Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on European Union Affairs debate -
Thursday, 25 Sep 2014

Forthcoming General Affairs Council: Minister of State

I remind members, witnesses and guests in the Gallery that they must ensure their mobile phones are switched off. It is important because the broadcasting equipment will be seriously affected by any telephones which are on.

The first item on our agenda today is a discussion on the forthcoming General Affairs Council meeting. On behalf of the committee, I welcome our new policy clerk, Fiona Cashin, who joins us having taken over from Conor Gouldsbury, who has gone back to college. Fiona is very welcome to the committee.

Also on behalf of the committee, I welcome the new Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Dara Murphy. The Minister of State was for a time a member of this committee and served as Vice Chairman. In my tenure as Chairman, I have seen the departure of not just one, but two vice chairmen. To lose one is a misfortune, but to lose two is an education. The lesson is that if one wants to get on in this world, become the Vice Chairman of this committee. We do not have a Vice Chairman as yet as one has not been appointed. I ask my colleagues in Fine Gael to ensure we get one as soon as possible to allow for the correct and proper functioning of the committee. If they could bring that back, I would appreciate it.

We will do, Chairman.

The Minister of State is very welcome back. We thank him for meeting with us today to discuss the forthcoming General Affairs Council meeting, which is taking place next Tuesday. I assume we will be talking about the Europe 2020 mid-term review, which was discussed back in July. Did the Minister of State attend that meeting?

It was his first General Affairs Council.

The Europe 2020 strategy is of importance to Ireland and, hence, to the committee. In July, we published a call for public submissions on the issue and we are pleased with the response. We received a number of submissions. For the Minister of State's information, I note that we have agreed to ask those who made submissions to attend to present them to the committee. That process will take place over the next few weeks and will probably finish by the end of October. We will keep the Minister of State abreast of the outcome of those meetings. I invite the Minister of State to make his opening remarks.

It is a great privilege for me to come back as Minister of State to the committee, the membership of which I very much enjoyed. I know the members personally and very well.

This is an excellent committee, which functions with a strong sense of agreement. I wish Fiona well in her new job and thank the many members of the diplomatic corps who are here today for the support they have given during my first few weeks in office. With regard to the position of Vice Chairman, I feel reasonably secure in this job while there is no Vice Chairman in place, but perhaps the Chairman might take the job himself if it seems to be the only way possible.

Chairman and members, I am pleased to have this opportunity - my first - to brief the joint committee ahead of the next General Affairs Council, which takes place in Brussels Monday 29 September. I will also take the opportunity to update the committee on the previous General Affairs Council on 23 July and the informal meeting of EU foreign affairs Ministers in Milan on 28 and 29 August.

First, I would like to say a few words about the renewal in our European Union institutions. Since my predecessor last met with this committee, a new European Parliament has been elected, opening a new legislative cycle. Activity was slow over the last few months and in the run-up to the European elections. Jean-Claude Juncker was elected President of the European Commission and has since announced his intentions with regard to the membership and structure of the new Commission, which is expected to take office on 1 November. Meanwhile, at the European Council meeting on 30 August, Donald Tusk was elected President of the European Council. He will assume his position on 1 December.

Phil Hogan's designation as Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development is extremely welcome. Agriculture, as we are all aware in this country and as the committee is certainly aware, accounts for 40% of the European Union's budget. As well as testifying to Mr. Hogan's own abilities and experience, the designation reflected Mr. Juncker's appreciation of the huge contribution that Ireland has made to EU policy generally and in particular to the CAP reform package that was implemented last year.

Interestingly, while unveiling his new team, Mr. Juncker announced several important changes to the structure of the European Commission. Chief amongst those is the introduction of project teams led by Commission Vice Presidents. These teams will reflect the priorities of the Juncker Commission and the strategic agenda set out at the European Council in June. The structure is intended to bring a greater focus and a more collaborative approach to the work of the Commission.

Mr. Juncker has also announced the creation of a new post of First Vice President, which will be filled by the vastly experienced Dutch foreign Minister, Mr. Frans Timmermans. This is a new post and he will be responsible for better regulation, inter-institutional relations, the rule of law and the charter of fundamental rights. We were saying yesterday at our meeting that he could perhaps be described as a Chief Whip type of character for the President. He will also play an important role in ensuring that the Commission proposals respect the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, which are important to us. These and other changes announced by the President-elect will take effect when the new Commission takes office in November and their full impact will only become clear after that. Alongside other members of the Government, I look forward to meeting the new members of the Commission and working constructively with them in the years ahead.

I will now turn to the forthcoming General Affairs Council. One of the principal items for discussion at that is the preparation of the agenda for the next meeting of the European Council on 24 and 25 October. The main focus of the European Council will be on climate change and energy policy; as the Chairman will be aware, the Council is now broadly known as the climate change council. Following discussions at the June European Council, the October European Council is due to take a final decision on the new Climate and Energy Policy Framework for 2030. Headline targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions and the share of renewable energy for energy efficiency are expected to be agreed. The European Council will also decide on further measures aimed at enhancing Europe's energy security and on specific 2030 interconnection objectives.

The discussion at the General Affairs Council - and also at the informal meeting of energy and environment Ministers in Milan on 6 October - will be key opportunities for member states to state their positions in the run-up to the October European Council. In parallel, high-level meetings at official level have taken place in Brussels in recent weeks in order to identify the building blocks for agreement in October. The aim of agreeing these targets in October is to allow the European Union to take the key leadership role in agreeing global climate change targets at the UN in next year's crunch conference in Paris.

Ireland is committed to working with other member states, the Commission, and President Van Rompuy to find our way to the shared EU objective of ambitious climate and energy targets. This objective was clearly articulated yesterday by the Taoiseach in New York. The targets agreed by the EU must be on the basis of a workable consensus that is fair and affordable for all. Therefore, a key issue for the European Council will be to decide on the issue of burden-sharing - in other words, how member states' contributions to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that do not come under the emissions trading scheme, ETS, are distributed. We can come to that later; it is a technical difference. Ireland is highly unusual among member states in that emissions from agriculture amount to 40% of our non-ETS emissions. That is significantly higher than any other European Union country. The scope for reduction in this sector is limited because Irish agriculture is already extremely carbon-efficient due to the predominantly grass-based nature of our beef and dairy production. In fact, Ireland is a world leader in climate-change-efficient agriculture.

We firmly believe that the European Union must develop a coherent and cost-effective approach to reconciling its goals in relation to global food security and sustainable food production on one hand and climate change mitigation and adaptation on the other. Thanks in significant part to Ireland's consistent stressing of the importance of the agriculture issue, there is now a growing appreciation of the need within the European Union for a holistic approach to agriculture and land use. We will continue to press for such an approach.

The agenda for the October European Council will also include economic issues, allowing Heads of State and Government to assess the current economic situation and to review measures to stimulate growth and job creation. Recent data suggests that downside risks to growth have materialised and that economic recovery has stalled in the euro area. There is a considerable variation in the situations in different member states, and on the positive side, a number of the periphery member states are showing signs of recovery, ourselves included. The need for flexibility within the European Union's fiscal rules to boost potential growth is likely to be considered by European Union leaders.

The Italian Presidency will be hosting a conference on employment on 8 October to consider how the European Union can stimulate job creation, particularly with regard to the vexatious issue of youth unemployment and how it can be addressed. Following discussion of the agenda for the European Council, the General Affairs Council will move on to consider the implementation of the strategic agenda for the Union in times of change. The committee will be aware that the strategic agenda, which was agreed at the June European Council, identifies five overarching priorities for the Union in the coming years. First, stronger economies with more jobs; second, societies enabled to empower and protect; third, a secure energy and climate future; fourth, a trusted area of fundamental freedoms; and fifth, effective joint action in the world, which the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Flanagan, is engaged in. Discussions will focus specifically on follow-up to the first chapter of the strategic agenda, a Union of jobs, growth and competitiveness. Ministers are expected to review initiatives undertaken in this area since the launch of the compact for growth and jobs in 2012 and examine aspects such as economic policy co-ordination, investment, employment, trade and the Internal Market. It is then intended by the Presidency and the Council that it will consider if and how there might be scope to improve follow-up on those at national and European Union level.

The Government welcomes the unambiguous commitment in the strategic agenda to strengthening the economic recovery that is now under way throughout Europe, although it remains fragile. We believe more can and must be done through the work of the new EU institutions to respond to the unacceptably high level of unemployment. As the Taoiseach indicated after the June European Council, this will mean restoring normal lending conditions through a fit-for-purpose financial sector and maintaining the strong momentum on the Single Market and external trade agendas. These will shape a regulatory environment that is more supportive of entrepreneurship and addressing investment bottlenecks more generally, including the crucial areas of transport, energy and telecommunications infrastructure, which is of particular relevance to Ireland. We are keen to ensure that we are preparing our economies for the future.

In particular, Ireland welcomes the explicit acknowledgement of the important role of the European Investment Bank within the strategic agenda. There has already been an increase in EIB support to Ireland in recent years, and we see the potential for further development of the project pipeline in the period ahead. This will be particularly crucial in the area of financing small and medium-sized enterprises that will create most of the new jobs that we seek to create. This agenda item is a response to the agreement reached at the July General Affairs Council.

My commentary is a little longer than normal because it covers three Council meetings. I hope the Chairman and committee members will indulge me in this regard. I am covering three meetings whereas normally it would be one. In response to the agreement reached at the July General Affairs Council, it has been decided that to more effectively discharge its duties under the Lisbon treaty the General Affairs Council will hold a monthly thematic discussion on the strategic agenda priorities. This will be the first such thematic discussion. I am pleased that the first discussion will be focused on the area which is clearly of most importance to Europe - that is, the area of jobs and growth.

Of lesser significance for Ireland, perhaps, but also on the agenda is the adoption of conclusions in respect of the EU strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian region. This strategy covers eight countries, including Croatia, Greece, Italy and Slovenia from the European Union and Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia on the non-EU side. This is the first time one of these strategic groups has involved non-EU countries. While we are not in this group, there are several members from within the European Union, and this is the first time a strategy for a region involving EU and non-EU countries has emerged. This is very much to be welcomed.

Under any other business, the General Affairs Council will also receive an update from the Presidency on the Friends of the Presidency group, which is meeting today. This is an official-level working group at the initiative of the Italian Presidency. Against the background of the strategic agenda agreed by the European Council, it will examine a range of issues linked to the functioning of the European Union system. Ireland is represented at senior official level in the group. Our view is that the Friends of the Presidency group must focus on identifying and agreeing practical ways in which the Council and the European Union institutions can work more effectively together. We believe this consideration should be within existing parameters. Now is not the time for Europe to get distracted by excessive bureaucratic decisions.

I will set out a brief update on the Europe 2020 strategy following the July meeting of the General Affairs Council. The July meeting noted an Italian Presidency roadmap towards the Europe 2020 strategy mid-term review, scheduled for the 2015 spring European Council. This sets out a series of important political exchanges which will take place across relevant Council formations in the coming months. In turn, these will feed in to a summary report which the Italian Presidency will prepare for endorsement by the General Affairs Council on 16 December prior to presentation to the European Council on 18 and 19 December.

As the committee is aware, Europe 2020 is the EU strategy to support growth in a smart, sustainable and inclusive way. This ten-year plan, which was adopted four years ago in 2010, is based around five key headline targets in the areas of employment, innovation, climate and energy, education and social inclusion. These are translated into specific goals for each member state, and progress is monitored through the European semester. It is clear that performance against these five areas has been rather mixed and has been overshadowed by the financial crisis. For the EU as a whole, the climate and energy and education targets are broadly on track. The innovation target is unlikely to be met based on current projections. Sadly, we have seen a deterioration on the employment and social inclusion targets, as we now have fewer people at work and more people at risk of social exclusion than when the targets were set in 2010.

The Government strongly welcomes the Italian Presidency roadmap and agrees that it is now time to renew engagement with Europe's post-crisis growth strategy. It is clear that unemployment remains unacceptably high, and we need to unlock a new wave of EU-wide investment supporting growth that is smart, sustainable and inclusive. The mid-term review will also be informed by the public consultation launched by the committee on 5 May, which will remain open until 31 October.

I was here when the Secretary General of the Commission, Catherine Day, appeared before the committee in January. She emphasised the importance of strong stakeholder engagement and public consultation, including from national parliaments. I commend the Chairman and the committee on the initiative it has taken in inviting public submissions to inform deliberations in this regard. I understand the committee will also be lining up more public sessions next month and I look forward to being kept abreast of these.

The July General Affairs Council included a presentation from the Italian Presidency on its work programme. This was very welcome, particularly in respect of its focus on jobs and growth.

On 28 August I participated in an informal meeting of Ministers with responsibility for European affairs in Milan. This meeting was exclusively focused on institutional themes relating to the function of the Italian Presidency. The informal meeting also discussed ideas for a radical reorganisation of Council configurations.

However, while member states were open to looking at modifications to the existing arrangements, there was little support for the more radical ideas suggested.

I met the German Minister with responsibility for European affairs, and strengthening ties with key European partners is a priority for me. I look forward to working with the committee in continuing to develop these relations. I apologise for the length of my submission which covered a number of meetings. I am very happy to take any questions committee members may have.

I thank the Minister of State for a very comprehensive overview of what has gone on in recent months. We appreciate that a number of meetings have taken place. As a former member of the committee, the Minister of State was well abreast of what was going on and his knowledge and experience shines through. His contribution today was very impressive, if I may say so. I have a number of questions and I will begin with the economic issues. As the Minister of State is aware, the article 13 conference established to monitor performance of the fiscal compact will take place next Monday and Tuesday in Rome. There will be an attendee from the committee and from the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform. ECB policies will be discussed and I also expect a discussion on Prime Minister Renzi's proposal that capital investment might be treated outside normal deficit procedures. Has the Minister of State come across discussions on this? How is the discussion evolving at European level?

My next question is on the rule of law. From his time as a member of the committee, the Minister of State is aware we started a number of discussions on this area. In recent weeks and months some European countries have started to question the European model of democracy, suggesting the democratic model pursued by European countries is too liberal and that we should look at a more illiberal democratic regime. Do we have thoughts on this? What discussions on this are taking place at European level?

With regard to the strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian region, I am glad to hear it covers the countries mentioned by the Minister of State. The committee visited Bosnia-Herzegovina last year and this year it visited Albania and Montenegro. We were very impressed with the performance of these countries and the steps being taken to improve their relations with the European Union. The Minister of State mentioned that he met the German Minister with responsibility for European Union affairs recently. I am aware the German government decided asylum seekers from Bosnia-Herzegovina, Albania and former Yugoslav countries which are non-EU members will no longer be entitled to asylum because the situation in their homelands has become peaceful. Is this view shared at European level? Are all countries, including Ireland, moving towards this model? I ask Minister of State to shed some light on this.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Murphy, and congratulate him on his appointment. I wish him well. I agree with the Chairman's remarks on the extremely impressive quality of his report to us, which is appreciated. I agree with the Minister of State's remarks that an item at the top of the agenda will be to strengthen relationships with his counterparts in other countries. It is important that we continue to build and solidify strategic relationships and areas of mutual interest. I salute this.

It would be inappropriate to let today pass without congratulating our Irish Commissioner-designate, Mr. Hogan, on the fact that he is Commissioner-designate for agriculture and rural development, which is a hugely important appointment for the country. It reflects very well on his renowned abilities and enormous political experience and on the standing of the country in the European community. It is heartening for all of us and we are very pleased. It merits recognition on this occasion.

With regard to the Minister of State's remarks on climate change, he is correct that it is important that Europe shows a lead and that we agree on targets and a strategy. As the Minister of State is acutely aware, the big issue is to bring India and China on board. We must provide moral leadership and coax and encourage. I am interested to hear the Minister of State's response on this. Money spent on innovation and research is critical. We must accept that nuclear power must be a major part of the solution. We must all accept the recent UN reports on climate change. If one accepts the gravity of the situation and the imminent danger to our people, and if we believe what we are being told, when my 13 year old son is my age he will have catastrophic climatic and food conditions. This is how imminent, graphic and serious the matter is, and with this in mind, there is no way we can resolve the issue without nuclear power being part of the solution. There has been much development in nuclear fusion, nuclear power has become a much safer option and the waste matter is being dealt with. What are the views of the Minister of State on this issue? How are we looking at it? The nuclear dimension cannot be left out if we are to resolve the problem, although perhaps it is not politically correct. There have been big developments and innovation in the area and it must be examined.

This country is a shockingly bad example of the not in my back yard, NIMBY, factor. We must get over this with regard to issues such as wind turbines. We must become much more courageous and patriotic with a greater sense of posterity. We can no longer use the NIMBY syndrome to deny a generation already born a proper living and proper environmental conditions. We cannot continue to block progress with affectations and fanciful objections to every development in the country. We must bite the bullet on this, as it must be bitten throughout Europe.

This country has huge potential for wave energy, which is an underexplored resource for dealing with climate change. Will the Minister of State comment on this? To what degree do we have an input in the area? Climate change is such a serious matter it merits emphasis. We must consider the nuclear option and examine it comprehensively without inhibition. In my view there is no avoiding it. We must also examine the NIMBY syndrome and whatever planning changes must occur so that jumped-up individuals with affectations can no longer stop progress which will save a future generation. This can no longer be allowed and we must stand up to it. This country must show leadership. We must also examine wave energy, and other energy sources such as solar, as natural ways to deal with the issue.

The Minister of State made the point we have grassland agricultural production and that we must balance the climatic appalling vista - to use the hackneyed cliché - with feeding our people. The Minister of State's point on grassland production was relevant and I agree with him.

We need a holistic approach.

The second major theme of the Minister of State’s address was the greatest moral imperative, apart from climate change, confronting the Minister of State and this and every committee of the House, namely, joblessness throughout Europe. Would the Minister of State accept that we need stimulus packages across mainland Europe and a Keynesian solution to create jobs? Would he agree that we need the initiative, suggested by Mr. Lorenzo, about keeping capital expenditure on infrastructural development that would lead to job creation outside normal budgetary arithmetic so that it would not be subject to the strictures of the fiscal compact, as our esteemed Chairman stated? It is very important. We need this measure and the stimulus.

The Minister of State’s opening statement, report and priorities are very impressive. He and the Government have two jobs to get done in Europe, namely, action on climate change and job creation. Every job we create gives dignity to a person and his or her family, saves on welfare, makes more money available to those in need, and creates a better society. I take the Minister of State’s point about stalling, and that is why we need a stimulus package. It is nonsense to do a bookkeeping exercise that does not have job creation at its centre. The barometer of whether we are succeeding at European level is the number of people working and, particularly, youth unemployment, which is a travesty. Where are we regarding the Youth Guarantee scheme and the initiative that was meant to be taken? While it is happening to some degree, we need greater input. I commend the Minister of State on an extraordinarily impressive start.

I welcome the Minister of State. I hope I do not repeat anything he said or anything in Deputy O'Reilly’s lengthy contribution. I will try to furrow a new path of questions. I wish the Minister of State the best of luck in his new job. He gave us a lengthy report and I have some questions that do not necessarily flow with his presentation. It is often repeated that for Europe to develop, grow and work its way out of the crisis, we must strengthen its competitiveness. Although I read it regularly, I do not fully understand what it means. Could the Minister of State explain it to me? While we all understand what it means to be competitive, in which areas is Europe uncompetitive? What are we trying to achieve by way of competitiveness? Where are we failing to compete with other markets? Could the Minister of State give some examples?

On fiscal matters, I was impressed when I heard the Italian Presidency speak of flexibility in fiscal prudence, that we could possibly borrow more outside the strict constraints with a view to injecting the funds into job creation. The Irish Government may have given some sort of tacit support to that statement. What are the Minister of State's personal views on it? We have come through an horrendous time here and are coming out the other end. The performance of 17 EU countries has been monitored and worries were expressed about the French and Slovenian economies that there was a risk of non-compliance with the budgetary targets. Are we to be reassured by anything more recent that the French are on target? We had heard terrible things about Slovenia, that they were going to go for a bailout.

Could the Deputy repeat the last question?

It was decided to monitor 17 EU countries and come up with country-specific recommendations. Part of the review was to deal with the fiscal obligations under the excessive deficit procedure, and the Commission was worried by the figures from France and Slovenia that they may not be in compliance with the budgetary targets that were set. We heard about Slovenia supposedly going for a bailout, which did not happen. Are matters improving? Could the Minister of State give us his views on those two countries and whether they have overcome these observations by the Commission?

One of the key areas, which the Minister of State mentioned, is energy security. Europe has taken a position on Russia, and rightly so. Russia is a major supplier of energy resources for Europe. Is the Minister of State happy that the balancing act of sanctions against Russia and the net counter-effect on Europe has been fully worked out? Now that the Russians have refused to allow imports of European agricultural produce, there is a very worrying trend in Europe that we are hurting ourselves more than we are hurting the Russian economy. Does the Minister of State have any views on it?

I concur with what the Chairman said about the Adriatic and Ionian regions. The Minister of State knows I am fanatically supportive of Albania's progress. When we were there, we saw them breaking their hearts to comply with expected standards. They did that and jumped a very important hurdle. I ask that the Minister of State continue to give Albania, Montenegro and the other countries further support.

It is great that we are on track regarding the climate, energy and educational issues. The most significant tragedy and challenge for Europe and, by implication, Ireland is our failure to meet poverty reduction goals. Europe is slipping in this field. Social inclusion is a very important issue. We hear about it in Ireland in terms of social housing, homelessness, drug addiction, street sleepers and beggars. These are the visual symptoms of a country that has not managed its social inclusion measures properly and where poverty reduction goals are not being reached. It is wonderful to see children celebrating their exam results and doing phenomenally well. Access to university is at an all-time high, educational qualification standards have risen immensely, and it is wonderful. I worry, however, that if we do not tackle the other end of the scale, much of the good work will be undone because no society can develop a proper economic, social infrastructure if it allows the growth of social alienation, disadvantage, homelessness and drug addiction to continue.

I will do my best, using some fancy footwork, not to repeat the three excellent contributions that have been made. I congratulate the Minister of State on his elevation to office and wish him well. We in this committee will do everything we can to be supportive, and even inspirational from time to time, in the important work he must do.

I have four questions which necessitate something of a preamble. The European institutions have learned one thing from the banking, financial and fiscal crisis that Europe has just come through, and that is the need for decisiveness. From economic, fiscal and speculative points of view, decisiveness and the expectation of a quick and standing decision will always stabilise everything around, markets in particular. I recall the European Central Bank president, Mr. Mario Draghi, made an intervention at a crucial time by saying that whatever needed to be done would be done. That was a clincher. That was not what had happened previously. A great deal of doubtful, negative speculation had followed every crisis, along with a great deal of criticism levelled at the European Union. The euro was supposed to be in decline or dead. Several economies, including the Irish one, were supposed to be in decline or dead. The European institutions were supposedly broken. We got advice from all centres around the table in this very room, as the Chairman will recall.

It is important to remember how far we have come since those days.

Absolutely. We were told that the economic policies being pursued in this country were wrong, that they would not work, and various economists worldwide were quoted and quoted themselves regularly, all of whom were wrong. Thanks to Mr. Draghi, that intervention at a crucial time was a decision, and decisiveness counts. On the same basis, the next challenge is European recovery. Ireland has done its bit in that area. We have shown that we are capable and the people of Ireland have shown by their sacrifices that they are willing to withstand great hardship to achieve a particular objective. All credit is due to the political leaders and to the people of this country for the sacrifices they made and the risks they took. We hope future generations will appreciate that.

The next question concerns economic recovery for the rest of Europe. Might it be possible for the European institutions to carry out an audit of the infrastructural deficits throughout the European Union that might inhibit rapid economic recovery and would also dramatically affect the future development of the European Union's ability to employ and generate economic impact?

By infrastructure would you include broadband? Would you include something like educational attainment in that definition?

Absolutely everything, Chairman. It does not require rocket science to carry out such an audit. The information should be readily available. On foot of that we should take into account that interest rates throughout Europe are now at an all-time low. During the economic boom in this country we were regularly informed that interest rates were at an all-time low. Why was the economy not progressing? It was simply because the moneys were used for speculative purposes in non-essential areas and in a way which created inflation in the housing sector in particular. Why not harness the current low interest rates, given that it is appreciably more valuable to invest in something that will give a greater return than to invest in a lending institution at the moment?

Who is the lender of last resort?

This is the thing I am coming to. That is correct. It should be possible for the European institutions to invent a structure whereby it would be more attractive for investors of all kinds - savers, strategic investors, venture capitalists - to invest in areas that will create long and short-term employment. It should also be possible to identify the projects that are most likely to produce results in a rapid fashion. That is what is required. It is a no-brainer. I know what the European institutions will say, that the member state governments cannot show these things on their balance sheets and so on. They do not have to show them on their balance sheets. If they create the right structure, they will do it right. That is my second question, whether the European institutions together can come to a conclusion on this.

I wish to return briefly to my colleague's reference to energy. Climate change is of great importance. It can be a double-edged sword. It can backfire on those with the best intentions depending on how we go about it. I agree entirely with the Minister and my colleagues, who have identified this as a key area. We should be very careful to recognise that our major industry is agriculture along with the pharmaceutical industry and the IT sector. This was the mainstay of our economic recovery in recent years. If we had not had those three areas, we would be as stagnant as the rest of the eurozone is at the moment. That is not saying we have achieved all of our objectives, but it follows that we need to be very careful in our selection of our options. We need to recognise, as do other European countries, that in 15 or 20 years from now there will be a greater dependence on energy supplies that are non-carbon-creating. How we generate electricity is going to be important. I do not happen to agree with my colleague in relation to the nuclear sector. That is just my personal opinion. We have to make a choice. There is not a chance on this earth that this country is going to be able to provide for its own energy requirements unless we do something major in the very near future. I reject emphatically the notion in some quarters that we are adequately supplied already. We are not. We do not have security of supply. There are many internal and external factors that will dramatically affect our objectives in that area.

If we are to achieve the kind of employment levels that we require over the next few years, we require a similar strategy here in Ireland to the one I have suggested for identifying infrastructural deficits across Europe. This involves energy, communications, air, sea and land transport and access to same for all the people in Europe, thereby attempting to bring them all together. There is great potential for achievement if this can be done.

I favour wind energy as a first option for ourselves. I have always held that view. I believe in recognising the aesthetics of the area and in having good planning policies along with due deference to all health issues that must be complied with. My problem with the nuclear sector is that notwithstanding scientific advances in that area, there is no known way yet to dispose of nuclear waste. Unfortunately, it was found with the Fukushima reactor not long ago that no matter how much technology one has, if the fracture occurs there are problems.

I was so saddened, as I am sure were many people, when I saw that relatives of the victims of the Dutch air disaster were prevented from collecting their dead and visiting the scene of the crash in the Ukraine. They were prevented by a number of hooded, masked men purporting to be soldiers and defending something that I am not too sure about. In my knowledge of history I have never known there to be a situation, even in a war, where people were prevented from collecting their dead. It is very important that the institutions of the European Union fully recognise the message contained in the prevention of European people from attending the scene of their personal trauma. There was no retribution and no way in which they could overcome the situation that was laid before them.

It would not be fair to expect an answer to every question, as some points were more for information rather than seeking a direct reply. I am sure the Minister of State, bearing the time in mind, could probably answer the questions he deems most relevant.

I will take guidance from the Chair and start with his question. I thank the members for their detailed questions, and if I do not cover everything I would be happy to go through individual questions. The Chairman's question goes to the core of discussions across the Continent, and he is correct that Italian Prime Minister Renzi has addressed the matter. It concerns the question of what flexibility exists within existing treaties with respect to capital investment, stimulus and the Stability and Growth Pact, including any preventative arms.

We believe there is sufficient flexibility to accommodate additional investment spending. Some member states are very hawkish in this regard, and it is quite a public debate. There is provision within the rules for an extension to the deadline when correcting excessive deficits, provided a member state has undertaken the required amount of consolidation. We also feel very strongly that public spending differs completely from day-to-day expenditure. We know it is mostly accepted by economists that this gives rise to greater growth within member states.

The argument, therefore, is that the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact should be relaxed somewhat in the short term to facilitate productive spending, given the potential we could have. A German Minister of State, Mr. Michael Roth, recently visited Ireland, and the German Government has a very strong position on the rule of law. I discussed this with the Minister of State, Mr. Roth, and we support the German Government in that regard. We will assist Germany, which is driving the issue with a couple of other countries very strongly. This links to Deputy Durkan's question regarding the Keynesian type of injection required within our Continent.

I share Deputy Joe O'Reilly's views with respect to Deputy Phil Hogan. The Deputy focused on wind energy. It is interesting that the European Investment Bank, which is stepping into the stimulus area, as the Chairman mentioned, has already invested in Ireland within the wind energy sector. It is noteworthy that following the incident in Japan, the largest economy in Europe, Germany, is moving from nuclear energy.

Many members discussed climate change. With regard to carbon emission targets, credits can be applied by virtue of how much renewable energy we have. While we maintain and argue strongly that agricultural emissions are different from industrial emissions, by virtue of the importance of food security and so on, equally, we can and must strive to use renewable energy as a source not just of our own energy security but also to help achieve the sort of climate targets we must meet. The Deputy is right in that we want to meet the targets not just to achieve a European target but to maintain the sustainability of our environment for future generations. The Deputy is spot on with his reference to India and China. There will be a big push at the next European Council meeting to agree targets within Europe so we can take a leadership role for the Paris negotiations. Europe does not wish to follow, trying to sort out its own position before talking to the rest of the world. We want to agree our position first so that the European Union can take that leadership role.

Deputy Eric Byrne would probably be very pleased with some of the early commitments we have from President Juncker. He has spoken about the mobilisation of an extra €300 billion in the next three years to make better use of the European budgets and the European Investment Bank. This is really to try to address the key areas where we have failed. The Deputy asked about competitiveness. Europe will always find it hard in this area with respect to wages, as we have a well-paid and well-functioning economy that supports a very strong social protection network. Half of social protection money in the world is spent within Europe, and that is something we want to protect.

When we speak of competition, we must consider innovation and the research and development space. We compete by virtue of the education of citizens, their training and the degree to which Europe can be a market leader across a broad range of areas. In this country, for example, we have the greenest, cleanest and best production of agricultural products, and other countries in the European Union have their own specialties. The research and development space is very important, and we also need to deal with other key competitive areas such as tax.

I share Deputy Durkan's views about oil and gas targets, including the degree to which we will have to be fully aware of the requirements over the next number of years. There has been much talk - including today - about the focus over the last number of years on jobs and investment. Although there may be a dispute within the European Union about the way investment stimulus can get into the economy, given the weakness of growth and low inflation across such a large proportion of the Union, that voice is starting to be heard in a more urgent fashion.

I have covered the broader points. The Chairman is free to jump in if there is anything else that must be dealt with.

The Minister of State has covered the main points. I thank him for attending today and I believe he will return in a few weeks for a discussion before a meeting of the General Affairs Council in mid-October. At that stage I hope we will be able to present some of the work we have done recently. We are awaiting publication of the report that the committee is doing on voting rights, resulting from the criticism by the Commission approximately six months ago. We are also awaiting the report on the future of Europe, which we hope to publish in approximately three weeks.

We are all delighted to see the progress made by the former Minister of State with responsibility for European Affairs, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, and we wish him well in his new job. Perhaps the Minister of State could pass on our congratulations to him.

I have indicated how easy it was to take over from somebody who took his role so very seriously and did such an excellent job in the Department. He was an excellent Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, and I hope to do the job even half as well.

We wish you the best in your new role.

We will convene again on 2 October, when we will meet some newly elected Irish MEPs.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.30 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Thursday, 2 October 2014.
Top
Share