I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Creighton, who will attend the General Affairs Council meeting next week. She has agreed to appear this morning to talk about it. We are delighted once again to see her and are grateful to her for taking the time to attend. We look forward to hearing her remarks in advance of next week's meeting.
General Affairs Council: Discussion with Minister of State
As always, I am delighted to be here with members of the committee. The General Affairs Council, GAC, will have a morning meeting in Brussels on Tuesday, 28 February. I will represent Ireland and the focus will be on enlargement, particularly addressing the issue of candidate status for Serbia, and on the preparation of the forthcoming European Council meeting in Brussels on 1 and 2 March. I will endeavour to inform members of the main issues which will arise and Ireland's perspectives thereon.
Following next Tuesday's formal GAC meeting, Ministers will have a lunch meeting with European Council President Herman Van Rompuy at which we will discuss preparations for the European Council meeting at the end of next week.
Both the general affairs and foreign affairs committees will discuss Serbia and, in particular, the Commission's recommendation from last October that Serbia be granted the status of candidate for EU membership. The European Council considered this issue in December but deferred taking a decision until further progress was shown in the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. The dialogue resumed only on Tuesday this week after a break of more than two months. This week's meetings are to focus on finding an agreement that will allow Kosovo to be represented at regional fora in its own right.
The Foreign Affairs Council will receive a report on progress on the dialogue and will then review the overall political landscape and the dialogue. This discussion will feed into the preparation of Council conclusions for the General Affairs Council. The GAC will consider whether to grant Serbia candidate status and will put forward a recommendation to the European Council meeting on 1 March.
Ireland's view continues to be that Serbia should be granted candidate status. The steps the Government in Belgrade have taken to advance the process, including handing over war criminals to The Hague, should be recognised and supported. While there are legitimate concerns with regard to Serbia's engagement in the dialogue with Kosovo, by making progress on this front a factor in Serbia achieving candidate status, we are introducing new conditionality. The EU will have plenty of opportunities to put further pressure on Serbia in the course of the accession process. The EU's influence over Serbia in these matters will increase significantly once it is part of the process. However, others want to see tangible progress in Serbia's relations with Kosovo before agreeing to grant candidate status. It remains to be seen whether enough progress can be made to allow for agreement at the summit.
Next Tuesday morning's session will provide Ministers with an opportunity to consider the draft European Council conclusions, an initial draft of which has been now circulated by President Van Rompuy. The main items on next week's European Council agenda again will be economic policy, in addition to preparations for international summit meetings and a number of foreign policy issues, including the southern neighbourhood and Syria.
The initial set of draft conclusions are being considered today by COREPER ambassadors in Brussels. It can be expected that a revised draft of the conclusions, taking into consideration comments made by member states, will be now prepared prior to ministerial reflection on Tuesday morning next.
The spring European Council will conclude the first phase of the European semester by way of guidance to member states on the preparation of this year's national reform programmes, NRPs, and stability or convergence programmes, SCPs. These are to be submitted by member states by mid-April. This guidance will be informed by the Commission's annual growth survey and a review of progress in implementing last year's country-specific recommendations and commitments under the Euro Plus Pact. There also will be guidance to the Commission and to the Council on the implementation of the flagship initiatives under the Europe 2020 strategy. An important milestone from the informal European Council meeting on 30 January is the renewed attention being paid to the growth agenda. The Government has been calling for this for some time and welcomes the further development of this emphasis through the European semester. It is an important balance to the established and necessary focus on fiscal consolidation and budgetary discipline.
Members will recall that Ireland joined with a number of like-minded member states in jointly making two submissions to President Van Rompuy ahead of the informal January meeting of the European Council on the growth agenda and on the potential of the digital single market. Much of the thinking advanced in these papers was reflected in the statement on growth that ultimately issued from that meeting at the end of last month and these inputs also helped ensure the growth agenda was given greater public prominence at the summit than at previous meetings of Heads of State or Government.
The Government is building further from its experience last month by way of preparation for the spring Council. In order to maintain momentum and ensure Ireland's growth priorities continue to be reflected, the Taoiseach this week has joined with the Prime Ministers of 11 other EU member states in co-signing a further letter ahead of next month's meeting. This week's joint letter calls for progress in eight specific areas. First, it calls for strengthening governance of the Single Market agenda and raising implementation standards. It also seeks a stepping up of efforts to bring about a truly digital market by 2015, as well as the establishment of a genuine, efficient and effective internal market in energy by 2014. Furthermore, it calls for a strengthening of member states' commitment to the European research area and the provision of the best environment for innovation and entrepreneurship, as well as seeking stronger trade links, including with fast-growing emerging markets, greater ambition in reducing the administrative burdens from EU legislation, better functioning of labour markets and shaping a financial services sector that serves the interests of citizens and business.
The Government hopes these priorities will be appropriately reflected in the outcomes from next week's European Council. It is broadly satisfied with the initial draft of the European Council conclusions, which point in the right direction. However, it seeks the inclusion of clear deliverables and concrete timelines wherever possible and hopes to see further progress in this regard, including on the digital single market, trade and energy matters.
The close attention being paid to the Single Market sits well with the Government's own emphasis on the growth and export potential of Irish small and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups. A better functioning Single Market, including the removal of bottlenecks in key growth areas, is a better environment for Irish exports. The Government is in the process of rebalancing the economy towards sustainable, export-led growth and sees significant potential in unlocking the full potential of Europe's dynamic market of 500 million consumers. It is by creating the right conditions for enterprise that one creates the right conditions for jobs. Today will see the launch of the Pathways to Work initiative, which is designed to help tackle the problem of long-term unemployment by getting people job-ready. This initiative will complement the Action Plan for Jobs 2012 that was launched last week and which concentrates on economic reforms needed to accelerate the growth of jobs. Both these national efforts fit well with the renewed growth emphasis at European level. On the one hand, one must continue to create the right conditions for job creation and entrepreneurship in an increasingly knowledge-intensive and interconnected global economy, while on the other hand, one must improve participation and employment rates with sensible and job-friendly labour market policies. This is the emphasis of the Europe 2020 strategy and the Government believes it to be the right emphasis. Earlier this week, a team from the Commission visited Dublin to explore ways to combat youth unemployment and increase supports for small and medium-sized enterprises. This initiative came out of last month's EU summit, following which President Barroso wrote to the eight member states, including Ireland, which have high youth unemployment levels.
The spring European Council has a formal role in the European semester process and will consider formally the annual growth survey for 2012 produced by the Commission in November last, which is the starting point of the second European semester of economic governance. The key message is that faced with a deteriorating economic and social situation, more efforts are needed to put Europe back on track and sustain growth and jobs. The Government supports the five priorities suggested by the Commission in its annual growth survey, namely, pursuing differentiated, growth-friendly fiscal consolidation, restoring normal lending to the economy, promoting growth and competitiveness for today and tomorrow, tackling unemployment and the social consequences of the crisis, as well as modernising public administration. They align very well with the Administration's own programme for Government priorities, as of course does the very emphasis of the European semester on strengthening the alignment between budgetary priorities and structural reforms. Countries like Ireland, which are in an EU-IMF lending programme, are not obliged to prepare a full national reform programme and stability or convergence programme for submission in April. This is because the extent of monitoring and reporting already in place through the regular quarterly reviews is seen as largely sufficient. The Government will, however, be preparing a comprehensive review of national progress under the Europe 2020 strategy for submission in mid-April and looks forward to engaging constructively with the second European semester.
The spring European Council is expected to call for the Commission's so-called "two-pack" of legislative proposals, which are intended to further strengthen euro area surveillance, to be adopted by June and the Government supports this ambitious timetable. These additional measures are a logical accompaniment to the so-called "six-pack" of legislative measures on economic governance, which entered into force towards the end of last year. Next week's meeting of leaders also will see consideration of progress achieved in implementing the conclusions on innovation and research as agreed by the February 2011 European Council. It is expected the Heads of State and Government will seek to agree a further set of orientations covering this critical area next week. The European Council also is expected to take stock of progress across a range of other interrelated areas, including regulatory reform of the financial sector and the restoration of investor confidence in Europe's banking sector.
The spring European Council also will address preparations for a number of the forthcoming international summit meetings. While the G8 summit will not take place until 19 and 20 May and the G20 summit will follow on 18 and 19 June in Mexico, both will take place before the next scheduled meeting of the European Council at the end of June. Next week's meeting will set out priorities which should be pursued. As Ireland is a member of neither of these international formations, the agreement of an EU position going into these meetings is of course most welcome. The European Council also will consider some key priorities that will guide the EU's preparations for the UN "Rio +20" conference to be held from 20 to 22 June 2012. Ireland believes we must take the opportunity afforded by the "Rio +20" conference to secure renewed political commitment to move forward the sustainable development agenda, including a green economy approach to decent jobs, poverty eradication and increased productivity for the well-being of all the peoples of the world.
As a foreign policy issue, the European Council will discuss developments in the EU's southern neighbourhood one year on from the start of the Arab spring. This will be an opportunity for the Heads of State and Government to review progress since last year's extraordinary European Council in March. The initial draft of the European Council conclusions on the southern neighbourhood focus on orientations to guide the EU's further engagement in the region. The orientations are expected to encourage countries in the region to undertake significant political reforms and express determination to offer more support to partners that make progress towards democratic reform. New initiatives that have been taken by the EU include the launch of the neighbourhood civil society facility, which increases support of and funding to civil society organisations in the region and the so-called "EU spring package", which will see an additional €350 million targeted at the region for democracy support programmes and to promote job creation. Funding for these initiatives comes from the European neighbourhood programme instrument, ENPI. Progress also has been made on the negotiation of deep and comprehensive free trade agreements with countries in the region, although there is an acknowledgment that the pace of these trade talks must be stepped up. While leaders also will address the evolving situation in Syria, draft conclusions on this issue have not, as yet, been made available.
As I mentioned at the beginning of my statement, the European Council will consider the recommendation of the General Affairs Council, GAC, on whether to grant EU candidate status to Serbia. The issue of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen Agreement may also be addressed on 1 and 2 March. Ireland can support the current Presidency compromise proposal. While Ireland's involvement in the debate has been minimal on account of its Schengen status, the Government would like to see progress on this matter in acknowledgement of the efforts made by the Romanian and Bulgarian Governments to meet the requirements for entry to the Schengen area.
In the margins of the spring European Council on 2 March, the new Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union will be signed by the contracting parties and the Taoiseach will sign the treaty on behalf of Ireland. I should make it clear for members that the signing of this treaty is done subject to ratification and thus, it in no way prejudges the national ratification procedures to be followed by each contracting party in accordance with its respective national requirements.
In the case of Ireland's ratification of the treaty, the Attorney General is carefully studying the legal implications and will deliver her advice to the Government in due course. The Government will then consider the matter and will take whatever decisions are necessary. I am, of course, happy to confirm that should a referendum be required, one will be held.
I warmly welcome the activities of this committee in engaging with the new treaty. I am aware that the Tánaiste has previously addressed the committee on this matter and that the committee will be having further hearings, including with a number of guests later today. I am convinced of the absolute need for us to engage with citizens on the terms of the new treaty. We are already looking at what we can do in this regard and I can assure the committee that the Government is prepared to play its full part in this regard.
Following next Tuesday's formal GAC meeting, ministers will have an opportunity for a political discussion with the president of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, concerning preparations for the European Council meeting in Brussels on Thursday and Friday next week.
I very much appreciate the attention of members and I look forward to hearing their comments. I would, of course, be happy to respond to any points or queries, if I can.
I thank the Minister of State for attending the committee today. As she knows, this committee is keen to engage not just with her but also with the Tánaiste. We have sought submissions from members of the public concerning their views on the draft fiscal compact. We are hoping to get some of those and discuss them at the committee at a later date. I am not sure if the Minister of State is aware of that.
Before taking questions from the floor, we have another meeting at 11.30 a.m. so we will have to conclude this part of today's sitting by about 11.25 a.m. I ask members to bear that in mind in terms of the length of their contributions.
I thank the Minister of State and her colleagues for attending the committee as well as for her address to the meeting. Yesterday, her German counterpart also addressed the committee. We would like the Minister of State to convey to him our acknowledgement of his understanding of the situations that prevail across Europe. The committee has conveyed to him in fairly graphic fashion the need for constant recognition of the various economic and fiscal factors that affect all European countries, both in the eurozone and outside it. The meeting was successful and important in informing us of each other's position.
I compliment the programme for the meeting, particularly on the Serbian situation regarding EU enlargement. The position adopted by the EU is the correct one. There has to be encouragement for effort and Serbia has made efforts to move considerably. When that issue was previously discussed by this committee, there were reservations about war crimes. Huge progress has been made in that area in the intervening period, which should be recognised by the EU. It should always be borne in mind that it is far better to raise the bar with a particular reference for the need to comply, through the acquis communautaire or otherwise, rather than creating obstacles that cannot be complied with. European policy has been constructive in that area.
Reference has been made to future programmes. We have been confounded and surrounded by expert opinion for the last five or six years to such an extent that we are now in a confused state. While I am only speaking for myself in this respect, there is also a great deal of confusion throughout Europe. The sad thing is that it took so long to come to the conclusions that appear to have been arrived at now. The good news, however, is that at least conclusions of some kind have been reached.
We hope that the conclusions concerning the fiscal compact and the whole European project - that are now being identified and that have been agreed, subject to ratification - will be supported by each member state purporting to sign up. They will mean absolutely nothing if we do not all adhere to the project. There will always be those who will say it would be better to go one way or another, but if one signs up to an agreement one cannot cherry-pick. We must take it warts and all, and make the best of it. It is not easy and was never going to be so. From an Irish viewpoint, however, we seem to have established a recognition that we are serious about our business, which is hugely important. I congratulate all who have contributed to that huge effort. A major effort is being made by the Government and its senior officials on behalf of the nation at a critical time and that is beginning to pay off. We are not yet near the end of the road but we are working towards it.
With regard to the neighbourhood policy and the Arab spring, the EU should re-examine that area having regard to past experiences. We sat on this committee and others way back when the war in Kosovo was going on and various atrocities were taking place throughout the Balkans. I know that this situation cannot be placed in the same context but there are serious issues that do affect the EU and the rest of the civilised world. They are currently taking place in the neighbourhood and so deserve more attention from the European community.
The Minister of State spoke about whether or not there will be a referendum on the fiscal compact. The referendum should only be held if it is found that the treaty is not in accord with our Constitution. It should be recalled and emphasised that it is not a good policy to instil and install fiscal parameters in a national constitution. If so, it would mean that governments could have major difficulties in negotiating a budget without having a referendum in some cases. That is not the way to govern. If a referendum is required, let us have one and not shy away from it. It may well be a difficult job and issues will have to be confronted. As political representatives we will have to get involved and the people will have to face up to reality as well. We cannot be seen to shy away from any responsibilities we have in the European context and I know we will not do so. I therefore strongly support the proposal to adopt that approach when the time comes.
I thank the Minister of State for her comprehensive overview of next week's European Council meeting. She talked about the Serbian situation and the fact that country is likely to proceed to candidate status after the forthcoming meeting. While that is to be welcomed, has any consideration been given to the situation in Bosnia? Recently, the EU's former special representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr. Paddy Ashdown, attended our committee and set out his real concerns about where Bosnia currently stands. He said it was effectively falling back into a no-go zone in some respects, and that criminality was taking hold there again. He also said that if he had been asked a year ago how things were, he would have said it was not quite so bad but that it has deteriorated significantly in the intervening period. Perhaps the Minister of State could comment on that.
There is some concern that Ireland has not mentioned Bosnia as a priority in terms of the chairmanship role we will be playing in the OSCE. In a recent speech, the Tánaiste did not mention Bosnia as being a priority. I am not suggesting that Bosnia is not a priority for him, but it has not been mentioned, so perhaps the Minister of State could also comment on that matter.
The area of economic policy is also important. I know it is part of the Minister of State's agenda to move beyond talking about the crisis in Europe. We need to get back to examining growth, stability and job creation, which are the important things.
On the question of a referendum, my point has been made clear so I will not get into it.
I want to add to what my colleague said about Bosnia-Herzegovina. I welcome the fact Serbia will seek negotiations for membership of the European Union. Linked with that, however, is the whole question of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the almost breakaway issue with the Republika Srpska. It is important greater interest is taken in this region. There seems to be a lack of engagement between the European Union and Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was suggested the Minister of State's officials examine a recent debate in the Council of Europe on Bosnia-Herzegovina and that she examine the situation in the region.
Will there be a discussion on the trade embargo with the Islamic Republic of Iran? Trade embargoes are serious. If an embargo on Iranian oil exports goes ahead, it will have a detrimental effect on the cost of oil and diesel here which is rising rapidly and on the economy as a whole.
We have had very good relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. I regret we are closing our embassy there. When I was Minister for Trade, I was on a trade mission to Tehran. Our trade has built up with Iran and Ireland is held in enormous respect there. I regret that because we are members of the European Union that we cannot carry on a direct relationship with Iran. We need the trade with the Islamic Republic of Iran. We already have spent an enormous amount of investment in building up trade. The closure of the embassy is a retrograde step in this volatile situation. It is despicable at this point that the Government has decided to close three embassies, particularly the one to the Vatican. The closure of the embassy to Iran has gone below the radar and has not been discussed in great detail.
Deputy Durkan raised the constructive engagement yesterday with the relatively newly appointed German Minister for European affairs, Michael Link. It is important that he saw fit to visit Ireland as one of his first visits to other member states. I had a constructive meeting with him also yesterday in which we covered a range of issues and topics of mutual concern for Ireland and Germany. It was a fruitful and well-received visit. I agree with Deputy Durkan on that and am happy to pass on his thanks.
Deputy Durkan summed up the Serbian matter well. It is fair to say Serbia has made significant strides over the past several years, particularly over recent months. These must be recognised and it is important the European Union indicates strong support for the democratisation process, the strengthening of human rights, the rule of law and institution building there and in the Balkans. We must acknowledge when a country makes significant efforts to comply with and be in a better position to meet the criteria of the acquis communautaire.
I am hopeful about this process. There are no guarantees about the outcome of either our discussions at the General Affairs Council or the European summit next week. I know some member states have significant concerns about Serbia. As it was in December, the Irish position is that we would truly like to see the negotiation process begin and the leverage available through it used to ensure Serbia engages meaningfully with Kosovo on their outstanding issues. These are significant and we cannot afford to turn a blind eye to them. However, we must continue to extend the hand of friendship.
The point on Bosnia was well made. I also met Paddy Ashdown, the former High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, when he was in Dublin recently. I share those concerns. I intend to visit Bosnia, as well as the potential candidate EU countries in the Balkans this summer. It is not fair to say Bosnia is not on the European perspective. It very much is, as well as being on the OSCE's.
The reason it is not being discussed at next week's summit is because it is not in line for candidate status. That is not to say there is not significant engagement from the EU side. We very much support that and see this whole process, beginning with Croatia joining the European Union next year, followed by Montenegro and Serbia, as ultimately leading to Bosnia joining the European Union. That is a firm aspiration and commitment of mine which is shared by the European Union broadly. While I understand the Deputy's concerns and I agree we cannot take our foot off the pedal when it comes to the entire Balkan region, I do not agree it is not a priority for the European Union.
Deputy Durkan spoke about confusion in Ireland and the European Union about the European agenda. I hope and believe the Government can contribute significantly to deepening and widening the understanding of the European agenda and particularly the intergovernmental treaty. It is important the treaty is explained to citizens and that we afford every opportunity to engage with and provide full information on it to them, whether we have a referendum or not. As I stated in my introductory statement, we do not know yet what the Attorney General's recommendation will be on the need for a referendum. I feel strongly that we must have a comprehensive effort to inform and educate Irish citizens about the contents of the fiscal treaty. I have already raised some proposals within my Department as to how we will go about that. We are conducting a scoping exercise to see what we can do within our limited resources. It is an important issue which I take seriously.
It was kind of Deputy Durkan to acknowledge the Government's and our senior officials' efforts in this regard. There has been much negative commentary about the intergovernmental treaty and people may or may not like the outcome. However, senior officials in the Department of the Taoiseach and other Departments were negotiating over the Christmas, putting in significant hours. That is the nature of the work which often goes unrecognised. It is fair Deputy Durkan acknowledged this and I echo his sentiments.
Deputy Durkan also referred to the Arab Spring which will also be on the Council's agenda. It is over a year since the beginning of the Arab Spring. There have been seismic changes in north Africa, some in the right direction, others a cause for concern. This will be on the Council's agenda. I presume the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade deals primarily with it. The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs will attend the Foreign Affairs Council on Monday and there will be another full discussion on the Arab Spring and the various countries involved.
Deputy Durkan also referred to the issue of a referendum and whether we should hold one or not. It is becoming pedantic. The Government is still waiting for advice from the Attorney General. She and her officials need adequate time and room to formulate her view and to communicate that to Government. I believe it will happen soon. I do not know how soon. We will make a decision on that basis.
We have stated that we will hold a referendum if it is necessary to amend the Constitution. If not, then we not hold a referendum. It is straightforward. As I stated, I am very much committed to ensuring that there will be an adequate information campaign, one way or the other. I think I have dealt with Bosnia.
Senator Leyden's views on the issue of the trade embargo to Iran are thought-provoking. I do not necessarily agree with them. It would be bizarre if Ireland were somehow to ignore the International Atomic Energy Agency's report, published on 8 November last, which expresses serious concerns regarding the military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme. It would be highly irresponsible of us to turn a blind eye to that and to ignore the potential consequences. Pressure must be applied to Iran and it must be done with the full force of all member states of the European Union. While the situation is not ideal, I would disagree profoundly with Senator Leyden that Ireland could somehow continue trading with Iran oblivious to the discussions that have occurred, both at an international level and at a European level. First, it would be morally wrong. Second, in the context of the strategy of the international community, particularly the European Union, to put pressure on Iran to stop this highly dangerous and sensitive activity, that would be counterproductive and illogical.
Is it a good idea to close the embassy in Iran?
I will come back to Senator Leyden. There will be time to come back to him but the next questioner is Senator Reilly.
To finish that point-----
I will come back to Senator Leyden.
-----I am not advocating-----
I have made a ruling.
Sorry; it is merely a clarification.
I will come back to Senator Leyden.
I might not be here.
I will come back to Senator Leyden. We have moved on.
The Minister of State is ignoring the fact that the Israelis have an atomic bomb. She does not seem concerned about its bomb.
Senator Leyden, if he stays, will have a chance.
I will not have a chance.
I welcome the Minister of State to the committee.
I will sound like a broken record here; it is one of those questions. To hold a referendum or not to hold a referendum, that is the question. I welcome the Minister of State's comment that should a referendum be required, one will be held.
The Attorney General is working off the text negotiated and agreed by the leaders, but if reports are to be believed, it was negotiated expressly to avoid a referendum. I asked the Minister of State about this in the Seanad last week but I was not able to be there for the reply.
The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Gilmore, told us here on 20 January that Ireland, in common with a number of member states, sought to have the term "preferably" included in the text. Then, earlier this month, the Taoiseach denied in the Dáil a claim by a high-level EU representative that the treaty had been specifically crafted to minimise the prospect of a referendum in Ireland. The Minister of State's counterpart in Germany, here only yesterday, confirmed that European Union negotiators sought to design the fiscal compact in such a way to avoid a referendum in Ireland and told The Irish Times that “we are trying to design everything that is on the table in a way which would be okay in the eyes of the Attorney General and the Irish Constitution so that no referendum is needed”.
I accept what the Minister of State stated, that should a referendum be required, one will be held. However, if we are working on the basis that the Attorney General is working off the text that was agreed, and the agreed text was such that sought to avoid a referendum, can I get clarification on whether that was the case? Who is telling the correct story? Is it the Tánaiste, the Taoiseach or the Minister of State's counterpart in Germany?
Perhaps the Minister of State has an update on how the meeting went with the action team sent over by the Commission. I tried to secure a meeting with the officials when they were over, however their schedule was fairly busy. Last week Commissioner Šefcovic advised us that the youth unemployment initiatives will be financed through the ESF, but most of the fund is already allocated in the Irish case. In the Irish case, we must look at other funds that can be refocused for tackling youth unemployment. Would the Minister of State give us an update or some of the skeleton work in that respect?
We have had a very good relationship with Iran. As Minister of State, I visited Iran with a trade mission. I regret the closure of the embassy in Tehran. I hope that the issue can be resolved and that the Iranians will decide not to proceed with the uranium enrichment that could lead to the creation of an atomic bomb in that region. I accept that fully, but it would be regrettable if an embargo was needed. It is a serious situation. The cost of oil here will soar if an embargo goes ahead and oil is not exported.
I hope that Iran will come to its senses in that regard and that there will be agreement shortly. From that point of view, I accept that the pressure must be applied. I accept the procedure. I accept we cannot go alone. As we have had such a good working relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran, I regret that during those negotiations we do not have a presence in Tehran. Having been there and having met the Iranians who have a close relationship with Ireland, that is my personal view on it.
Of course, I regret the closure of the embassy. I regret the closure of all embassies. I would rather that we could be increasing our diplomatic effort abroad but, like many European member states, that is not the case. Many member states are closing missions in various parts of the world. That is merely the reality of the economic climate. I hope that in due course we might be able to revisit the issue.
The interesting aspect is that shortly after we announced the closure of our embassy, the British embassy in Tehran was besieged and they had to bring home all of their diplomats, as did a number of other member states. Perhaps it is not as straightforward as we might think. I am certainly glad that no Irish officials were in any way hurt or injured at that time.
We will come back to Iran on another day because this issue is one that has been gaining in importance for some time. I do not see any immediate solution to it. I hope that there will be a response from the Iranian authorities. I hope that there will be some recognition that the international community will not accept the actions that have been apparent in the past months, particularly as outlined in the report in November. It is over to the Iranians to prove that they want to normalise relations with the rest of the world, and particularly with the European Union. The ball is firmly in their court.
On Senator Reilly's questions, first, on the Attorney General's advice, I can only give her the same reply which I have given previously in the Dáil Chamber, in the Seanad and to the committee. Our team of negotiators negotiated in good faith on behalf of the State. No mandate was given to any negotiator or official on behalf of the Government to negotiate away from a referendum. That simply is not true. Of course, we took legal advice all the way through. Of course, we took seriously the implications of all elements of the fiscal compact, but we did not negotiate to avoid a referendum. On one element in Article 3, which is the debt brake, we stated all along we did not want to enshrine the debt brake in the Constitution. We stated all along that we intended on doing it via legislation. That was our position. It is in the legislative programme. It was in the legislative programme long before this treaty was conceived of. That was our agenda.
We are committed as a Government to reducing our deficit and to reducing our debt. We are also committed to enshrining strong rules in European law which will be observed faithfully by all members of the eurozone in particular. That is our position which has not changed and will not change. I am not that interested in what I hear on the airwaves or read in newspapers. I simply speak on behalf of the Government in terms of what happened in reality and what is happening. We are determined that this treaty will be ratified one way or another. As I have already said, if the Attorney General advises we need to hold a referendum, we will do so.
I know the Senator has a major interest in the scourge of youth unemployment and has been in contact with my office on the matter. I would have dearly liked to have been able to ensure that she could have met the Commission team. However, they were here for such a short period of time that it simply was not possible. It may be possible to arrange a briefing with officials from the Department of the Taoiseach who are heading up our side of the negotiations in the talks. Last week's meeting was an initial one for the purpose of outlining where we are, the levels of youth unemployment, the areas and sectors. There were some detailed presentations on the specifics of the challenge. We are considering approaches. As Commissioner ?efcovic said when he appeared before this committee, there is not much available in the European Social Fund for Ireland. It is good news in a sense because we are very good at drawing down our funding. While there is not much scope for new funding, there is potential to redirect funds from certain projects and programmes to try to focus specifically on youth unemployment. It is a little early to outline how that might happen, but we are giving it some thought. Obviously Pathways to Work, which is being launched today, is one element of that and we will introduce others in the coming weeks. I would be happy to return before the committee.
That would be great. We had an excellent meeting with Commissioner Šefcovic last week and many members were interested in hearing what he had to say on the action teams on youth unemployment and we would be interested in hearing any update on that in coming months.
I thank the Minister of State for her patience - I had to deal with my voting duty. She might be shocked to learn that we lost the vote. I reiterate what has been said already on Serbia. I do not ask her to give a response because I missed that part, but I can read the transcript. While we have the chairmanship of the OSCE and will have the Presidency of the EU in the near future, we should take heed of Lord Paddy Ashdown's advice and try to utilise that. We want Serbia to come into the EU and for that process to continue. However, we need to take the opportunity to engage with it on stabilising the region.
Regarding the letter from the 12 Heads of Government and State, while obviously any strategy to pull Europe together in moving towards growth and jobs is welcome, it once again points to the fracture within the EU whereby 12 states came together on this, with noticeably Germany and France not part of that. The symbolism of that letter is a divided Europe that does not have a collective vision of its direction and does not have real agreement on the way forward. That is the only conclusion one can draw.
That leads me to the fiscal compact or treaty. Last week we received evidence from the four economists, none of whom was enthusiastic and none of whom argued that it was a panacea. Some of them were very clear that the economics of it was daft. The three key elements of the crisis are the sovereign debt crisis for a number of the states, the banking crisis and the lack of investment. There is no solution to those problems within this compact. It is really a recipe for the cleansing of sins. In Ireland's case it is deeply worrying that the hands of future governments would be tied. This is a permanent and binding treaty and is a legal agreement. Up to now we have had general agreements on balanced budgets. This is now a new legal agreement on how we move forward. The Government's only achievement in the negotiations was to soften and weaken the text that would have necessitated it being put to the people by the insertion of the word "preferably". In return we got the conditionality on the European stability mechanism. We could not avail of any possible future bailout unless we agree to this recipe, which some argue is a recipe for disaster in terms of growth.
We are living in very painful times. That letter was signed by 12 Heads of Government and State. There are 27 members of the European Union. What about a letter from all 27? What about a plan for growth? What about a plan that allows people to move forward and does not cripple the people? The European Anti-Poverty Network has circulated a document outlining the impact of the crisis in terms of poverty and in terms of widening the gap between the richest and the poorest. Where is the solution for them? Where is the strategy to help people who are further impoverished by this crisis and those who have been made unemployed? I know the Minister of State will give an upbeat response as she always does. I believe that in her heart she knows there is something badly wrong at the heart of Europe these days.
My final question is on Iran. Ireland has signed up to further serious European Union sanctions against Iran because it is alleged it seeks to develop nuclear weapons. Israel is not a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. It is widely believed that it has hundreds of nuclear weapons. It is in breach of numerous United Nations resolutions on illegal settlements in the Occupied Territories. It has suffered no sanctions from Europe and indeed the European Union has a very satisfactory trade agreement with Israel. The people in that region see all of that. The International Atomic Energy Agency has put out a line that there may be a possibility that Iran would consider the development of nuclear weapons without a shred of evidence to back up that assertion. When the US intelligence agencies report to their own Senate, they have stated there is no evidence and do not believe Iran is trying to develop that capacity. How can we justify the double standards in this regard thereby exacerbating the situation there given that a solution was provided by Iran in 2005 which would have gone further than its responsibilities under the NPT?
It seems that we always have to have a bad guy in a region. Iran has not invaded a country in more than 200 years, but it has been invaded. Iran has many challenges. I would be very critical of Iran in a range of human rights matters and am not a huge fan of that country. I would be very critical of many aspects of its society and have informed Iranians of my position in meetings. However, there is no evidence that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons and we are taking these sanctions thereby sending a clear signal and causing alarm in the region while we do the complete opposite with Israel. I cannot understand why Ireland as a neutral country with its track record on the defence of human rights and the respect we have in the world would sign up to this strategy without a shred of evidence being provided to justify it.
I ask the Deputy to conclude.
I will conclude with this. I appreciate the Chairman allowing me to speak. I wrote an article about this in The Irish Times today.
There will be no time for a response because we must finish at 11.30 a.m.
I am sure the Chairman can allow one or two minutes.
I urge the Minister of State to consider the double standards. In a response, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade stated he hopes this approach will encourage those with nuclear weapons to desist. I presume he was referring to Israel. Pakistan and other countries in the region also have nuclear weapons. They have this capacity but they are not signatories to the non-proliferation treaty. I do not understand the approach Ireland is taking.
We have also removed our embassy from Iran. The role we could play in the region as a neutral respected voice with no agenda apparently has been undermined by these decisions.
I thank the Deputy for his questions. I must advise the Minister of State that we have a problem in that a number of guests are waiting outside. She has been very gracious with her time today. If possible I would like to address very briefly some of Deputy Mac Lochlainn's questions. Perhaps we can revisit the others at a later stage.
I have already addressed the issue of Iran and I appreciate the comments made by Deputy Mac Lochlainn.
With regards to the letter from Heads of State, we have been criticised for not taking initiatives in advance of summits to try to put our issues on the agenda and now we are being criticised for doing so. I find this very strange. It is always the case that in advance of Heads of Government coming together to agree a text member states put items on the agenda. This is what we have done with many like-minded-----
What about France and Germany?
It is interesting because I had a good conversation with my counterpart from Germany yesterday who agreed with the points we put forward, particularly with regard to the single market and the digital agenda. Not every state will sign a pre-summit letter, but the point is that we will come together next week and agree a text. We agreed a very far-reaching text on 30 January with regard to the growth agenda. I find Deputy Mac Lochlainn's logic a little contradictory.
With regard to the fiscal compact, we have had many exchanges at this committee and I have been before the Seanad on a number of occasions. I have no doubt we will have more debate on this. Deputy Mac Lochlainn has a viewpoint on this and I respect this. I have an entirely different view. It is one element of a solution to our overall problem. It is perfectly logical that Ireland would seek to reduce its deficit and that we would seek to reduce our debt levels. Most objective observers would consider this to be an agenda we should pursue. It is not true to state we did not achieve anything in our negotiations. We achieved very significantly a three-year transition period for programme countries which means we do not have to begin the process of rigorous consolidation until 2018 which is very significant and gives us, and the other programme countries, much breathing space. This was a very significant achievement.
We can have a very long discussion about social policy. The European Union is, and will continue to be, a social project. However, until we resolve the huge debt and economic crisis we have and the massive unemployment crisis that is engulfing us, it is very difficult to see how we can help the poorest people. We need to create wealth to support people and put in place the type of policies and strategies we want. A budget of €1,025 billion has been negotiated for the multi-annual financial framework from 2014 to 2020. This money will help the poorest regions and people in the European Union and this is significant. If we want to increase our capacity to deliver on these resources we must create wealth in the European Union. I would very much like to return and debate this because it is a relevant point and I feel very strongly about it, as the Deputy rightly said.
I thank the Minister of State.
I thank the Minister of State for appearing before the committee. We wish her the very best at the meeting next week and we hope to engage again with her on the discussions next week and future discussions.
Sitting suspended at 11.35 a.m. and resumed at 11.50 a.m.