Given that we have a busy agenda with a large number of activities to discuss, I would appreciate the co-operation of members for the duration of the meeting. No apologies have been received. The first item on the agenda is a discussion of priorities in the field of European affairs with the Minister of State with special responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Lucinda Creighton. On behalf of the joint committee, I welcome her and acknowledge the valuable role she played as a member of the Joint Committee on European Affairs and the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and particularly as chairperson of the Joint Sub-committee on the Review of the Role of the Oireachtas in European Affairs. In many ways, the work she did while serving on the sub-committee forms part and parcel of what we are examining both in terms of the work of the Government and the consultation process on which are working. We are naturally interested in hearing what her priorities are in the field of European affairs and how she believes the relationship between the joint committee and her Department can be enhanced. I invite her to make her presentation.
European Affairs: Discussion with Minister of State
I thank the Chairman, members of the joint committee and the excellent secretariat. It is a great honour for me to be here. This is where I cut my teeth in the Oireachtas during a three year period during the lifetime of the last Dáil. A few members served on the previous committee, including the distinguished former Chairman, Deputy Bernard Durkan. I am thrilled to be here and congratulate the members who are new to the committee. It is an interesting, challenging and diverse one and I know they will all enjoy serving on it. I congratulate, in particular, my former colleague on the committee, Deputy Joe Costello, who is now its Chairman. The members who worked on the previous committee during the lifetime of the previous Dáil will know how dedicated and hardworking he was and I have every expectation he will make a superb contribution as Chairman.
I will try to be as concise as I can, but there is a good deal to say about European affairs, the work of my division, the committee and the Oireachtas and how we can interact. I will cover as much as I can in as short a time as possible and I look forward to the exchange which will then take place.
I am pleased to say a number of the commitments contained in the programme for Government have been implemented. The Taoiseach has followed through on his commitment to brief the Oireachtas prior to the European Council, placing EU issues of national significance at the forefront of Oireachtas business in a timely and relevant manner. Some members have participated in these sessions.
I am grateful to the Chairman for his co-operation and hard work in making Europe Day, Monday, 9 May, such a success. This was a project in which I strongly believed.
We had limited time to get it up and running but it was a useful event in terms of airing European affairs in the Dáil Chamber. While the timing of the event prior to the formal establishment of the Oireachtas committees necessitated a special arrangement, the contributions by the Taoiseach and the Commissioner for Research, Innovation and Science, Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, as well as the attendance of many of our MEPs, underlined its utility and importance. As it was the first time such a debate occurred in the Dáil, there are lessons to be learned from it. A number of Members have responded to the letter I circulated to them afterwards and I will take account of their feedback when organising next year's event.
The Oireachtas committees have now been established and will play a more active role in the scrutiny of EU legislative proposals and their transposition into Irish law. Each sectoral committee will examine EU proposals relevant to its area of work, thereby enabling Deputies and Senators from across all committees to engage more actively with EU affairs. This is an important development because, as a former member of the Committee on European Scrutiny, I can say with certainty that the scrutiny of European legislative proposals will be treated in a more efficient and relevant way thanks to the devolution of that power to sectoral committees. I am confident it is a step in the right direction. The transposition of EU proposals into Irish law is one of my functions as Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs and I look forward to co-operating with sectoral committees and this committee in the context of its responsibility for oversight. The Oireachtas committees will be assisted in this role by the relevant Departments, which are required to provide an information note on EU proposals or measures within 20 days of their publication, in accordance with the European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002. It is important that we have a strong European affairs committee in our national Parliament. I welcome the engagement of the joint committee with other member states through the COSAC network and I am sure that strong partnership will evolve and be enhanced during the committee's lifetime.
Relations with the European Parliament take on greater significance in the post-Lisbon environment. The European Parliament now jointly decides with the Council in co-decision on the majority of EU legislation. Next week we will welcome the President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek, MEP, to Ireland, during which time he will visit Leinster House and deliver an address to the Seanad. There also will be the opportunity for him to meet members of this committee. The President, Mr. Buzek, will also call on the President and hold meetings with the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and me. On 11 July I will join him in attending a special celebration of the role played by EU funding programmes such as PEACE and INTERREG in supporting projects aimed at reconciling communities and contributing towards a shared society. I recently met the Secretary General of the European Parliament, Klaus Welle, and a number of chairs of key committees in the Parliament, and my colleagues in Government have undertaken similar engagements in recent months.
The Government is determined to restore Ireland's standing as a respected and influential member of the European Union. The visit of the President, Mr. Buzek, represents one element of an extensive programme of senior level contacts with EU institutions and with other member states. We are making clear the economic and financial realities confronting us and the steps which we have taken to get the public finances in order, repair the banking sector and restore growth. We are emphasising our determination to see this process through to a successful conclusion and we count on the continuing solidarity of partners. We seek to inform and to persuade, pointing to the benefit of Irish success for the euro area and the EU. Members of the Government have been availing of every appropriate opportunity to meet their EU counterparts. EU ministerial meetings are usually the most time and cost efficient context in which such contacts can be facilitated, although other opportunities are also availed of when they arise.
I have undertaken valuable engagements with a number of EU colleagues in the margins of the General Affairs Council. However, I have also built further upon these contacts in other contexts including, for example, useful exchanges with my British, Austrian, French, Dutch, Polish, Spanish, Bulgarian and German counterparts. Another approach to re-engaging with our European partners is to address think tanks in member states to contribute in a constructive way to the debate about the sort of Europe we want. This also gives us the opportunity to put Ireland's case to people who influence the shape of future EU policy. This approach was reflected in the programmes for my recent visits to Paris, Berlin and London. I met experts from Notre Europe in Paris and the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung and the European Council on European Relations in Berlin. In London I visited the Centre for European Reform and the European institute at the London School of Economics. I am currently working on a programme of similar visits in the autumn and I have sought advice from our ambassadors in EU capitals on the most influential bodies that should be included in my itinerary and, where appropriate, in other Ministers' itineraries.
The network of diplomatic missions abroad and fellow member states accredited in Dublin represents another important channel. At the end of March, the Hungarian embassy, which held the European Presidency at the time, was kind enough to facilitate me in meeting EU ambassadors. The Tánaiste also met the ambassadors of EU member states in Dublin on 18 April to brief them on the response of the new Government to the economic challenges facing us. I will again address EU ambassadors next week at their monthly heads of mission meeting, which is being facilitated by the Portuguese ambassador. In line with the commitment given in the programme for Government, the Tánaiste last month hosted a conference of Irish heads of mission in Dublin aimed at ensuring that our entire mission network is briefed on the Government's approach and the key messages to be conveyed to the national media and economic actors in their respective countries of responsibility. Along with various other departmental officials, the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste, the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, and I addressed the heads of mission on our key areas of policy.
Through its regular meetings in advance of each General Affairs Council, this committee will have regular opportunities to scrutinise and offer input into the major issues of concern to Ireland on the EU agenda. Under the treaties, the council has the tasks of ensuring consistency in work in various configurations and preparing and following up the work of the European Council. It usually meets several days before the European Council to go through the agenda and draft conclusions and, subsequently, to assess the follow up activities by member states. It thus serves a particularly important function and member states are getting used to it. Its work is also relevant to the forthcoming Irish Presidency.
The concerted action by the Union aimed at restoring stability to the economic and financial system will come before this committee on a regular basis and it is worth taking stock of where we stand. Last month I accompanied the Taoiseach to the European Council. The Council noted that the comprehensive package of measures intended to respond to the economic and financial crisis in Europe, which should lead to greater financial stability and facilitate the creation of sustainable jobs and growth, is now almost fully implemented. The only outstanding item, finalisation of the six legislative measures, or the so-called six pack, to strengthen European economic governance, is now within reach. We expect the Council and the European Parliament to complete this final piece of work in the coming weeks.
Nationally, we have obligations and monitoring to undertake under the EU-IMF programme for Ireland. The EU-ECB-IMF troika is in Dublin this week preparing the next quarterly review. The June European Council was extremely positive on the progress being made by Ireland in the implementation of the EU-IMF programme. It stated clearly that our reform programme "is well on track" and we are determined to keep it that way. Our aim is to return to the markets as soon as possible. This is a welcome recognition of the huge efforts being made by the people. There was a clear recognition that helping Ireland to exit its programme and return to the markets was a shared goal with our EU partners.
The Government is very appreciative of the assistance provided by our European and international partners. It is this assistance that is providing us with the space we need to work our way out of the difficult situation in which we find ourselves. That solidarity and support shown to us cannot be minimised and is a concrete manifestation of interdependence within the European Union. At the meeting of the European Council euro area Heads of State and Government reiterated their commitment to do whatever was necessary to ensure the financial stability of the euro area as a whole. This is of critical importance to Ireland.
In addition to looking forward to the passage of the necessary measures by the Greek Parliament to facilitate the release of the latest tranche of funding to Greece - this has now happened and been approved by the eurogroup of finance Ministers - the euro area Heads of State and Government agreed at their meeting last month to provide an additional funding package for Greece to be financed through both official and private sources. There is to be "voluntary private sector involvement in the form of informal and voluntary roll-overs of existing Greek debt at maturity," while avoiding a selective default. The euro group of finance Ministers has taken note of commitments made by financial market participants in some member states and confirmed that the "precise modalities and scale of private sector involvement and additional funding from official sources will be determined in the coming weeks". The financing strategy will form the basis for launching a new medium-term programme to support Greece's adjustment efforts.
On 29 June the European Commission published a detailed multiannual financial framework for the next EU budget for the period 2014 to 2020. The overall amount proposed for the next seven years is €1,025 billion, or 1.05% of the European Union's GNI. The Commission's proposal is detailed and complex and we are giving it careful consideration. Its publication sets the ball rolling in what will be a long and complicated negotiation. This proposal provides us with the starting point for the negotiations and contains much we can welcome. The Government looks forward to playing an active and constructive part and to hammering out a good deal for Ireland and the European Union. This is one of the most important items on the Union's agenda and will have important medium to long-term implications for the economic and sectoral interests of Ireland and the Union. We want to ensure the budget matches new realities. Member states are working hard to bring discipline to their own budgets and the same principle must apply at EU level. However, we also need a budget that is fit for purpose and that allows the Union to deliver, whether it be on the crucial issue of agriculture and food security for European consumers, or in the increasingly important area of research and innovation.
A core element of Ireland's re-engagement with the European Union will be the successful execution of the Presidency of the European Union from January to June 2013. This will be the seventh time Ireland has served in this role and will coincide with the 40th anniversary of Ireland's accession to the Union. Ireland will form part of a Presidency trio that will include Lithuania which will assume the Presidency from Ireland during the second half of 2013 and Greece which will assume the Presidency in 2014. The rotating Presidency of the European Council has a vital role in ensuring the smooth and co-ordinated handling of EU business. While changes have occurred in the chairing of the European Council and the Foreign Affairs Council, all other configurations and most preparatory bodies continue to be chaired by the Presidency. We have been observing with interest the work just concluded by our Hungarian colleagues and wish Poland and its trio partners, Denmark and Cyprus, every success in the next 18 months.
We are working towards the Presidency, but it is a long way off and we have to allow a certain amount of flexibility. Ireland has developed a reputation during its four decades of EU membership for running efficient and impartial EU Presidencies. This is one of our strengths and will again be the overriding objective of our 2013 Presidency. Ireland also plans to run a cost-effective Presidency which is essential in the current climate. It will also be seeking to use the Presidency as a core element of the broader Government strategy of engaging fully with the EU agenda and strengthening Ireland's standing in Europe and abroad.
Preparations for the Irish Presidency have been under way since last year and will become more intensive in the coming months. I have had meetings with a number of my European colleagues, including the Polish and Greek Ministers for European Affairs, to discuss Presidency issues. I have also met the Secretary General of the European Parliament and discussed the Presidency in view of the role the Parliament will play in delivering on our legislative priorities in the course of our Presidency. Next week's visit of President Buzek will provide a further opportunity to highlight our forthcoming Presidency. I do not think the importance of the European Parliament can be over-emphasised. It really is the experience of all members of the rotating Presidency so far. The Hungarian Presidency did an excellent job, as did some of the previous Presidencies in coming to terms with the huge challenge presented in the European Parliament. It is a welcome role for the Parliament, but it falls on the member state to work at building relations and so on. I have been warned that I will be spending much time in Strasbourg dealing with MEPs and the relevant committees as we try to advance our priorities.
Last week the Tánaiste met the Lithuanian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister and had the opportunity to discuss the issue of co-operation in the context of our trio Presidency. At official level, planning for the Presidency is being co-ordinated by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the officials of which I would like to compliment on the work they have done. I will chair the meeting of the interdepartmental Presidency planning group next week to review preparations and identify the emerging themes and priorities. This will be a core component of my work from September.
I would like to mention the co-ordination of European affairs across the Government. It is an element of my role with which the committee is probably least familiar, but it is one of the most important. All member states in the European Union are giving much consideration to and placing much more emphasis on the importance of coherence and co-ordination across all government Ministries when dealing with European affairs. It is an area in which I would say the Irish Government has fallen down for many years. It is very much a key priority and I will be focusing on it especially in the first few months of my appointment. This month I am meeting all Cabinet Ministers to discuss their departmental priorities. I am focusing very much on the programme for Government and how it interacts with European affairs and the work plan of the European Commission. It is important that there is early intervention, especially with the Commission, the body which proposes legislation. I am conscious of the fact that while other member states have excellent records in building relations and maintaining very open and strong dialogue with officials in the Commission, as well as strong contact with it at the highest political level, this is something that has not been a priority for the Irish Government in recent years, but it is something I now see as a major priority. That work is ongoing and is a major priority. It is not an easy task. As the committee will learn from its task of co-ordinating scrutiny, Departments often tend to be territorial and do not share information. As a Minister of State in the Department of the Taoiseach, I am in a good position to co-ordinate such information on behalf of the Taoiseach.
As part of that focus we are re-establishing the Cabinet sub-committee on European affairs, which became less of a priority in recent years. It is the most important Cabinet sub-committee and the Taoiseach regards it as having significant importance. I would be happy to report to the committee, in so far as is possible, on the priorities and workings of that sub-committee.
There will be fairly significant and substantial structural reforms within the Government in how we deal with the co-ordination of European affairs. There will be a discussion on this, and there is a role for the EU division of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. An important role must be enhanced in the EU division of the Department of the Taoiseach with regard to co-ordination. We are considering proposals and I have met the Taoiseach to discuss them. As the committee knows, interviews are taking place in the next week or two for the appointment of a Secretary General for the Department of the Taoiseach and a second Secretary General who will be responsible for European and economic affairs. That will be a key appointment for the Government task of co-ordinating European affairs.
I apologise for speaking for a long time but I hope I touched on many issues. There are many more and I am sure they will be mentioned in questions from members. I will do my best to answer any questions and I am thankful for the opportunity to set out some of my priorities and areas of interest. I look forward to an ongoing dialogue with the committee and genuine engagement over the months and years ahead.
I thank the Minister of State for her comprehensive address to the committee. She is the first person to address the new committee and it is appropriate that the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs gives her views on the priorities and engagement with this committee. Clearly the Minister of State's time as a member of the last European affairs committee was well spent and, as she said, she cut her teeth there, and from her comments I know she cut them well. They are quite sharp now with regard to European affairs, which will be to our benefit.
I propose to proceed, by agreement, by inviting brief contributions and questions from members and the Minister of State can respond to the entire package. I will start by asking a question or two. The multi-annual financial framework will be a big issue over the next couple of years. It is being pitched at 1.05% of the Union budget and there is a very substantial programme of activities between now and 2020 with which the European Union is committed to engage. What is the Government's thinking on this and is it sufficient to fulfil the obligations of the European Union across the board in terms of employment, climate change and development?
Will the Minister of State elaborate on what this committee might do in the lead-up to our presidency in 2013 with regard to engagement in the strategy and proposals relating to the Presidency? I will open the discussion and the Minister of State can make a general response to all the questions.
Would the Chairman not take questions from three people, for example, before allowing the Minister of State to answer?
The Chairman will be able to chair the meeting.
The Chairman said he would take all the questions before allowing the Minister of State to answer. I suggest he takes the questions in batches of three. I must go to the Seanad at 1 p.m.
We all have things to do.
I suggest questions are taken in batches of three in order that the Minister of State can respond.
I propose to take the questions as a complete package.
I heartily welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Creighton, to the committee meeting and thank her for the presentation. I have two observations on what she has said. The Minister of State made a point regarding the current negotiation for the funding package for Greece, referring to the fact that an objective is the putting in place of voluntary private sector involvement in the form of informal and voluntary roll-overs of existing Greek debt on maturity. That discussion does not appear to have got off to a great start and the level of Greek debt that would be affected by such a plan seems to be shrinking by the day. The reaction of some of the main players, notably ratings agencies, to the proposals has been very tough. As a State we have a clear national interest in all of this working out in an orderly manner.
It does not appear that this has started well and the deadline was originally set for the end of July but has moved to August. It will be interesting to see if it is moved further. If that is being set as a cornerstone for a successful resolution of the difficulties, does the Minister of State have an observation on how the process started and how it should play out for the interest of our country?
There is a broad point regarding our relationship with the European Parliament and how we will work. The Minister of State produced a very good report on enhancing the role of the Irish Parliament with regard to European affairs, and I am sure she shares my enthusiasm for making that happen. That should not be dimmed by our party being in Government. It is vital that we reinvigorate the role of the Parliament with regard to European affairs, and the Minister of State has previously made some excellent recommendations on the issue. We must bring those to life soon for the benefit of all Members but, more importantly, for the people of the country who are seeking to understand what is happening in our relationship with Europe and what the people they elect are doing about it.
On a lighter note, I notice that when the Minister of State mentioned priorities, she spoke about the finalisation of six legislative measures, or the six pack. So much European language has been indecipherable to us at times that I am slightly concerned that we might go to the other end of the spectrum with a statement like that. This might set a precedent that would lead us to uncharted waters as the year goes on.
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Creighton, to the committee. She served very effectively on the last committee and much of the work we did here was valuable along the way. I have no doubt the zeal and vigour she brought to the deliberations of the committee will be replicated in her new role, and I wish her well.
I am particularly encouraged by the Minister of State's comments on ensuring that all Departments and Ministers bring a very strong focus to their work towards involvement with the European Union. We have seen difficulties over years where there is only focus around referendums or a major European issue so if we act when such an imperative is not obvious, there will be dividends as time goes on.
I do not want to be political or overly critical. In her deliberations and discussions with Ministers it is important, as mentioned by previous speakers, that the Minister of State emphasise strongly the importance and primacy of Parliament when major announcements are being made. During her discussions with the Minister for Finance perhaps she might raise the fact that the decision on burden-sharing by bondholders was announced in the United States. It would have been better if it had been made in this Parliament, as it would have given strength to the efforts of so many people who have spoken about the need for this initiative. It is a question of co-ordination. The Minister of State will bring a focus to this work.
Can the Minister of State enlighten us on the difficulties or otherwise being encountered by the Government as it tries to secure a reduction in the interest rate? Although it is primarily a matter for the Minister for Finance within his Department and at ECOFIN and other forums, I suggest there is a role for the Minister of State in building alliances. I know this has been a focus of her work to date. What is the thinking in other member states on the interest rate issue? In her discussions with representatives of member states other than France and Germany - we are generally updated on where they stand on a regular basis - what is being said on the issue of burden-sharing by senior bondholders? It would be helpful if she could give us an overview on what other countries are thinking.
It is generally accepted that the European project is facing a crisis that is unprecedented in its history. There is a sense of anger in the core states which perceive they are having to bail out reckless peripheral states. That is how the narrative is seen by the political establishment in such countries. In peripheral states such as Ireland, Greece and Portugal there is a view that we have been forced into crippling austerity measures in order to contribute towards solving a crisis that is European in its genesis. The fact is that in the international financial markets there was very poor regulation for a long time.
One of the tasks of the IMF is to oversee responsible behaviour in the international financial sector. At the height of the Celtic tiger phase of our economic history, to use an unfortunate label, the IMF repeatedly gave Ireland a clean bill of health. The European institutions, including the ECB, also gave Ireland a clean bill of health. That encouraged banks in core states such as Germany, France and Britain to engage in more lending. In the case of Greece, the loans were given to the Greek Government and in the case of Ireland, they were given to private banking institutions. Ordinary Irish people were not responsible for that decision. They did not implore the banking institutions in the core states of Europe or the hedge fund managers to invest in private banks. They did not sell the pitch. It was the international financial markets which did this and the people have been forced to take the burden.
There is an absence of leadership and cohesion in the European efforts to deal with the crisis. If one wants to assess the matter, all one has to do is read the views of respected international economic analysts in the Financial Times or The Economist. One will come to the conclusion that what we are doing is unsustainable. It is clear that at some point Greece and Ireland will head towards default. We will have a choice between an unstructured default and an orderly default. Clearly, it will be in everybody’s interests for the default to be orderly. The Moody’s rating agency which is based in the United States has reduced the status of Portuguese bonds to junk status. I hate that term because, having visited Portugal on numerous occasions, I have a love for the people there and think they deserve better than having to read such headlines.
The political leadership of Europe faces a challenge. The European project is of critical importance. The vision of a social Europe that upholds human rights internationally, for example, during the Arab Spring, and protects the rights of people in peripheral states and regions is critically important. Much has been achieved by the European project in areas such as environmental legislation, human rights, workers' rights and women's rights. I could go on. There have been many great and notable social achievements under that umbrella. It would be reckless not to point this out. I respect the Minister of State's integrity on the issue of the European project, about which I know she is passionate. I remind those who share her values and care about the European project and its potential that the best way to defend the European Union's interests and its future is to deal with the profound and clear injustice of the programmes that Ireland and other countries have been asked to deal with.
I will conclude quickly by-----
This is not an opportunity to make speeches but for the Minister of State to brief us on her priorities and our relationship with her.
With respect, it would be remiss of me-----
Please keep it succinct.
People would be shocked if I were to speak at this forum without commenting on the economic crisis. I would not be fit to be a member of the committee if I were to fail to do so.
When the Minister of State is talking to her European colleagues as part of the diplomatic initiative to try to get a better deal - God knows we need it - she should ask them if it is right for Ireland to have to pay €703 million to the holders of Anglo Irish Bank's unguaranteed senior debt at a time when we are having to cripple the health service, take huge amounts of money out of the education system and put huge pressure on the people. Is it right that we will impose a further €4 billion in cutbacks in the budget at the end of this year and a month later - in January - we will spend €1.25 billion to pay off these bondholders? How in the name of God can this be justified? How can any European leader tell the people it is fair that we have been saddled with banking debt on top of our sovereign debt? We should pay our sovereign debt, but why should we have to pay private banking debt? This injustice is wrong for Ireland and the European Union. It has damaged the credibility of the European project internationally. If I were to fail to say this today, I would not be fit to be a member of the committee or represent the people who sent me here.
We have to be succinct. This section of the meeting has to finish by 1 p.m. I remind members that we must stick to the substance of the discussion, as outlined in the address made by the Minister of State.
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Lucinda Creighton, back to the committee. She served a tremendous apprenticeship and made a major contribution at this forum. I hope the secretariat will circulate the reports compiled by a group chaired by the Minister of State. As they were produced some time ago, perhaps they might be e-mailed to all members. They set out a blueprint for the relationship between the Minister of State, the Department and the Oireachtas. I mention them with particular reference to the Seanad. Under the Lisbon treaty, there is a role for both Houses of the Oireachtas to participate in considering European legislation. I would like the particular role of the Seanad such as its responsibility to refer legislation back under the new Lisbon treaty rules to be enhanced.
I would like to comment on specific EU legislative proposals that have been passed. I might not be here for the Minister of State's reply because I have to take the Chair in the Seanad at 1 p.m. Ireland is the only EU member state to proceed with the proposal that eel fishing be banned for 90 years. My party was in government with the Green Party when that decision was taken and it was not our wish to proceed with it.
The Senator is hiding behind the Green Party.
It is gone but not forgotten.
Not by the Senator anyway.
Without being blasphemous, I think Senator Terry Leyden is denying it three times.
We fought this issue strongly. Can the Minister of State ensure those contentious areas can be reviewed in relation to the Commission and that they are not set in stone?
The Minister of State in her comprehensive response spoke of restoring Ireland's standing, respect and influence in the European Union. It is a while ago since I was Minister of State with responsibility for trade. I was a negotiator for the Single European Act and I found nothing but respect for our standing at that point in the European Union. I wonder whether it has deteriorated to the extent that the Minister of State must restore it. She also mentioned that later in her script. I regard Ireland as having a high standing. Even though we have gone through difficulties, I still believe in our standing. We ran such successful Presidencies, and I wish the Minister of State well in preparing the 2013 Presidency.
Will the Minister of State also be the Minister of State responsible for the Council of Europe, which represents 800 million people? That is where the Minister of State can play a more active role. As Deputy O'Reilly will be aware, Ireland has an excellent ambassador, Ms Hennessy, in Strasbourg. There is potential there for building up relationships.
I welcome all of the representatives of all of the embassies here. It is useful to have them present.
I thank Senator Leyden for his kind remarks. I hope the Minister of State will respond on the question of the Council of Europe where we participate on a regular basis and make a worthwhile contribution, as the Chairman did in the past.
I welcome the Minister of State and acknowledge all she has already done in a short period with extraordinary success and the clear and focused direction she has set out for the future. I would like her to respond to a number of items and I will try to be succinct in presenting them to her.
First, there is a crucial need for a transparent regulatory system at European level to deal with banking and financial difficulties in the future. It is clear that there has been a failure of regulation domestically. There has also been a failure of regulation in the mainland of Europe if there are the difficulties cited by members previously of reckless lending to our institution to continue in a pyramid-like fashion. That needs to be addressed. I understand there are steps afoot. However, I seek clarification and the Minister of State's perception of where it is going and what contribution she can make to ensure that it will be seen to happen clearly.
I differ from Deputy Dooley in perception of the announcement of the Minister, Deputy Noonan, in America. It was an excellent announcement. It was an important and timely message to Europe, and, if you like, a sovereign statement from a sovereign Government, but the Minister was quick to point out subsequently that it is within an overall European or, to use the jargon, a pan-European context that we will solve the problem. The Minister is correct to state that we cannot expect the taxpayers, either of this country or the mainland of Europe, to accept or be responsible fully for the reckless gambling of the senior bondholders. If they had made profit, there would be silence on the issue. If one puts money in an investment, one must be fit to take both profit and loss. I would like to hear from the Minister of State what steps and progress are being made at a European-wide level to achieve burden sharing. What progress is being made at a Europe level to get a just interest rate? I note that the Taoiseach and the Minister of State, and the Tánaiste, are working feverishly on this, but what I would like to know is how she perceives that progressing.
I have two further points. We must marry economic responsibility, economic prudential management and economic planning with sustaining the economies, and the risk is that the burden will be too great.
Lastly, on a specific question on a different issue, I understand that the less-favoured areas, or what are known as the LFAs, are under review within Europe and that there is, at Commission level, review going on which might give more priority to the southern European states. My concern here is that while there is a need for cohesion, balance and integration, the Irish interests, particularly the Irish agricultural interest, could come into peril here. I seek a response from the Minister of State as we lead into the CAP negotiations on this. As a representative of a farming constituency but also a constituency where employment is based considerably on the food processing sector, I would like be assured of the Minister of State's confidence in and coherent thoughts on the Common Agricultural Policy review and, specifically, the LFAs.
I congratulate Deputy Costello on his new role as Chair of the committee, and also the Minister of State, Deputy Creighton. I can see that she is working hard, is passionate and is committed and has a deep interest in the European agenda. I have three brief points and associated questions.
The Minister of State mentioned in her presentation that she addressed think tanks and she is rightly keen on building key relationships with all of the member states. I wonder, based on her own experience, what influence she is bringing to bear, and what teeth do such interventions have with regard to what other members have stated as well, on an acknowledgement and an awareness of what has happened the Irish people in terms of being victims of a foolish Government, for example, with regard to the blanket guarantee and the responsibility that has put upon the Irish people. In bringing that awareness to the rest of our colleagues in Europe, does that open them more to a reduction in the interest rate? Is that type of conversation taking place? Is the Minister of State discussing the role of the ECB and how it lent to our banks without adequately stress testing them? She is correct in stating that thanks to the Irish people our reform programme is well on track, but we are hurting.
My second question is with regard to the important role of EU scrutiny of legislation and the devolution of such powers to the Oireachtas committees. I wonder whether it is the Minister of State's view that there is a danger of something being lost in doing that when there is not clear responsibility given to one committee. It is a good idea from the point of view of engagement of members but I have argued in another fora for the Seanad having a clear role in the scrutiny of European legislation. Would the Minister of State see that as a role for it?
The EU has wielded considerable influence in many areas of our lives, particularly in areas such as agriculture and the environment, but it has not done so in education. Within some of the member states, there is some excellent practice. Finland, for example, has come out in successive PISA reports at the top in terms of literacy, mathematics, science and problem solving, which all are key indicators and drivers of economic growth. How could we change that, other than by relying on it being ad hoc and up to an individual Minister having such vision? Where there are models of excellent practice, there should be a greater imperative on us to see how we can emulate that in our home countries. I look forward to hearing what the Minister of State has to say on those three issues.
I welcome the Minister of State to the committee. I echo the sentiments of my colleagues and wish her the best of luck in her new role.
Following on from Senator Healy Eames mentioning this committee would have opportunities to scrutinise and offer input into the major issues of concern to Ireland on the EU agenda and her mention of the role of the Seanad, I noted yesterday that legislation on food labelling went through the Parliament. I have been vocal in the Seanad calling for a debate on this issue but we have not had the proper Minister in the House to discuss the issue. We may get the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food but food labelling rests with the Department of Health. In her meetings with the members of Cabinet and the Leaders of the Houses, will the Minister of State ensure that when we are considering the scrutiny of legislation on issues coming to Ireland from Europe, the proper authorities are available to discuss the issues? While there were representatives from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food who have sufficient knowledge of labelling practices, they are not the line managers or those responsible for dealing with the relevant legislation. Will this form part of the Minister of State's discourse with the Cabinet?
Thank you, Senator. That was as comprehensive a round of questions and contributions as the Minister of State presented. We do not expect the Minister of State to cover everything in detail.
Why not?
The Minister of State might be selective in terms of the importance she attributes to the issues, especially in respect of the work we are doing, that is, putting together a work programme. We would especially value the Minister of State's views on the areas important to us.
Several of the questions touched on areas relevant to the committee's work programme. Far be it from me to try to tell the committee its business; that is not my task. However, there are some obvious priorities for the European Union, the Government and Ireland of which the committee is aware and on which it should focus. Understanding and coming to grips early on with the Commission's work programme is important and Barbara Nolan will discuss this in more detail presently. The multi-annual financial framework is another obvious issue because it is critical, and the Chairman pointed out as much in his question. The Chairman asked about the contribution being pitched at 1.05% and whether I or the Government believe that is enough. In my opening remarks I tried to set out that there is considerable divergence of opinion on this.
The Chairman will be aware that several member states wrote a strongly worded letter to the European Commission President last year demanding a zero growth budget, in other words, that there would be no increase in the budget. The countries included France, Germany and the United Kingdom, not insignificant member states. We are aware that the French have a similar interest to us in terms of retaining the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, budget. How the overall demand of no increase in budget can be married to retaining the same level of funding for CAP and how other policy areas can be reconciled is a question requiring member states to look into their own hearts and minds to consider, but the Commission must try to balance these matters as well. It is a complex, complicated procedure. There is a vague aspiration that it will be dealt with by 2012 and I believe there is a strong possibility that this will spill over to the Irish EU Presidency. We may end up being the ones who must reach an agreement not only at EU Council level but through the European Parliament. This brings us back to the critical role of the European Parliament.
The Government's view is that zero growth is not realistic, notwithstanding the austerity being implemented in many member states. It applies not only to the IMF programme states but also to many others, and we must be conscious of that. At the same time, we must ensure we reflect the expansion of the Union, the needs of the new member states and the need to maintain critical policy areas, such as the CAP in Ireland's case. We may be satisfied with the Commission's proposal but many are not. Naturally, there are elements of it where we may have a different view but in terms of the overall funding, we could maintain tentatively that we are satisfied with it. It is early days, however, and the Government must reflect a good deal more on it.
I will meet the Cabinet Ministers, including Deputy Coveney, in the coming two weeks. He will be a key person in terms of the CAP funding. The Minister, Deputy Noonan, and I met the relevant Commissioner when we attended the eurozone ECOFIN meeting two months ago. We set out Ireland's general concern at that stage. The Commission is well aware of it. I met Ms Catherine Day twice. She is aware of our position as well. This is a matter of sensitive negotiation and it will require Ireland to use all its influence and alliances, and we are working on that. When I visited Paris I discussed the agriculture issue in particular with my French counterpart. This work is ongoing and we are at the infant stages of it.
The General Affairs and External Relations Council is important. Effectively, it is a new council under the Lisbon treaty and it is finding its path somewhat. I will welcome views from committee members and the committee as a whole in respect of how I should approach it on behalf of Ireland. It has a key function in preparing the European Council and following up from European Council meetings. That should be at the centre of the committee's schedule and agenda in the months ahead.
Some people asked how the committee could feed into the Presidency. I recommend that the committee set about a body of work on previous Irish EU Presidencies, where we have succeeded and where we have not. The committee could examine some of the more recent EU Presidencies such as the Belgian EU Presidency. Notwithstanding the fact that Belgium does not have a government at the moment - it has had an interim government for some time – those involved have been widely praised for the role they have played, especially with the European Parliament and overall in the way they have handled the EU Presidency. It is uncharted territory in a sense. We no longer have the pomp and ceremony with Heads of Government presiding over European Councils. That is gone and President van Rompuy is in place and is doing a good job. The Tánaiste will not preside over the General Affairs and External Relations Council; Catherine Ashton will do that.
There is a change in terms of the profile of the EU Presidency. I have proposals which I will be discussing in the months ahead. As soon as I have something tangible, I will gladly bring it to the committee. There are certain things I wish to see happen. I am keen to get away from the days when there were cavalcades of black Mercedes cars with outriders going to Portlaoise, Cork or wherever and then leaving again. What value is that for the local community? How does that present Europe to real Irish people? I would prefer to see a grassroots approach. We could do a great deal in culture and the arts. There needs to be awareness of other member states, what they do and what they are about. Last Friday morning, I launched the European charter for rural communities in Cashel, where the event was hosted. More than 250 people were in Cashel from throughout the European Union. If we could replicate what they did throughout the country in towns and villages, it could represent bringing Europe to the people and it would make the EU Presidency relevant and give meaning to it. Although I have some thoughts on this, I do not yet have concrete proposals but I am working on them and I will bring them to the committee. I am keen to hear the committee's thoughts and proposals as well. The sooner the committee can bring these to the table, the better because we are moving forward on this and a great deal will take place quickly.
With regard to Greece, Deputy Donohoe's observations are fair. The problem with the euro crisis, the economic crisis in Europe and globally is that it is unprecedented. Some economists suggest they have all the answers, which is fine. Someone who believes he or she is infallible and has all the answers to everything usually has no idea. It is likewise with politicians. This is uncharted territory. There are a considerable number of sensitivities. Some economic perspectives do not take into account the political perspectives but one cannot isolate the two. Similarly, there are political considerations that do not take into account the economic reality and we must reach a position whereby the two can be married together. Since my appointment in recent months, I have lamented on record the absence in the European Union of the requisite political leadership. I agree with Deputy Mac Lochlainn and others in this regard. We are not all so far away from one another's position and the more pragmatic we can be and the more we can bring heads together, the better.
Senator Healy Eames also mentioned the importance of putting forward our position and setting out the background to what happened. There is no need to bash constantly the former Government as people know the history quite well. We must focus on the future, on the country's present position and on how well Ireland is doing. This must be done together with a concern for what is happening in Greece and an acknowledgement that what is happening there inevitably and invariably affects all eurozone countries, all European Union member states, probably the entire globe and most particularly, the countries that are already in EU-IMF programmes, namely, Ireland and Portugal. It is in Ireland's interests to resolve the Greek issue and the phraseology that appeared in the European Council's conclusions on informal and voluntary roll-overs constitutes a step in the right direction.
I consider the response from the ratings agencies to be disappointing but unsurprising because in recent months it has been evident that the ratings agencies have not been in a position or inclined to give Europe, the eurozone or countries such as Ireland and Greece much of a break. There has been much discussion on this issue. I recall attending a COSAC meeting with Deputies Dooley and Costello during the Spanish Presidency last year, which discussed the need for a European rating agency that could be slightly impartial and perhaps not so influenced by whatever concerns drive some of the independent ratings agencies. This matter must be pursued and while it is being pursued within the European Union, it must be moved forward fairly quickly. While it will not solve our immediate problem, it is one for the future.
We have many lessons to learn from this crisis, which certainly is not over by any shape or means. Everyone knows it is ongoing and as Deputy Mac Lochlainn pointed out well, countries have competing interests. One point I continually lament is the manner in which all member states now appear to put national interest ahead of European interest without understanding the two are interchangeable. Irish interest is the same as European interest and European interest is absolutely linked to the Irish national interest. They cannot be and never will be separated because there is no going back and nor should there be. However, we must have a better understanding of the positions from which we are coming, must end the blame game and must begin to discuss solidarity, co-operation and working to find a lasting solution. Neither I nor any Minister in any government across the European Union has all the answers. However, if we work together to find a pragmatic solution, I believe it will be possible. I believe some steps that have been taken are good. For example, the not terribly sensitively named six-pack is a set of measures that will have a highly positive effect in putting in place much greater clarity regarding economic governance within the European Union in the future. Unfortunately, it does not solve our problems that arise from the past but if we at least learned those lessons, it would be a good thing.
As for Deputy Dooley's comments on the statements made in the United States by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, I acknowledge I was a major critic of previous Ministers making key announcements with fanfare involving the press and media in a press centre rather than the Dáil Chamber. However, in the Minister's defence, he did not announce anything new as this already was known Government policy. Moreover, it is the correct position and in respecting the point made by Deputies Mac Lochlainn and O'Reilly and others, one must take great cognisance that Irish taxpayers, who did not put us in this position, are bearing the brunt of it. I am not satisfied with this either and like everyone else present, I also have a constituency and constituents. The Government must do everything in its power to ensure that those who took the risk will bear the brunt of it and I note it is clear this is possible in respect of the failed banks, namely, Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide. The Minister, Deputy Noonan, and his officials are working hard on that agenda. In the case of those banks that are of so-called systemic importance and which are being restructured as per the announcement in March, this must be made work because those banks are needed. There will be no economy in Ireland unless it has functioning banks. No credit will be made available to SMEs and there will be no indigenous economy or domestic growth in the foreseeable or long-term future unless the banking crisis is solved. I believe the announcement made by the Minister, Deputy Noonan, on 24 March has gone a long way towards achieving this and am satisfied that together with his officials, he is making every effort to ensure there will be a degree of burden-sharing where possible, particularly in respect of Anglo Irish Bank.
On some of the other points raised, without being condescending, I was pleased to hear the tone of Deputy Mac Lochlainn's contribution because I respect his opinions too and he has always been a highly constructive participant in these discussions. He is right about the need for a vision for a social Europe and for a Europe that upholds and campaigns for human rights around the world. He is right about a Europe that can set out a vision for protecting the globe with regard to environmental developments and so on, as well as a Europe that can be a competitive economy and can create jobs. This is in everyone's interests and Europe has been a huge success story in respect of most of this. We must praise ourselves when things work. I do not believe the European project is in any sense irreparably damaged on the international stage. Although we are very good at being critical of ourselves, I was reminded of this point when I attended the Asia-Europe meeting, ASEM, a few weeks ago on behalf of the Tánaiste. Mr. Kevin Rudd, the Australian Foreign Minister, and former Prime Minister, spoke there and stated the people in the European member states needed to reflect and think a little about how far they have come. He went on to note that if people in his part of the world could achieve one hundredth of the integration achieved by Europeans or could even dream of something like a real single market, let alone a common currency, they would jump at the chance. He stated that from an Australian perspective, Europe is a success story and perhaps the member states should desist from constantly criticising themselves, looking inwards and being so negative. I thought that was nice to hear and offered a good perspective from another part of the globe from someone who is well-attuned to international and global affairs.
I welcome Senator Leyden's proposal to circulate the report on the role of the Oireachtas that I chaired when I was a member of the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny. I read it recently, as well as rereading the programme for Government, to refresh myself and to keep at the forefront of my mind what I believe and what I want the Government to implement. I assure the Senator I will raise and mention it with all the Cabinet Ministers, as well as with the Tánaiste, because some of its elements must be moved along. While some are being moved along, there is scope for more. As for the query on whether the decision on eel fishing made by Senator Leyden's own Government can be reviewed or reversed-----
That may be a matter for another meeting.
----- the present Administration has a fairly significant task in trying to deal with the legacy of the previous Government and the decisions that must be taken regarding what is on the table at present. I refer to all the outstanding directives that have yet to be implemented and members will see much more in this regard in the weeks ahead. Consequently, I do not know whether the Government will be in a position to concentrate on reversing the eel fishing ban in the immediate future. However, Senator Leyden undoubtedly will keep the Government on its toes in this regard. As for the Council of Europe, the Tánaiste and I have a dual role in this regard and I certainly will be happy to take an active role. My focus to date has been on the institutions of the European Union but I will be happy to engage with Ireland's delegation to the Council of Europe to ascertain what progress can be made there. Deputy O'Reilly made the point about a regulatory system for banking. This is a work in progress and much progress has been made. I agree with the Deputy regarding taxpayers and the fact we have to do everything in our power to minimise the significant exposure to taxpayers.
The interest rate is also a work in progress. The committee will be familiar with the detail. Ireland has excellent support from the European institutions and I recoil when I hear the European Union as an entity being attacked on the issue of the Irish interest rate. I met the President of the European Parliament, President Buzek, in Brussels and he made it very clear that he is a supporter of a reduction in the Irish interest rate. Likewise, the European Commission has been a great support to Ireland on this issue. President Barroso has been outspoken in this regard as have 26 of the 27 member states of the European Council and we also have support from the OECD and the IMF. Ireland has widespread support but there is an institutional framework and a legal position which demand unanimity at European Council level in order to move this issue along.
The committee will be aware there has been an issue with one member state in particular, a good friend of Ireland, by and large. The French have been good friends of Ireland and we have much in common and we co-operate on issues such as agriculture and other issues. There is a definite willingness to move the process. President Sarkozy and the Taoiseach had dinner together at the European Council and they had ample opportunity to discuss it. I spoke to my counterpart at the last General Affairs Council meeting, Minister Wauquiez, who has now moved on and has been replaced. There is an openness and a willingness to move on this issue and there is ongoing contact between the Department of Finance and the French Ministry for finance. A new Minister is in place and we have to build that relationship. I am optimistic we will see progress.
On the question of the think-tanks, in my view they can provide the opportunity for exercising significant influence as also can meetings with the media and people of influence. This is what I am doing. Everywhere I go I meet with the media, both broadcast and print media and people of influence in think-tanks. I use these meetings where possible to address a public audience attended by the media and others. I am very satisfied that Ireland's reputation is improving. Notwithstanding Senator Leyden's view that Ireland has always been held in good standing, this is not the case. I wish to be honest. I was a member of this committee and I have been involved with European affairs for many years. I was astounded when, just after I was appointed Minister of State I went to Brussels and I met with people in all the institutions. There are many Irish civil servants working in Brussels and they were extremely demoralised, feeling hurt and let down by the conduct of the previous Government who did not engage with the institutions and did not build relationships. The word I heard from many Irish civil servants based in Brussels was that there was an arrogance and a swagger which overcame us during the so-called Celtic tiger era. That is not Ireland, it is not us, it is not our people, it is not the essence of Ireland. This Government is doing everything in its power to get back to a position where people know that we will defend Ireland's interests and we will also be a constructive contributor to the European agenda. We regard this as being completely interlinked with this country's interests.
I may not have answered all the questions raised but I am conscious that two excellent speakers are waiting to address the committee.
The Minister of State has done very well.
I thank the Chairman. No doubt I will be back here for many future exchanges. I thank the committee for its indulgence.
The Minister of State is the first person to address the committee. Her address and her responses to questions have been extremely comprehensive and valuable. I hope this is the beginning, if not of a beautiful relationship, of a good and hard-working relationship. It is very important that the committee and the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs get on well and that there is regular contact and a regular sharing of information and ideas. This committee will always be accessible to the Minister of State. I thank her for her attendance and for her very valuable contribution.