JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS debate -
Tuesday, 17 Feb 2004

Business of Joint Committee.

Deputy M. Higgins

The Sub-Committee on Human Rights met on Thursday, 19 June 2003. Deputy Carey and I were present at that meeting and we heard a presentation on Burma. There has been a sudden announcement of a change of position by the Department of Foreign Affairs regarding Burma, which is incredibly disastrous in respect of the recognition of the military regime in that country. The elected President of the country is under house arrest. Given that we had a detailed submission on breaches and abuses of human rights at the sub-committee, I feel that if we are to be a serious foreign affairs committee, we must hear from the Government on this. First, we must have an opportunity to debate what has happened. We have been presented with no case. I worry about this in terms of the reputation of Ireland in Europe and elsewhere.

The common position on Burma, as I understood it, was not finalised at the level of the EU. The idea that a country that holds the Presidency of the European Union would recognise the military regime in Burma just out of the blue and appoint a non-resident ambassador is highly questionable. I can think of no more urgent matter than this.

We had two different groups before the committee, including the Burma Action Group, and they made representations to us. It was at the request of the husband of Aung San Suu Kyi, while he was alive, that I raised for the first time the restrictions on her freedom. We had consistently, on an all-party basis, held the line on the military regime. I find the current position totally unsatisfactory. There are many nuances to this and I do not know how the Government proposes to deal with them. For example, the last time we discussed the issue, there was a decision on our using our influence through the Security Council to elicit the views of China, which was supplying military equipment to the military regime.

Recognising the military regime is completely selling out on those who are in exile and those we met at the Sub-Committee on Human Rights. We should take a position on this.

Deputy Carey

I know we have a very busy agenda, but I agree with Deputy Michael Higgins. I was taken aback, to put it mildly, when I saw in a rather obscure part of a national newspaper the announcement on Burma. At a minimum, the least we could expect is that the Government should come here and state its position. It seems to run counter to my understanding of Ireland's policy on the regime in Burma. There may be very good tactical reasons for it, but if they exist they escape me. I urge that the Government be invited at the earliest opportunity to state its view on why this apparent about-face has been made.

Deputy Noonan

I agree with the previous speakers. My shock threshold is very high but I was shocked when I read about this matter in the papers. I just cannot understand how an Irish Government, given the present circumstances in Burma, could recognise the regime of a bunch of military thugs who have demonstrably received no support, according to the results of the last election. This committee has always taken the opposite position. It has supported the democratisation of Burma and the principal opposition party. I do not understand why the Government has reversed its position.

Chairman

I think it is agreed that we want to hear from Government urgently. We will invite it to meet with us to discuss the matter at our next meeting.

Deputy M. Higgins

I agree that we should do this at our next meeting. However, as of today we should express our concern.

Chairman

I agree. I suggest that we convey it immediately and ask those concerned to attend our next meeting.

Deputy Noonan

What I am about to say is not a criticism of the Chairman. Increasingly, this committee is becoming a "meet and greet" committee for people who are visiting Ireland. While I am sure they are important people in their own countries, I cannot see where the Irish interest is served. We like to be courteous to everyone and I do not object to meeting and greeting. However, on joining the committee I thought we would have some input into policy. As far as I am concerned, this committee is an extension of Leinster House-Bord Fáilte. Meeting and greeting is of marginal interest to me and, to be candid, I have better things to do. While this is part of the job, I would have thought that it would be balanced by serious discussions on policy where we might influence Iveagh House. Since Christmas, every agenda sent to me is an invitation to meet someone else.

Chairman

With the Presidency, there is a great deal of meeting and greeting. We will soon prepare our work programme for the coming year. We have highlighted our programme last year and referred to issues like the Middle East, Iraq and Africa. By and large, the people we meet with are related to the issues on our agenda. However, it is fair to say that owing to the Presidency and imminent accession, many people have requested to meet with us.

Deputy Noonan

I understand the difficulties.

Chairman

We have to make time for policy.

Deputy Noonan

The role of Parliament and parliamentary committees is different from the role of Government. If members of the Executive are not available to meet with people, it seems that this committee is becoming the first substitute. That is not our job. Our job is to keep the Executive accountable. It is not our job to meet with people, regardless of how interesting they are.

The Chairman mentioned Iraq. I have missed a couple of meetings and perhaps there was an in-depth discussion on Iraq. However, since I last participated in a discussion on Iraq circumstances there have changed dramatically. The position of the coalition that invaded Iraq has also changed dramatically. We are silent on this.

Chairman

There is nothing to prevent Members from making such a proposal at a meeting. This has happened at numerous meetings and we can examine the minutes to show where people proposed that the committee discuss certain subjects. I appreciate the point the Deputy is making.

Deputy Noonan

I would prefer if you would drive the agenda as Chairman. We should take into account that this is a policy committee.

Deputy M. Higgins

Deputy Noonan raises an important point. For example, if one takes three countries on which we have a common policy, such as Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq, there are common positions on which we might want to have a say. I support Deputy Noonan's suggestion that we should try to shift to a policy emphasis.

We have decided to discuss an issue next week. We should not understate how contradictory it is in policy as meetings are taking place between the EU and Asia, including China. As far as I am concerned, there is no coherent, clear, moral position in Irish foreign policy. It would be an act of bad faith for me to attend the human rights sub-committee and tell the groups we receive that we are concerned about what they have said but then do the opposite of what we had undertaken to do. That is our current position. It illustrates the point Deputy Noonan is making. Many long-serving members of the committee want to discuss policy. We want to be independent.

Senator Norris

I support what Deputy Michael D. Higgins has said about Burma. The way in which this information was released by the Department of Foreign Affairs is pretty sinister. This material was made available to journalists in a most misleading way - it was done to throw them off the scent. On the one hand, the Government is singing the praises of Aung San Suu Kyi's while on the other hand it creates recognition of the Burmese military dictatorship. This is astonishing and regrettable. Unfortunately, it is quite predictable in light of the similar covert alteration of policy on Tibet.

This committee could get involved in this issue on a non-partisan basis. This is not a party political issue; it is the permanent government in action. I do not think many members of this committee would feel it is proper for major policy shifts to be decided by individuals within the bureaucracy without recourse to a full debate. Frank Aiken strongly supported Tibet from within Fianna Fáil. If after a debate in the Oireachtas the Government decides for financial reasons that it should reverse policy on Tibet, as a democrat I would have to accept this. I object to Iveagh House making a change on foreign policy without accountability and recourse to the Houses of the Oireachtas.

Chairman

The views expressed are very clear.

The minutes of the meeting of 3 February 2004 were circulated with the agenda for this meeting. Are the minutes in order?

Deputy Carey

Yes.

Chairman

Are there any matters arising? No. We now proceed to an exchange of views with the ambassador of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Deputy G. Mitchell

Is the ambassador accredited to Britain and Ireland?

Chairman

He is accredited to Britain only. We do not have diplomatic relations with the DRC.