Skip to main content
Normal View

SELECT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS debate -
Wednesday, 6 Nov 2002

Vol. 1 No. 7

Visit of Czech Republic Parliamentarians.

I welcome the members of the delegation from the Committee of European Integration of the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, led by its chairman, Mr. Pavel Svoboda, and accompanied by the Czech ambassador, Mr. Petr Kolar. We are very pleased to see the delegation and I welcome it to our Parliament.

Last month, members of this committee met Deputy Prime Minister Svoboda nine days before the referendum on the Nice treaty. At that time I was confident of a positive result but one cannot be certain in politics. Fortunately, for both Ireland and the Czech Republic, there was a successful outcome and Ireland can complete its ratification of the treaty in the near future, thus ensuring that enlargement goes ahead. Ireland was the only member state of the EU to put the treaty to a referendum and we have given the candidate countries a small fright and a very warm welcome. I also congratulate the delegation on the results of the European Council in Brussels. There is now a clear timetable set out for the most ambitious ever enlargement of the European Union. Of course, some issues remain but we can all be confident that, working hard between now and December, negotiations can be concluded at the Copenhagen summit with a view to signature of the accession treaty in Athens next spring.

The Czech Republic has made remarkable progress since it first sat down to formal negotiations in 1998. We can only marvel at the work involved in putting in place the legislation necessary to comply with the acquis and we applaud its efforts. I do not think any of us thought then, or later when the negotiations began for a further six candidates, that we would see the simultaneous accession of ten new member states in 2004. This is something of which we can all be rightly proud.

While we have just come out of an intense referendum campaign you will be heading into one after the accession treaty is signed. I will be interested to hear your assessment of the proposals at this early stage. Perhaps one of the clearest lessons coming out of the two Nice referendum campaigns in Ireland is the extent of the democratic deficit perceived to be here, mirrored I am sure across the Union. Because of the discussions we have had at COSAC we know there is concern about this in all national Parliaments. The campaigns themselves will have served to better inform the public here about the European Union but the end of the campaigns does not mean the end of our work in this regard. There will be future referenda and we have a very important job to do to ensure people know the democratic deficit is being addressed by our Parliament.

In the Oireachtas we are making a particular effort to reduce that deficit. We have put in place new measures for parliamentary oversight of EU business. These measures include the detailed scrutiny of proposals in all three pillars, consultations with members of Government before meetings of the Council of Ministers and general consideration of the full range of EU business. For example, next week we will meet the Minister for Foreign Affairs as part of his preparations for the General Affairs and External Relations Council on 18-19 November. That will be the fifth such meeting since July. Bearing in mind that August is a quiet month, that is a large number of meetings. Working arrangements along these lines were put in place in July and we have just recently put these arrangements on a legislative footing. Until now such provisions have been most notable by their absence but with the new arrangements we are taking a big step in the right direction, especially if they can be made to work. The new arrangements will contribute both to a better understanding in Ireland of EU affairs and allow a better representation of Ireland's interests in the institutions of the Union.

Ireland is already working with the Czech Republic and all the other candidates within the convention. Gistard d'Estaing's study phase started with a bang with the release of his draft outline constitutional treaty. While we all know this is a preliminary draft, it has already prompted considerable debate and discussion beyond the usual europhile circles. That can only be a good thing. This time round we will not make the same mistakes we made before so, hopefully, we can bring the people with us through the process, instead of running ahead.

As one who has been very committed to the European Union - I was director of elections for my party for the Amsterdam treaty, the Maastricht treaty and the Single European Act - I will be looking at the proposals with a very careful eye to ensure what comes out of this convention, and ultimately out of an intergovernmental conference, meets the needs of all member states, large and small. Enormous work remains to be done in the remainder of the life of the convention and on into the Intergovernmental Conference. This is the first time we have managed to generate various public and press interest in the early stages of an Intergovernmental Conference. I will be interested to hear your views on how the convention is going and where you think it is headed. Deputy Pat Carey, who is present, is a member of the convention and is up to date on its proceedings.

Next January will mark 30 years of Ireland's membership of the European Union. Our experience has been largely positive. The story of our economic success, particularly over the past decade is well known. However, beyond that, membership has given us the opportunity to enhance our position on the world stage and to play our part in building a better Europe. We will, of course, be happy to share those experiences with you over the coming months and years.

I am sure all members of the select committee will be glad to hear the progress being made on the construction efforts after the terrible floods during the summer in the Czech Republic, particularly in Prague. I hope the European Solidarity Fund has been of some assistance.

Chairman, I welcome you and your colleagues. Perhaps you would like to make some opening comments and the meeting can then be opened to the members of our committee and your colleagues.

Mr. Svoboda

We thank the Chairman for his welcome and introduction. We may be the first delegation to meet the Select Committee on European Affairs since its constitution and we meet at a time when we are looking forward. The successful outcome of the referendum has opened the door to the European Union for the Czech Republic and other candidate countries.

You did your part of the work and we are now facing our part of the job. In the Senate and in the Chamber of Deputies we are now finalising work on the Referendum Act. It should be done by the end of the year and this legislation should be updated so that we may organise a referendum in the Czech Republic in May or June 2003. According to the latest polls 50% of those asked were in favour, 20% were against and 30% were hesitant and do not know whether they will participate in the referendum. Out of those who have declared they will take part in the referendum, approximately 78% were positive. We have no major fears but we are ready for a very offensive campaign. This campaign will last about seven or eight months until the referendum takes place in May or June 2003. We have devoted €7 million to a campaign that should be impressive and should provide all necessary information to our population and information focused on the different groups of the population based on their profession, age and other factors. We are now approaching the finishing line of the negotiations. Four chapters remain to be completed. We are conscious that complicated discussions will take place during the Copenhagen summit but the Czech Republic and other candidate states share the view that the intrinsic value of accession is higher than some of the technical details that remain to be settled. We are in the final stages and we remain confident that the atmosphere of generosity and trust should be the focus for the closing stages of the debate.

In our discussions we have discussed the past, including some past problems, and the Treaty of Nice and we should now look to the future. We are looking forward to co-operating with Ireland because of its size and history. Because of the level of development of the two countries we are condemned to close co-operation. In our debate I would like us to emphasise two items. One of these is rather technical because both your committee and ours are undergoing a certain transformation of their respective roles. We would like to know more about the system you have set up that will enable you to exercise effective monitoring of what your Government does in Brussels, as we would like to do likewise. The second item which is in more general terms, is the future of European Union, the future of the constitution, the powers of the European Parliament and of the national parliaments and possibly the reform of agricultural policies. We would like to see the results of the European Convention confirmed by an intergovernmental conference that should take place, if possible, in 2004 in Ireland. I thank you for your interaction. The floor is now open for debate.

I join with you, Chairman, in welcoming the delegation to our meeting. It is a happy moment for all of us to welcome our colleagues from the Czech Republic. I have visited it twice under a former regime and a former style of Government. It is a matter for the people of the Czech Republic as to whether they vote to join the European Union. I sincerely hope they do. It is a time of great change within the European Union and the constitutional status of the Union is up for debate, a debate which has started in the convention. My colleagues here know a great deal more about it than I do. While the Czech Republic is one of the larger of the smaller countries we have much in common and we should strengthen and deepen our bonds of friendship and co-operation working together in the European Union. I thank the delegation for its contribution.

Perhaps we will have two speakers who can be followed by the interpreter.

Like my colleague, Deputy Mulcahy, I extend a warm welcome to the delegation. Their presence is important to us. I wish to acknowledge the helpful support which the ambassador from the Czech Republic gave to the Irish referendum debate in recent weeks. That support is greatly appreciated. I know the Czech Republic is hoping to become full members, and I expect that will happen in 2004. I note from our briefing papers that there are a number of chapters that have yet to be completed. I would like to hear the views of the delegation on what difficulties may emerge, particularly in the area of finance. The chairman of the delegation also mentioned agriculture. This committee has initiated a rigorous form of scrutiny and accountability of European legislation and European affairs. This method which has been adopted by our Parliament is as good and probably better than that adopted by most others.

As the Chairman said in his remarks earlier, I have the privilege of being one of the alternate delegates to the Convention on the Future of Europe where serious discussion is taking place about the whole vision of Europe. The draft constitutional treaty has been published. The plenary session of the convention meets tomorrow and on Friday. There are a number of working groups. By Christmas a significant body of work will have been completed but the real works begins between January and June when much important work will take place and flesh will be put on the skeleton of the treaty which has been unveiled. From Ireland's point of view, we are pleased to note the support being received from some of the accession states, particularly in the areas of taxation and monetary and economic policy. Other issues which will be important to everybody are the external borders of the new Union and the fight against terrorism, against trafficking and so on. There is also the issue of the role of national parliaments. While I believe an outcome of this convention will be a significantly enhanced role for national parliaments I am not sure how that role will emerge. The proposal by the presidency of the convention that there should be a people's congress should be written off as an eccentric idea. I certainly do not think it is something we will be seeking.

The other point in relation to the role of national parliaments is the very serious intent of the Presidency to enhance the principle of subsidiarity which has received much lip service but not much focus on implementation.

I welcome members of the delegation and look forward to engaging with them and their colleagues again.

Mr. Svoboda

Allow me to react to some of the ideas. I would like to mention the four chapters that remain open. Transport stands in the way of closing one chapter - there is a problem with cabotage - but the issue will soon be resolved. We also mentioned the chapter dealing with the European institutions. We would like to have the same number of MEPs as countries of a comparable size, such as Greece, Portugal and Belgium which have 22 MEPs. So far the Czech Republic and Hungary have been allowed 20 MEPs. Such a sensitive issue could have an important psychological impact on the referendum because those who oppose our accession could use it with joy. However, we have positive expectations that the imbalance will be addressed.

On the chapter on finance, we had certain worries that the Czech Republic would become a net contributor following accession. However, there is agreement that we will at least not be a net contributor in 2004 to 2006, after which a new financial planning period will begin.

Agriculture is not such a major issue for the Czech Republic because approximately 4% of the population work in that area. Agricultural production represents approximately 2% of GDP. The four sub-chapters on agriculture include direct subsidies and quotas. We hope our partners will be generous in regard to the period for establishing the quotas and the transition period. We would like to acknowledge the excellent support we have received in this regard.

Our ambassador received a lot of praise for the important role he played. The contacts between our committees are excellent. Our committee has been to Ireland twice and I understand the Irish committee has been to Prague. We would like to welcome the committee to Prague again.

The unfortunate situation of the floods was mentioned. The damage caused by these floods represents approximately €3 billion in the Czech Republic. People who visit Prague now would be hard pressed to find any traces of the floods in the city. A big reconstruction effort is taking place in areas where houses were destroyed. This has generated some social problems with which the Government is doing its best to cope. The immediate reaction of the European Union has been one of solidarity - the European Union has been built on solidarity - which has increased tremendously its standing in the mind of the general public. I would like on this occasion to thank Ireland for the generous aid it provided following the floods.

Something which may be of interest is that the committee when fully formed will be a joint committee of the Dáil and Seanad. Our MEPs will also have the right of attendance. MEP Avril Doyle is present today.

I welcome the delegation from the Czech Republic and congratulate them on their decision to hold a referendum on accession to the EU. The anti-European lobby uses this argument on a regular basis to suggest the way in which the Union works is totally undemocratic. I sincerely hope the Czech Republic is successful in the referendum. There have been ongoing bilateral activities, including advice and training of officials, between Ireland and the Czech Republic, which is welcome. This bodes well for future co-operation in an enlarged Europe.

Has there been any further up-to-date progress on anti-discrimination legislation in relation to the Roma population's access to education, housing and employment? I understand the Benes decree - I know this is not involved in the EU accession talks - has been raised as a political issue by opponents in the Czech Republic. Does this bode ill for relations between Hungary and the Czech Republic within the enlarged EU?

Ms Doyle, MEP

I join with the Chairman and members of the committee in welcoming the Czech delegation. As a member of the European Parliament I have had the opportunity to be briefed regularly on progress in the agenda set out in Nice for the accession countries. The Czech Republic's progress is exemplary. Its economy is one of the most successful of the accession states, and the most vibrant after Cyprus and Slovinia. I wish it well and hope that Europe will be as good to it as it was to Ireland when it joined in 1973. There are many parallels between the stage of the Czech Republic's development now and when Ireland joined in terms of per capita income and GDP. I look forward to welcoming the Czech Republic as a full member of the European Union by 2004.

Mr. Svoboda mentioned that it would be easier to sell the referendum to the people if there was provision for 22 MEPs rather than 20, making the Czech Republic comparable to Greece, Portugal and Belgium. We managed to sell the enlargement of Europe here after 12 months of a debate with a 2:1 majority in favour of accession. Part of the package we had to sell was a reduction from 15 to 12 MEPs. This should not be allowed to become a stumbling block. If Ireland could sell a reduction of three, the Czech Republic could surely sell 20 MEPs instead of 22. I am just saying that to defend the current position.

Ireland as a non-nuclear nation has had ongoing problems because of its proximity to the Sellafield nuclear processing plant and generally the BNFL plants along the west coast of the UK. For example, Sellafield is the same to Ireland as Temelin is to the Austrians. I would be interested to know what progress the Czech Republic has made in implementing the recommendations contained in the European Council report on nuclear safety in the context of enlargement, bearing in mind the priorities outlined in the report. A very good template was put in place whereby the Czech Republic and Austria can sit around the table and discuss the issues in regard to Temelin and the nuclear industry. We would like to be able to put in place this template with our sovereign neighbours in the UK. We should be consulted and be able to discuss our concerns in this regard. Energy provision and the mix of energy provision is a matter for each member state. None of us can tell other member states what to do or how they should do it. Safety concerns from neighbouring states are legitimate.

I welcome the delegation.

I just add that there is no great rush among our MEPs to see which three will give up their seats.

Ms Doyle, MEP

More importantly, more MEPs would not be a selling point in this country.

Mr. Svoboda

On the issue of the Roma people in the Czech Republic, not even the European Union can hope to solve this problem in one or two years. It is a long-term process linked with the area of education. The Czech Government has initiated a policy of special assistance for the Roma population in the different regions at grass roots level. I would exclude legal discrimination because there is none. There is no discrimination against Romas based on our legislation. In practice, there may be cases where, in the area of employment, for instance, a person would not be accepted or would be dismissed because he or she is a Roma. These are unique cases that do not, on the whole, have a major influence on the entire Roma community. Increasing amounts of funding are being devoted to the area of education of Roma children. We are convinced this problem is going to disappear in the mid term.

On the Benes decrees or, to be more specific, the decrees of the President of the republic, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament only yesterday decided these decrees are not an obstacle to enlargement and the accession of the Czech Republic. This is also going to be anchored in the resolution on enlargement. For us, this issue is solved. My personal view is that, as a political gesture, the Czech Parliament may make a declaration or a gesture in the second half of 2003, obviously in a situation where it would not be pressurised to do something like that.

On the issue of the Temelin nuclear power plant, this is one of the most modern and safest power plants in Europe. I understand the anxiety of all three parties. A process of consultations has been established called the Melk process and the three parties fulfil all the provisions of this process. I believe Austria will be more convinced that this power plant does not represent a danger to it and that it can live with such a plant. In the area of our bilateral relations with Austria, I see this issue is slowly fading away.

Mr. Kohlícek

I would like to add a few points to the comments made by our chairman. In the census for the year 2000 the Roma population represented fewer than 12,000 persons. We had 504 Roma children registered in special schools in our country, so there is no discrimination against the Roma population. Unlike some of the immigration officers of the United Kingdom, we in Prague cannot define a person as a Roma because of the shade or colour of their skin. We are not racists like some of these immigration officers.

To be specific about the so-called Benes decrees, these were legal measures that were supposed to reduce some of the consequences of the Potsdam Conference conclusions and similar measures were adopted in the United Kingdom, France, the Benelux countries, Denmark and Italy. They are nothing special and many of the provisions of these decrees are not as harsh as the provisions of similar legislation in western Europe.

Concerning the issue of Temelin, there are quite a few nuclear power plants close to the border with Austria that are much older and that correspond to safety requirements that are not as stringent as those applying to the Temelin power plant. They are not as useful in general political debate in Austria. I am waiting for the day when Austrian MEPs will visit the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, Austria, where they will consult the approximately 80 safety reports that are deposited there on the safety of this power plant.

I had to smile when the number of MEPs was mentioned because our problem is not to have 20 or 22 MEPs but that countries of a similar size in the European Union would also have the 20 MEPs we are supposed to have. We want a similar number for countries of a similar size. We do not want to have more, rather the same number.

I advise that a debate on the recent European Council meeting is scheduled to begin in the Dáil in approximately 15 minutes.

Mr. Kubinyi

There are two issues I want to mention. I come from Ostrava, an area of heavy industry and mining that is undergoing substantial restructuring of industry. Maybe one half of the Roma population that claim to belong come precisely from the Ostrava area. I am well aware of the issues. I would stress that the Roma people have full access to health and education services as do other citizens. There is no discrimination against the Roma people in this respect. On the other hand, I do not share the optimism of our chairman Mr. Svoboda that in some ten or 20 years this issue will have been resolved. Due to the Roma way of living in clans and the lack of will to be integrated in society, this problem may continue. I invite any of my colleagues to come to Ostrava to see what has been done. We do not consider ourselves as racists or as operating a form of apartheid in Ostrava or in other parts of the country. We are trying to help the Roma people as far as possible.

Concerning the number of MEPs, I assure our colleagues that our situation is slightly different. In the past not only were we not a member of the European Union, we belonged to other structures that were very unequal and unfair. In view of this past, our people are very sensitive to any imbalances or differences in treatment. We discussed with Deputy Secretary-General O'Leary the possible influence on the media. We do not have that influence on the media and opposers might play up this issue a lot. A majority of our population is elderly as opposed to Ireland. Elderly people are afraid of new things and any debate about an issue like that may be another source of confusion and of trouble in their minds. These things could lead to failure of the referendum. I am sure all my colleagues here would consider such a failure as very unfortunate if an issue like this triggered it.

That was a very useful and helpful exchange. I hope it has been useful and helpful to you also. I hope the outstanding issues for the Czech Republic can be resolved at Copenhagen. I am sure they can. If we can be of assistance to the Czech Republic or to your committee in preparation for membership of the European Union or thereafter, please feel free to contact us. We will give your Ambassador a copy of our latest proposals on EU scrutiny and preparation for European Council meetings which may be of interest to you.

The select committee went into private session at 3.30 p.m. and adjourned at 3.45 p.m. until2.15 p.m. on Monday, 11 November 2002.

Top
Share