Gerry Adams
Question:10. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent talks with former US President Bill Clinton during his visit to Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47684/13]
View answerTuesday, 18 February 2014
Questions (10, 11, 12)
Micheál Martin
Question:11. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the issues he discussed with Mr. Bill Clinton when he met him recently; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47757/13]
View answer
Joe Higgins
Question:12. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting with Mr. Bill Clinton; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7495/14]
View answerOral answers (21 contributions)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 to 12, inclusive, together.
On 9 October 2013, I had an informal meeting with former US President Bill Clinton, who was visiting Dublin to attend an event organised by Philanthropy Ireland. The President is a very good friend of Ireland and is keenly interested in our progress, so I took the opportunity to update him on a range of issues in which he remains keenly interested.
President Clinton, of course, has been a major influence on the Northern Ireland peace process over the years, so I updated him on the current situation in Northern Ireland, including the talks process chaired by Richard Haass, which was still in its early stages at that point. President Clinton has also provided valuable assistance to Ireland during our economic difficulties. In February 2012, for example, he hosted the "Invest In Ireland" round-table event in New York, which I attended. This was a valuable opportunity to engage with investors and to promote Ireland as a location for investment.
Our meeting on 9 October was a good opportunity to update President Clinton on Ireland's progress towards economic recovery. He had a particular interest in this. We also discussed political and economic developments in the US. The main reason for President Clinton's visit to Dublin was to support Philanthropy Ireland, and we discussed recent progress with Ireland's objective of increasing the level of philanthropic giving.
President Clinton also updated me on the work of the Clinton Foundation. I was pleased to learn about the progress the Clinton Foundation is making in tackling issues such as HIV-AIDS, health access, development, climate change and child health and nutrition. We also discussed Ireland's very successful partnership with the foundation through the Clinton Health Access Initiative. Ireland has partnered with the Clinton Health Access Initiative in Africa since 2003 and supports HIV-AIDS programmes in Mozambique and Lesotho, as well as programmes to improve maternal and child health and child nutrition. This was essentially the range of our conversation. I again took the opportunity to thank President Clinton for his ongoing support for Ireland over the years.
As the Taoiseach said, President Clinton has been a friend to Ireland over many years, not least in respect of the Irish peace process. The Taoiseach said he briefed the President on what was, at that time, the early stages of the Richard Haass negotiations. Can I ask the Taoiseach, if I am allowed to, where the Government stands regarding the outcome of those negotiations?
There is a marked reluctance, in some cases a downright refusal on the part of unionism, and by that I mean the political leadership of unionism, to embrace the opportunity that the Haass process represents. I think it very unfortunate, if one is to judge by some media commentary, that the American system has taken umbrage at the perhaps discourteous or even dismissive attitude of some towards Richard Haass and the outcomes of the process. That is deeply unfortunate. It certainly is not the disposition of my party. We see within those proposals real potential to deal with issues that are very difficult for parties on all sides. Will the Taoiseach comment on the Haass process and where he considers it stands now?
Did the Taoiseach have any discussion with President Clinton on immigration reform and the issues faced by so many Irish people living in the United States who work there and have made their homes, lives and families there? Immigration is an issue of some controversy in the United States. It is a complex issue but it is one in which we have an enormous stake and it is one which we would wish to see resolved.
The Taoiseach is correct to commend the work not least in respect of HIV-AIDS that is carried out. Like everyone else I am very proud of the fact that this country has such a strong track record on those matters. Those partnerships should continue.
We had discussions in the House on the conclusion of the Haass talks. We expressed disappointment that it was not possible to get agreement on the flags, parades and the past, but it is important to note that the Haass talks provide a basis for making further progress. As Deputy McDonald is well aware, that is not an easy issue. While her party agreed that the conclusion of the talks process should be endorsed, others did not. The talks were hosted on the invitation of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister to Dr. Haass and his team. The five parties did engage pretty well during the two short periods in which they discussed matters. The process did not work out. I am pleased to note that at least the parties continue to follow through by having a series of meetings on how matters might be progressed. The Government is more than willing to support and assist in whatever progress can be made. The talks were not hosted by the Government or the British Government but we are very supportive of every little piece of progress that can be made in that regard. The Tánaiste spoke to the Secretary of State recently and also to Dr. Haass.
I did discuss with the President the question of immigration. I hope to raise the matter again when I have the opportunity to travel to Washington in March. A great deal of activity is going on in the United States. I commend Ambassador Anderson on the number of meetings she has had both with representatives in the Senate and in the Congress on the matter. It boils down to what will happen in the US House of Representatives. President Obama and the US Senate have laid out their position very clearly. I cannot say what will happen with the House of Representatives but meetings are taking place. The general hope is that things could happen on immigration in 2014. We are approaching the last two years of this presidency for President Obama and in that sense there is an understanding that immigration has a major impact in the United States given the number involved. For our part, we will certainly engage with the immigration reform group and the Irish connections. There are 50,000 young Irish people in particular who are undocumented. It is a small segment of a very big pool but we would be hopeful that progress could be made. We discussed the matter and President Clinton is hopeful. President Obama and the Senate are also hopeful and now it is a matter for the House of Representatives. Elections are coming up later in the year and that might well impact on what action is taken. I will raise the matter again with the leaders and groups I hope to meet when I go to the United States. In so far as that is concerned, we will keep Irish interests very much alive and to the fore. I hope to mention it specifically to President Obama when I have the opportunity to speak with him.
Could the Taoiseach confirm who attended the meeting? Was it just the Taoiseach and President Clinton or were others at the meeting as well?
On the briefing the Taoiseach gave on Northern Ireland, Richard Haass and Meghan O’Sullivan came to Northern Ireland but the failure to reach agreement was very disappointing to all concerned and reflected badly on the main parties in the Executive. These issues are going on a long time, in particular the parades issue and flags and emblems. There have been many false dawns. There is an obligation on the main parties in the Executive to fulfil the commitments they gave a long time ago on those issues.
The British and Irish Governments need to become more involved than has been the case. They are standing back a bit too far from the fray. The dangers that can develop are very real in terms of the communities in the North and the potential of the issues to create more disturbances on the streets, as we witnessed at the outset when the issues came back onto the agenda in terms of the flags dispute, protests on the streets and the threats to people in their homes. We do not want to go back to that. I wonder at the toleration of people who come from the United States and elsewhere to mediate in such situations. In some respects due deference is not shown by bringing the situation to a conclusion and getting a deal done. A deal could have been done but that did not happen on this occasion for reasons of focusing on one’s electoral base.
Could the Taoiseach indicate the type of discussions that took place in terms of Ireland’s level of philanthropic giving? In that context, was there any discussion about tax relief or the situation pertaining to tax exiles and their treatment? The head of Philanthropy Ireland, Mr. Frank Flannery, has made public statements in that regard. Did he bring to the attention of the Taoiseach that the treatment of tax exiles should be changed in the context of the level of giving by the Irish philanthropic sector?
Deputy Martin asked me who was at the meeting. I cannot recall, except to say that I was there myself with President Clinton and a couple of officials. I can send on the details to him.
As far as I can recall, tax exiles and tax on exiles was not discussed. We had a discussion in respect of the work of Philanthropy Ireland. I indicated earlier that the President was in the country to attend an event relating to Philanthropy Ireland. He is very aware of Ireland’s efforts to increase the activity in terms of philanthropic giving. The forum on philanthropy and fund-raising set out a target to increase philanthropic giving by 10% year-on-year in Ireland from its current level of approximately €500 million per annum to €800 million per annum by 2016. The drivers were the national giving campaign, improving the general fiscal environment and the opportunity to give, developing fund-raising capacity among not-for-profit organisations and creating a national social innovation fund. Since the launch of the forum's report in July 2012 a good deal of progress was made in the implementation of the recommendations. The national giving campaign - the 1% difference – has been launched by Philanthropy Ireland. The tax treatment of donations to charities has been simplified and decoupled from business tax incentives.
A road map has been set out for implementation of the Charities Act and establishing a charities regulator which the Minister announced some time ago. The social innovation fund has been incorporated and a board appointed. All of these things are moving in the right direction.
I take Deputy Micheál Martin's point on dangers developing in Northern Ireland and cross-Border issues if there is no constant engagement and interaction. As I stated to Deputy Mary Lou MacDonald, these talks followed the invitation of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to Dr. Haass. I met him on a number of occasions, as did the Tánaiste, and we stated we were very supportive of his efforts. People may ask why they were not able to conclude them. It turned out that the most contentious issue was that of flags, as distinct from the past or parades. They made progress on all three fronts, on some more than others. It is fair to state that while they did not conclude by being accepted by everybody, there is a basis for moving forward at different levels on each of the three issues. The five parties involved intend to meet in the coming period, of which we are very supportive. I hope to travel to London early in March to speak further to Prime Minister Cameron and that from our perspective and theirs the support of both Governments will continue for the efforts of the parties to make further progress. I hope we will keep engaged and involved. We are cognisant of the dangers to which the Deputy referred and I share his concern.
What is it about Presidents and ex-Presidents of the United States that so mesmerises establishment politicians in Ireland? Are they drawn to the aura of power or former power, the fact that the people concerned were and the incumbents are in charge of the biggest imperial power on earth? It is something about which I always wonder. When the Taoiseach takes advice from President Clinton, I ask him to be careful, particularly with regard to economic advice, considering that for eight years he presided over the policies of extreme liberalisation of the financial markets, the casino economy and the privatisation and liberalisation that took place which, among others policies, laid the basis for the disaster which became the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the Freddie Macs and Fannie Maes which crashed the economy with disastrous consequences for the working class people of the United States and the world. I ask the Taoiseach to be cautious when he takes an apparently uncritical approach to President Clinton.
With regard to Northern Ireland and discussing issues of civil and human rights in which President Clinton supposedly took an interest, did the Taoiseach speak to him about similar issues in the United States, particularly about Irish America and how the establishment there treats the gay and lesbian community in banning it from marching on St. Patrick's Day in New York and Boston? Did the Taoiseach discuss whether he should boycott either of these marches in the event that he has been invited to them? The Minister for Social Protection who seems to be part of his protection detail today as far as Dáil duties are concerned has apparently taken such a position. Will the Taoiseach do the same or will he go along with the homophobic disgraceful approach taken by some of the conservative Irish-American institutions?
It is not a case of being mesmerised by people who are or were elected to the highest political office in the United States, rather it is a case of engaging with people who either hold or held that high office and their interest in our country. The Deputy should never underestimate the advice and encouragement given to business interests from Ireland to invest in the United States and from the United States to invest in Ireland. On more than one occasion President Clinton has pointed out to international audiences of considerable significance the advantages Ireland offers in terms of its attractiveness as a location for investment-----
Massive profits.
-----be it in terms either of the IFSC or the brain power Ireland exhibits in its young people and their ability to reach the highest targets and highs level of challenge. It has been a powerful instrument in delivering many US investors in our country and the resulting jobs and opportunities for the people. It is not a case of being mesmerised; rather, in the case of President Clinton, his interest in Ireland, the part he played in the peace process and his direction that George Mitchell should be the mediator in very difficult circumstances leading to delivery of the Good Friday Agreement more than 20 years ago were important considerations and decisions. The same applies in the case of President Obama who received a certificate of honorary Irish heritage because of his particular interest in the country. The Clinton years were very powerful for the US economy in terms of restoring economic credit to the United States, the number of people at work and the opportunities presented. Obviously, the bank collapse led to catastrophic consequences throughout the country. I hope to travel to the United States. The St. Patrick's Day parade is a parade about our Irishness, not sexuality. I will be happy to participate in it.
The Taoiseach has stated he discussed the issue of flags and parades with President Clinton. I suggest the New York St. Patrick's Day parade has given new meaning to what James Connolly called the carnival of reaction in its disgraceful refusal to allow people in the LGBT community to parade their identity. The Taoiseach should make some statement in response to this disgraceful decision. Will he comment on rumours that at least if he will not boycott the parade as some of us think he should, he will wear the rainbow badge to symbolise his support for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans community and make some protest over this really outrageous and homophobic decision to ban the LGBT community from the St. Patrick's Day parade in New York?
I do not organise the St. Patrick's Day parade in New York or anywhere else. Obviously, the organisers set down their regulations for how the parade is conducted.
The Taoiseach cannot wash his hands.
The Taoiseach could wear the badge.
I understand that approximately 500,000 people participate in the St. Patrick's Day parade in New York. I do not know how many of them are gay or lesbian-----
Approximately 10% normally.
It is a matter for themselves. I do not express anything about their sexuality.
It is a repression of people's rights.
I will certainly be very happy to wear the symbol of Irishness on St. Patrick's Day in New York - the shamrock.
Does Irishness include homophobia?
As I stated, the parade is about Irishness, not sexuality.
It is a disgraceful washing of the Taoiseach's hands.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.