I thank Members for their contributions. I acknowledge the support of the committee for this substantial increase in funding for the European Movement. I take the point that, when we make this policy decision, with the agreement of all, to greatly increase the level of subvention to this organisation, on behalf of the taxpayer we have a right to expect that there would be a greater public impact in terms of the work done by the European Movement in Ireland. That point will be put across when we report back on the acceptance by the committee of the Supplementary Estimate.
The European Movement has played an important role in making a changing Europe comprehensible. I also take the point that the Institute of European Affairs is an excellent body and I have had direct experience of the role it plays and the quality of the work it carries out. The institute has generated and commissioned a number of excellent studies which have engendered great debate and improved our understanding of European trends and the benefits and difficulties which have arisen as a result of our membership of the EU.
The European Movement should be well disposed to discovering how it can match the Institute of European Affairs' ability to highlight and heighten public awareness in order to promote fruitful and constructive debate. The European Movement must concentrate on the issue of how best to impart its message in order to make an impact on the general public.
We must consider the structure of the European Movement in Ireland. I will circulate to Members a copy of a document in my possession, the Activities of the European Movement - June 1999 to June 2000. As stated earlier, the fact that it has so many branches throughout the country dilutes somewhat the impact of its message. One Member stated that he felt many of the organisation's activities were Dublin based. However, it appears to me that there is a good geographical spread of its branches throughout the country.
The document to which I refer lists the events organised and services provided during the past 12 months. These include the provision of an updated website with information on European issues; freephone inquiry numbers; publication of vital national interests, Ireland and Europe; a conference was held on regional development in October last year; there was a training course for local government representatives and officials in November and December of last year; the presentation of the European of the Year award in February of this year; public meetings were held on various themes - for example, there was a meeting in Youghal in November on the implications for domestic taxation of the end of Structural and Cohesion funds; a meeting on strengthening human rights for European Union citizens was held in Dún Laoghaire in April of this year and the question of EU enlargement was discussed in Limerick, also in April - and, finally, a meeting on participation in the international European Movement's parliamentary youth assembly was held in September of last year.
The Taoiseach is the President of the European Movement and I believe many of our criticisms should be directed to the vice-presidents, among whose number are the Tánaiste and Deputies John Bruton, Quinn and De Rossa. As its chairman, I am sure Deputy Dukes would be willing to listen to the concerns of the committee which has been extremely generous in taking what is a leap of faith in this area. The increased allocation is not based on improved performance; it is based on the fact that the finances of a reputable body with noble aims and objectives are in deficit.
Sometimes the State avoids certain of its responsibilities for as long as possible. On this occasion, it is felt that it should meet its responsibilities in this area. That does not take away from the fact that a significant amount of money is being spent by the movement. Expenditure in 1999 amounted to £318,729 while receipts were £239,686. Those receipts were broken down on the following basis: membership, £128,635; activities, £79,115; grants, £30,936 and office services, £1,000. The amount of money required is sizeable and the State is prepared to provide up to £100,000 per annum or one-third of the movement's total expenditure.
One would expect that, as a result of that major injection of cash, one would see a good return for taxpayers' money. That will involve, as Deputy Higgins stated, the European Movement having to reassess its remit and consider the ways it can focus on the areas of priority on which it should concentrate in debates and seminars held throughout the country. From perusing the movement's activities last year, one gets the impression that the various branches do their own thing. One is not certain that a coherent core agenda is being pursued by the movement in all of its activities.
Concentrating on core issues, tightening its agenda and pursuing a consistent theme in the activities it organises throughout the year would, perhaps, be a way to ensure that people are made aware of the movement's purpose. For example, the Galway association could well have discussed SACs if it had held a public meeting last year. However, no such meeting was held. I am familiar with many of the ardent Europeans who live in Galway and who would have been only too happy to attend a public meeting and offer their views.
I take the Chairman's point about the Charter of Fundamental Rights in respect of which he is involved on behalf of the Oireachtas. The Government is considering the implications that adopting such a charter would have on countries with written constitutions and those with unwritten constitutions. This work has been undertaken as a result of a mandate received from the Cologne Summit. The Cologne remit specifies that the job of this group is to make more accessible people's understanding of their rights and what European citizenship means in the context of existing Treaty provisions. Our position, and I believe that of a significant number of EU partners based on our discussions in Feira last week, is that the charter should take the form of a political declaration and the decision on the nature of the charter would be taken at the European Council in Nice in December. However, even the French Presidency, which has indicated to us that it wishes to broaden the discussion into economic and social rights, as the Chairman has said, recognises the practical reality that the idea of this becoming a decision in Nice, which would indicate giving a legal basis in the Treaties to any such charter, is not one that would meet with the required approval of a sufficient number of member states. Clearly, despite the best work that can be done by that committee, it is unlikely that the charter would be in a sufficiently ready state even to adopt it if such were the mood of the Council. The idea is that the first draft will be available at Biarritz in October. We will wait and see if that can be achieved.
The mandate given to the convention, the body formulating the charter, stated that account should be taken of economic and social rights as contained in the European Social Charter and the Community charter on the fundamental rights of workers. Our view is that, where economic and social rights are not now individually enforceable, the charter should not be used to confer such status on those rights. Our approach is certainly not a maximising one for the reasons the Chairman has outlined and for other practical reasons in terms of avoiding a duplication of justiciable rights, especially taking the European Convention on Human Rights into consideration where the court in Strasbourg deals with that anyway. I do not see the benefit of having a duplicated court system for those matters, and this charter of rights could well overlap with existing European Convention on Human Rights issues.
Regarding the McKenna Supreme Court judgment, which was raised and which is a relevant point, the Government was prevented by the terms of that judgment from spending public money for the purpose of promoting a positive outcome to a referendum on the Treaty of Amsterdam. It is considered that this constraint also applies to indirect funding of the yes campaign through the European Movement and other non-governmental organisations and these restrictions, therefore, continue to apply. The money which is being given in the Supplementary Estimate can be used by the European Movement for the purpose of its activities. It is in when a referendum is required that the McKenna judgment comes into play.
We are proceeding with our negotiating strategy on the Intergovernmental Conference, backed up by the legal services division, that no Treaty amendment is envisaged in relation to European security and defence policy based on the documentation submitted and adopted at Feira which dealt with the progress that has been made arising from Helsinki regarding those areas of policy. We believe there is a need to proceed with an Intergovernmental Conference which avoids substantive treaty amendment and, based on the Feira outcome, both in relation to the Presidency papers, which were adopted, and the conclusions which were adopted after the European Council meeting, we are happy with the way the matters are being considered at present.
The French Presidency is indicating a somewhat ambitious agenda which must be counteracted by the fact that a restrictive agenda will be required if a successful outcome at Nice is to be achieved. Foreign Minister Vedrine is very much of that pragmatic mode. President Chirac had perhaps indicated a more ambitious agenda in his comments but whether that is achievable will be better assessed at Biarritz.
Those are the issues which have been raised by the Deputies. I thank them for their support for the Estimate. I take on board many of the points which were well made, and they will be communicated to the European Movement in the context of the Estimate being adopted.
