by the EU, which is also helpful. It is probably the first sign that the Balkans, following the uncertainty of the past few years and the concerns expressed in respect of the declaration of independence, could develop a certain volatility. It is hoped the election result aligned to the signing of the agreements by the EU and Serbia will give rise to more stability in that region, which is to be welcomed.
I ask the Minister or his representative to raise the issue of sending election observers to Zimbabwe at the general affairs Council. I know that SADC and the African Union will be providing observers. Is there any mechanism through which the EU can send observers?
I am interested to hear that the Iraqi prison governor is on secondment here for three weeks. I am at a loss, however, to understand what it is he hopes to learn. I know Deputy Power is a strong advocate of our juvenile prison services. I am at pains to glean what the Iraqis could learn from our system with regard to how we detain young offenders. However, that is a matter for another day.
When referring to the WTO talks, the Minister stated that Ireland will spare no effort in defending our interests, including those in the vital agricultural sector. Deputy Costello asked if we will retain the veto in the WTO talks. As I understand it, we have that right now and will continue to have it whether or not the Lisbon treaty is passed. Does the Minister have a view on whether we should use the veto if conditions remain the same at the WTO talks? What is the position in this regard? I am aware that one of the farming organisations is seeking a commitment from Government on this issue. Some Government politicians are also stating that the veto will be used if necessary. Does the Minister have a view on this?
I welcome the Minister and the Minister of State to the joint committee. I congratulate them on their new appointments and wish them luck in their portfolios.
I am pleased to note the Minister intends to take a firm stance on the World Trade Organisation negotiations, particularly in the area of agriculture. In the context of rising food prices in developing countries, it is ironic that there appears to be a lack of awareness in the European Union of the increasingly important role food security will play in the years ahead and that the WTO, certainly in mixed trade negotiations, regards food and food products as traded products like any non-food products. The former must be distinguished from the latter.
Ireland should be mindful that we have a strong agricultural sector. Many of its concerns are valid when one considers the manner in which the sugar beet industry effectively collapsed overnight. The effect of negotiating a mixed trade agreement under which the European Union may gain in certain areas, for instance, investment, is that the agricultural sector, including Irish agriculture, could sustain severe losses. I hope this fear does not materialise. I welcome the Minister's statement that he will defend the sector's interests in the Council.
On European security and defence policy, the electorate needs to become more aware of the extent of civilian operations conducted by the European Union. The Minister noted that nine of the 11 current operations are civilian rather than military in nature. Given our proud track record in peacekeeping and that our continued adherence to the concept of neutrality — our neutral status has been questioned in the debate on the Lisbon treaty — reassurance that our participation in EU missions would be largely confined to civilian operations would be welcome. Our track record gives us a certain credibility in this area. I ask for reassurance that Ireland would only engage in military missions on the basis of clearly defined criteria. While the European Union has engaged in more civilian than military operations, the position is likely to change in the coming years. People need to be reassured that our focus and involvement will largely remain in the area of civilian operations.
I propose to raise two issues with the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power. On the millennium development goals, I hope he will champion strong action by all member states to reach the commitment to allocate 0.7% of GNP to aid. Another issue of concern to the development sector is that the European Union must avoid imposing damaging conditions with aid. The Minister of State referred to the importance of integrating trade and aid policies. The issue of coherence is also important. When we enter into agreements in which trade and aid are mixed developing countries often believe the aid is tied or a degree of conditionality will apply and the aid may be jeopardised if they do not sign up to free trade agreements. I ask the Minister to defend the interests of developing countries by ensuring aid provided by the European Union is untied and not linked to other agreements.
The Minister of State will be aware of concerns among the development sector regarding the nature of the economic partnership agreements, EPAs, being agreed with the African, Caribbean and Pacific, ACP, countries. I understand that by 1 January 2008, 35 of 76 ACP countries had initialled the EPA agreements. While the remaining countries initialled interim or partial EPAs, they have not agreed to sign up to the full EPAs and the EU continues to push for full EPAs with all 76 ACP countries. It appears there is a difference between the interim and full EPAs. The latter primarily deal with the liberalisation of trade in goods and include additional elements which vary by country or region. They go beyond what is necessary for the agreements to be WTO compatible, which is a source of some concern. Apparently, however, the full EPAs contain commitments to liberalise the rules on investment, services, intellectual property and other aspects. Many ACP countries have expressed concerns that what they are being asked to sign up to is not friendly to developing countries. Ireland's priority aid countries — Tanzania, Uganda, Mozambique and Lesotho — have only initialled interim agreements and not signed up to full agreements. Oxfam Ireland has been active in lobbying Members of the Oireachtas on this issue. It argues that in free trade agreements EPAs constitute the only option the European Union is offering developing countries which do not belong to the least-developed country, LDC, category. It believes there should be more flexibility and that there is a failure on the part of the European Union to recognise other categories. If such countries do not qualify for inclusion in the LDC category, their economic development is at a much lower level than that of EU member states, yet there is no recognition of this in the free trade agreements the European Union is trying to negotiate with them.
I addressed the EPA issue with the Minister of State's predecessor, Deputy Micheál Kitt. He seemed to argue that the policy of protectionism operated previously by developing countries was unsuccessful in helping them to develop their economies. While it is important to see developing countries being integrated into the global economy, there must be some recognition that even if countries are not in the lowest LDC category, there are levels of development that may require flexibility in gaining access to EU markets for goods from such countries.
Oxfam Ireland has pointed out that within EPAs developing countries are being asked to eliminate tariffs on more EU exports than necessary under WTO rules for free trade agreements. The European Union is insisting on the elimination of more than 80% of tariffs on EU goods exported to poor countries. This measure goes well beyond WTO rules, thus imposing burdens on ACP countries in areas such as investment services and intellectual property. While I am sure the Minister is aware of them, I will repeat some of the recommendations Oxfam Ireland has made. First, it is encouraging the Government to back independent evaluations and impact assessments of EPAs, both interim and full, agreed to date. Second, it wants the Government to renegotiate aspects of the agreements to ensure a reduction to meet the minimum necessary for WTO rules compliance. Third, it wants flexibility for developing countries in any negotiations on trade related issues such as intellectual property rights. It also argues that developing countries should be allowed to lead on the pace and content of the negotiations.
I am sorry for going into so much detail, but Oxfam Ireland provided a lot of information. I look forward to hearing the Minister's response.
I warmly congratulate the Minister and the Minister of State on their appointments. I wish the Minister, Deputy Martin, well in his new role and congratulate the new Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, on his first ministerial appointment. It is a great honour to be appointed to the team and I wish him well. They are both joining an outstanding Department with great people who serve the country with distinction both here and abroad. I am confident that the country will continue to be served, politically and diplomatically, to the highest standards.
I thank the Minister for his remarks on the WTO negotiations. It is important that next week a robust statement is made at the GAERC meeting on the WTO talks. In view of Commissioner Fischer Boel's first report today on the CAP health check, it is particularly necessary to outline our position in order that the European Union will be in no doubt about the importance of CAP reform. In the context of serving international markets, the reforms should not be eroded as we play our part within the WTO. It is hard to read the signals because the WTO talks are in a state of flux and one has no idea what the eventual outcome might be. This is worrying for the farming community and the agriculture sector generally. Taking into account the contributions of the Minister and Minister of State, it is vitally important that we all work together to ensure the Lisbon reform treaty is passed in order that the European Union and all its players will have the legal competence necessary to discharge its functions in confronting global challenges.
The celebrations last week in Israel highlighted that the Palestinians seemed to be very isolated. I hope the GAERC meeting next week will redress that imbalance and ensure the European Union continues its even-handed policy in order that common sense, pragmatism and democracy will prevail in the region and that the rights of all are respected. I hope the Union can redress the obvious imbalance.
I ask the Minister to inform the committee whether any progress has been made at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and whether Serbia is co-operating with it. I ask him to inform us how robust is the European neighbourhood policy on Serbia and Kosovo.
We must recognise the serious discrimination in Zimbabwe, in particular the intimidation of the leader of the opposition. Can the European Union ensure observers will be available for the next round of elections? This is of importance.
With regard to the situation in Burma, the Minister of State has referred to the importance of providing aid. It does not matter who delivers it once it gets to the starving people. I hope the European Union can make a strong statement and that the High Representative, Javier Solana, can make progress in ensuring those in charge discharge their humanitarian responsibilities.
The Minister has a wide range of issues to address.
I thank Deputies and Senators for their contributions. Deputy Dooley raised a significant point, one that we will certainly take on board about information on the Lisbon treaty and the wider issue of providing information on how the European system works. It is important to generate greater awareness and understanding of how the European Union institutions have evolved in the past 35 years of Ireland's membership of the Union. The Department of Foreign Affairs has a unit, Communicating Europe, with a relatively small budget in between referendums. However, this can be reviewed in the future.
One has to be impartial about how information is provided but there is a need for it. Recent polls indicate an increase in access to and the acquisition of information but we would like to think the work of the independent Referendum Commission which has a budget of approximately €5 million will begin to have an impact when it issues booklets to households. The political parties have become more active in the past fortnight. Modern society has much information available to it. Therefore, it can be difficult for any one issue to attract the undivided attention of the populace. This is a fact of modern life. It is the case that in campaigns such as this people tend to focus a little more on the information available as one gets closer to the date of the referendum. A vigorous campaign is important and all parties involved in such a campaign must provide and disseminate as much information as possible by means of leaflets, participation in media programmes and so forth. This process is under way and I hope that by the end of the campaign the position on information will have been improved.
I take the Deputy's point about the necessity of having an ongoing programme to enhance awareness of the European Union and its institutions, and the importance of its interaction with citizens. Deputy Costello also stated he was pleased we highlighted the ESDP side of the equation in terms of the Lisbon treaty. I will continue to highlight this issue during the campaign.
Senator Déirdre de Búrca noted the importance of providing reassurance about military neutrality. I did so in the context of the triple lock system, under which a UN mandate and Government and Oireachtas approval are required. The constitutional prohibition on participation in common defence would require going to the people if it was ever decided to pursue that route. Unanimity is still required for EU missions, which means that if we do not like the criteria, rules of engagement or nature of a particular mission, we may oppose it. The civilian and rule of law missions are important.
The mission in Chad in which Irish troops are involved is difficult and challenging. However, European Union personnel, Mr. Javier Solana and others have stated the Irish troops are effective and making an impact on the ground. This may be due to the manner in which our troops conduct themselves but they are certainly having an impact in terms of facilitating the return of refugees and internally displaced persons. Deployment of military personnel to provide security can be important in certain contexts.
Yesterday, I met a minister from Uganda who gave an interesting description of events in his country. He also noted the important role the provision of security and stabilisation can play in developing normality and giving people the confidence to return to their homes.
On Deputy Costello's point on public services, I reiterate that the Lisbon treaty does not undermine the competence or capacity of member states to provide state services in health and education. The treaty includes a strong protocol which underpins this competence of member states. Nothing can be done or imposed by the European Union under the treaty that would undermine the character or nature of the provision of such services. We need to nail this myth because attempts have been made to suggest the treaty will usher in wholesale privatisation of health services. As a former Minister for Health and Children, I have heard this argument before. Citizens are entitled to access European health services under the services directive and other EU regulations. I recall attending meetings of Ministers for Health five or six years ago when people thought the edifice of their health systems would collapse as citizens rushed off to avail of some magic health service elsewhere leaving the domestic system with no supports or participation. This fear was not realised.
Is the Minister sure?
Even when the National Treatment Purchase Fund was introduced we purchased approximately 900 of 30,000 treatments in the United Kingdom. We must always maintain a sense of perspective on these issues. That is the position in terms of services and I do not propose to labour the issue.
I agree with Deputy Costello that no serious discussion of implementing the treaty should take place until after ratification. The Deputy also referred to the role of the Oireachtas in implementing the new provision that all new EU legislation must be vetted or examined by the Oireachtas. While this is a good measure which will make EU procedures more democratic, it has organisational implications for the Oireachtas. We should consider how we will facilitate this measure because it will be a significant change. Nevertheless, no action can be taken until the treaty is ratified.
In terms of the western Balkans and Kosovo, Irish troops remain in KFOR under the existing UN mandate and we have no plans to withdraw from the mission. Eight gardaí and one civil servant will be involved in the EULEX mission. There are certain challenges concerning the transition and we will continue to work with our EU partners on those.
As regards the issue of EU monitors in Zimbabwe, a number of speakers have said that we should be pushing for international observation of any second round election, and not just regional observers. To be frank, however, it is unlikely that either the EU or the UN will receive the necessary invitation to send an election observer mission to Zimbabwe for the second round. The EU hopes instead to work with regional organisations, namely, the African Union and the Southern African Development Community, and support them in their efforts to ensure that the elections are in tune with newly-developed African best practice standards. That is an important way to go in terms of improving regional capacity, which is probably a more optimal way of providing confidence and underpinning development.
If one is to observe the election process properly, one needs the practical consent of the authorities to enter the country by way of visas, in addition to having access to polling stations and count centres. EU diplomats based in and accredited to Zimbabwe have witnessed the conduct of the elections to date. The Irish ambassador to Zimbabwe was in Harare recently and we will continue to try to support the regional authorities in that regard. We will raise the issue at next week's GAERC meeting as a number of people have asked us to. We could dispatch an observer mission if the green light was given, even at a late stage.
As regards the Middle East, Deputy Costello raised the trade dimension of the EU's relationship with Israel and the association agreement. We do not believe that the suspension of the Euro-Mediterranean association agreement, which would of course require consensus within the EU, would serve the interests of any of the parties at this stage. However, the meetings of the association council do provide an opportunity for the EU to highlight its concerns on the human rights implications of Israel's security policies. The next meeting of the EU-Israel council will take place on 16 June.
A divisive debate would ensue if there was a proposal to suspend or review the terms of that agreement, whereas we want to keep the momentum on the peace process itself, as well as keeping both parties focused on it. A suspension or review could possibly undermine our efforts to continue providing assistance to the Palestinian people, which is an ongoing objective of ours. Our priority is to encourage all efforts to restore momentum to the peace process through meaningful negotiations for the establishment of a Palestinian state. That is our focus and it will be the nature of our contacts and engagement, both bilaterally and through the EU.
The former Minister was in Washington for an historic occasion at the time of the last GAERC meeting. He raised the issue of the undocumented Irish with senior members of the US Congress and the US Administration. We are anxious to advance that important issue.
The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, was bringing the referendum legislation, pertaining to the Lisbon treaty, through the Houses of the Oireachtas at that time. The Minister of State, Deputy McGuinness, has a function in the context of his role as Minister with responsibility for trade. Given the topicality of the WTO negotiations, his presence at the GAERC meeting was both useful and relevant.
I agree with Senator de Búrca's position on food security and the WTO, which is a good point. We have said as much to our European partners and to Commissioner Mandelson. Prior to her appointment as Tánaiste, the previous Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Coughlan, raised the issue of food security with Mr. Mandelson. The matter is more significantly on the agenda now than it was a year ago or at the commencement of the Doha Round. We need to take stock of issues concerning the security of food supplies and reflect on them from an EU perspective. This is a fair point and one we will develop.
I have dealt with the issue raised about neutrality, reassurance and peacekeeping. I agree with Deputy Noel Treacy that the Department of Foreign Affairs is a very good Department — it is a great Department.
With regard to the point made by Deputy Treacy, we do not sufficiently highlight the role of the public service. There is much negative comment about the public service but I have been a Minister in many Departments and I have always found embassy officials across the globe to be exceptional in fulfilling their duties as representatives of Ireland. I take on board the comments articulated by Deputy Treacy and his view that we require a strong statement on WTO at the next GAERC meeting.
I have dealt with the question on the Serbian situation. It presents challenges for us but the situation is calm and we will work with our EU partners to continue that calm. We must wait to see what will happen in the aftermath of the elections and the various alliances that may be formed.
I have dealt with the question of election monitoring in Zimbabwe and Deputy Power will deal with the questions about Burma. Deputy Timmins raised the issue of Iraq.
Just as a passing problem; I am not looking for a response.
For the Deputy's information, the organisers of this programme with the Iraqi officials have articulated that the best programme among all the programmes from across Europe has been the programme with the Irish Prison Service. I think sometimes we undersell ourselves.
Deputy Timmins also raised the issue of the WTO talks and the thorny question of the veto. It is somewhat premature to talk about vetoing proposals that are shifting. We must analyse important papers that were published yesterday. My colleague, Deputy Brendan Smith, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, will look at those papers. We have already articulated our unhappiness with the way Commissioner Mandelson has been moving this agenda, particularly with regard to agriculture. We retain unanimity. The factual position post Lisbon or even prior to Lisbon, is that any trade agreement involving services requires unanimity so WTO requires unanimity, a unanimous decision from EU member states. We always take this into consideration but we are in a negotiating process. Ideally we would like if people decoupled the issue of WTO from that of Lisbon because Lisbon will happen on 12 June, one way or the other but we will still have to deal with the WTO. We are in a negotiating mode; one does not begin negotiations by declaring that we will veto whatever we do not like and it will move within the process. We are not happy with the current proposals on the table and we have said we find them unacceptable. However, we are still in a process of negotiation.
Proposals on the health check on the CAP will be published this afternoon and we are convinced that a "No" vote would seriously undermine our negotiating capacity post Lisbon. We would be playing a card that would be detrimental to Irish agriculture interests in the future. We want to negotiate strongly for a potential expansion in milk quotas in the context of the CAP health check or a simplification of payments systems for farmers. We have alliances within Europe; we work well with the French and other governments. We believe a "No" vote would undermine our negotiating strength and that a "Yes" vote would enhance our negotiating strength, both within Europe in the context of the CAP health check and in the context of WTO negotiations. These are very strong, positive, strategic reasons for a "Yes" vote, from the perspective of farming and agriculture. I think farm leaders understand this point. I understand their point of view.
I also understand the reason they want to utilise what they perceive to be potential leverage from the ongoing referendum campaign. However, one must be careful in how one plays that card because when voting on the Lisbon treaty concludes on 12 June, we will still be in negotiations with the World Trade Organisation. There is still a journey to travel in the negotiations. We do not even know whether a ministerial meeting will be convened in June. Ireland is not the only country which has significant problems with what is on the table. That is our perspective on the current position.
I thank the Chairman and members for their good wishes on our appointments. The joint committee's contributions will inform our contribution at the Council meeting next week.
To address the Minister's final point, the questions and contributions, whether on the WTO, world food prices, Afghanistan, Mozambique or Burma, demonstrate that Ireland, on its own, is not able to influence or shape events of this nature as we continue the march towards a globalised world. If our discussion serves one purpose, it shows that Ireland will be able to continue to exert influence at the heart of Europe by endorsing the Lisbon treaty which makes the European Union more efficient, effective and responsive, for example, in being able to deal with issues arising at the WTO negotiations. Voting in favour of the treaty will serve Ireland's interests much better than a "No" vote. This was the general theme running through the discussion.
I agree with Deputy Costello that the European Union collectively, as a global player, has a strong role to play in tackling global poverty. Ireland has a good news story to tell in Europe but I accept the Deputy's point that we need to do so with greater effectiveness in the public domain. I am taking steps to do this, as will be underlined by events in the coming days.
I agree with practically everything Deputy Timmins said in his comprehensive contribution on Burma. From my short experience, I can state the tragedy in Burma is virtually unprecedented and deserves a unique response. If anything, China which has opened up in recent decades has shown an enlightened approach in dealing with a humanitarian disaster of a similar scale by openly inviting and accepting international aid, including Ireland's initial contribution of €1 million for which it expressed gratitude. This serves to underscore the unfortunate position adopted by the authorities in Burma. We are dealing with very difficult circumstances but the key message is that we must adopt an approach that will ensure aid reaches the country as soon as possible.
The tragedy in Burma underscores the fact that Ireland, with its strong commitment to the alleviation of world poverty and intervening in humanitarian crises around the world, could not meet its commitment as an island nation of 4 million people without the European Union. As a bloc, the Union will be in a much better position to deal with such crises and act more efficiently and effectively once the Lisbon treaty has been ratified. Moreover, Ireland will have a much more enhanced role in this regard. For this reason, I look forward to making our contribution towards a European Union common position on Burma.
I found the contribution of Senator de Búrca, who has left the meeting, extremely interesting because, as we all know, there are major issues concerning the underlying price of global foodstuffs.
There is a division in the Seanad.
I was struck in recent days by the fact that a signification portion of the billions of euros we have allocated to international aid and development co-operation can be easily undermined by rapidly rising costs of basic foodstuffs around the world. Last year the EU contributed €47 billion towards developing countries. Much of that, although I cannot say what proportion of it, can be wiped out overnight to the detriment of people on the margins and on the bread line who cannot afford to put food on the table irrespective of the level of aid given. Senator de Búrca made an important point in that regard.
She also made points concerning the millennium development goals. I can confirm that we will support the goals and that we are a strong advocate of them. They are the core driving principle of our policy since the publication of the White Paper on Irish Aid. She made a point about tied and untied aid and I am happy to reassure her that it is a central principle of our aid that it is untied. That is a separate issue from the complicated and complex issue of EPAs, but as a general principle our aid from a government to government level is untied, and we will continue to maintain that important position.
Senator de Búrca also raised a point regarding the EPAs, which she correctly pointed out is a complex and evolving issue. I view interim or partial EPAs very much as a stepping stone towards full and complete EPAs, but our basic policy position on this issue is that whatever EPAs are finally negotiated, they will have as their core principle that they enable flexibility for the countries in Latin American, the Caribbean and other countries to maintain policies of poverty reduction. That is our central and basic starting point in regard to our contribution on that issue.
The basic point the Senator correctly made is that notwithstanding any of the complexity in the EPA negotiations we have as a guiding principle that they must be at all times consistent with the existing World Trade Organisation arrangements and treaties. They are the types of overarching principles that guide us and constrain the European Union in its negotiations in relation to the EPAs.
I thank Deputy Treacy for his good wishes. I reiterate the points I made regarding Burma. It is a crisis the level of which is simply unknown at this stage because the world's media and aid agencies are not able to get deep into the Irrawaddy delta where a crisis of untold magnitude could be unfolding, which is what makes this crisis unique and frustrating for us and for the European Union. However, suffice to say, we have made an initial pledge to contribute €1 million, but as the crisis develops and information becomes available to us, I assure Deputy Treacy and the committee that we will certainly not be found wanting in our contribution towards what appears to be an appalling humanitarian disaster.
I thank the Chairman and look forward to working with the committee in the future.
I thank the Minister of State and his colleague, the Minister, for being here and for going over the important issues before them and the committee. The General Affairs and External Relations Council is particularly important. All the salient issues have been raised by members, although the Ministers are well aware of them. They can be assured that the committee will be more than anxious to be supportive and constructive in every way possible to ensure their views prevail and the country's views are heard.
On the WTO talks, we seem preoccupied with Mr. Mandelson and forget that he is an EU Commissioner acting on behalf of the Commission and not one country. As citizens of the European Union, we have the same access as people in other countries and he must respond to our views as he would to those of the citizens of other countries, including the country which appointed him. He is not an independent entity. Like the Minister, we will watch developments very carefully. If the Minister requires any assistance in that regard, he can send for any member of the committee as members would be more than willing to assist.