Approximately 20 member states were represented at that meeting. Based on my experience, I consider it worthwhile for this country to be represented there, both to articulate the country's views and interests, but also to see and observe what are the balance of forces among other member states.
The discussion was a general one about priorities for the budget in the coming years, but also with a strong eye as to what will be the position post-2013 when the next six or seven year package is put together. The views among member states ranged from, at one pole, the French who strongly defended the budget and wanted budgetary leeway to be used, and also to address new priorities, to the British who scarcely saw the need for a budget at all, except perhaps to pay for the salary of a couple of regulators. The Swedes and the Dutch were in the British camp where the main emphasis was on budgetary control, and they were supported to a lesser extent by the Germans who wanted to see more balance and fairness in the contributions.
The Irish, the French and the Poles were pretty well the only ones to speak in favour of the Common Agricultural Policy. Quite apart from the interests of the farming community here, who despite greatly increased Exchequer funding, still depend on the CAP, overall we would be big net contributors to the EU budget if the CAP was taken out of the equation. Certainly after this budgetary period expires, when the Border, midland and western region will no longer qualify to the same extent for Structural Funds, our principal net gain from the Community will be very little without the CAP.
The point was made quite forcibly that although people talk about a lot of new priorities, as things stand, there is very little budgetary room for doing much. The French rapporteur in the European Parliament put it very well when he described the EU as a budgetary or financial dwarf but a regulatory giant. Perhaps Senator Quinn has views about regulatory giants. This is a most significant point with a view to a forthcoming debate on the referendum on the reform treaty.
It is often said that we would endorse a European federal superstate if we went along with this or that treaty. The point was made that federal states in general have budgets of at least 20% of GDP when we are talking about slightly less than 1%. I have done my best in debates, as have others, to out the utter absurdity of a super state that has a budget of about 1% of GDP. I have tried to include in my report, as faithfully as I could, the points I thought were of interest and relevance to this country. I urge on the Minister, and other members of the committee who will attend other meetings, that it is valuable for us to be represented because the budgetary economic debate at European level is very relevant to many concerns Ireland has.
