asked the Taoiseach whether any discussions took place at the recent Anglo-Irish trade talks on the present Franco-British disagreement on the future of the EEC.
3.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Anglo-Irish Trade Talks.
2.
asked the Taoiseach if an exchange of views on the latest developments in relation to the EEC took place during the recent discussions in London; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
4.
asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the recent talks held in London concerning the working of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement.
5.
asked the Taoiseach the result of the most recent Anglo-Irish Ministerial talks; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
6.
asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the results of the visit of the three Government Ministers to London last week.
7.
asked the Taoiseach if he is in a position to report on the weekend talks on the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement between Ministers and officials of the Government and representatives of the British Government.
8.
asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the result of the recent discussions with the British Government in relation to the Free Trade Area Agreement.
9.
asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the recent discussions in London on the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement.
10.
asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement regarding the recent talks with the British Ministers.
11.
asked the Taoiseach what benefits he expects will accrue to industry as a result of the recent talks with British Ministers.
12.
asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the discussions in London on the export of dairy produce to Britain.
13.
asked the Taoiseach if there are any prospects of improved conditions for the agricultural industry as a result of the recent talks with British Ministers.
14.
asked the Taoiseach when the deposit scheme on Irish goods imported into Britain will end.
15.
asked the Taoiseach whether the Government have taken any decision in relation to the further lowering of tariff barriers this year.
16.
asked the Taoiseach if the question of postponing the tariff reductions on imported British goods was discussed at the recent trade talks in London; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
17.
asked the Taoiseach whether there will be further meetings with the British Government on the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement prior to the Budget.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 to 17 together.
At the Ministerial talks in London last week all the matters arising from my meeting on the 29th November with the British Prime Minister, including in particular the working of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement in all its aspects, were further considered.
On the agricultural side, British Ministers repeated the assurance already given on behalf of their Government that their agricultural expansion programme will not frustrate the agricultural objectives of the Agreement. Irish Ministers had strongly emphasised the importance for Ireland of a continuing satisfactory trade in agricultural products, especially cattle, beef and dairy products. In particular, they pressed for adequate access for the projected quantities of dairy products which Ireland would have available for export. Discussion of these matters is to be continued at a further Ministerial meeting to take place in Dublin this month.
There was also a full review of developments affecting Ireland's exports of industrial products, including the implications for the Irish economy of the measures taken by the British Government to restrain domestic demand and imports. British Ministers foresaw a growing improvement in Britain's balance of payments and a trend towards relaxation of these measures. They recognised the special character of the economic relationship between the two countries, and agreed to discuss at an early date the special problems for Ireland arising out of British balance of payments measures.
The possible need for Ireland to consider some modification in the programme for dismantlement of tariffs on British industrial goods was discussed and will be among the matters to be discussed further at the forthcoming Ministerial meeting.
Regarding the Import Deposit Scheme, Deputies will be aware that the enabling legislation is for one year only and, while there is provision for its termination at an earlier date, there is no provision for its extension beyond one year.
The opportunity was taken during the London meeting to have a general exchange of views on EEC developments.
As will be noted from the communiqué following the talks, British Ministers agreed that their Government is now prepared to waive the remaining payments of the annuity of £250,000 payable to the British Government for a period of 60 years to 1985 in respect of damage to property in Ireland after the 21st January, 1919.
Did the Taoiseach say there were discussions with the British Government with regard to further reductions in our tariffs next July?
Yes, that was mentioned. It will be discussed further at the meetings to be held this month in Dublin.
I take it the point of view was expressed on behalf of the Government here that if selective decisions were made as have been made by the British Government we would reserve the right to reconsider the liberalisation of tariffs accordingly.
The Deputy can take it that all relevant points like that were discussed.
May I inquire if with special reference to achieving exports from this country it was thought expedient to remind the British Government that we made an agreement with them in 1947 when I think my predecessor, Deputy Patrick Smith, was Minister for Agriculture, to expand the output of eggs at the request of the British Government and that they subsequently altered their own domestic policy with the result that they themselves became exporters of eggs and ceased to buy Irish eggs or indeed Danish eggs at all? Might we recall that one breach of the spirit of an agreement at that time is quite enough and that if we entered this trade agreement with them in anticipation of an expanding market for commodities like cheese we would reasonably expect it to be honoured not only in the letter but in the spirit?
It is very hard to discover the question in that peroration but if the Deputy is suggesting that we should have made the point that our expansion in agricultural products, notably cheese, must be taken into account, certainly that point was made very forcibly.
I thought the Minister for Agriculture might have reminded them of the circumstances surrounding the egg agreement of 1947 where exactly the same situation occurred. We accepted the British Government's request to expand egg production because they were short of eggs. At the end of a five-year period we discovered they were expanding their production to the point of saying they had no market left for any eggs at all. I do not think the British Government ought to do that twice.
The two cases are not on all fours. In the case of eggs the production came from within. In the case of cheese it was a question of large-scale imports of cheap cheddartype cheese that caused disruption in the British market. As far as overall agricultural production is concerned there is a programme in Britain which seeks to increase the British contribution to the consumption of agricultural produce in Britain but that increase is expected to take account only of some expansion in consumption which will arise in the years ahead in Britain and therefore the British Government were able to assure us that that programme will not in any way hinder our projected expansion of exports to the British market.
Could the Taoiseach say if the facts were explained that as a result of unilateral acts by the British in the past year and their serious impact on the whole economy here, if we were driven to the point, we would, in fact, consider abrogating this particular Agreement? Was that viewpoint expressed? Does the Taoiseach think the Agreement calls for this kind of expression on our part at this stage in view of the pretty serious consequences of certain British acts in the past year in the life-time of this Agreement? Does the Taoiseach think it calls for this or did our negotiators express this viewpoint?
Our negotiators certainly impressed on the British Government that acts of this nature that are in contemplation should be notified to us in advance. The question is still open whether the unilateral acts as suggested by the Deputy are actually in breach of the Agreement. That has not been established or agreed. Nevertheless, if there was a clear case of a breach of the Agreement by the British then it would be a matter for us to take whatever action we would think to be proper.
Is the Taoiseach satisfied that our negotiators expressed the serious conception which we have in regard to the severe threat to us because of certain acts by the British in the past year? Did they indicate to the British Government in no uncertain fashion that a continuance of those acts or failure to give a satisfactory explanation of those former acts would mean that we would think about abrogating this Agreement because it was becoming too expensive from the point of view of our whole economy?
The Deputy can be sure that our negotiators expressed such complaints very forcibly to them in relation to acts of that nature.
Did they say that the British had broken the Agreement and we were not going to tolerate any further breach of the Agreement?
I would not accept that.
Could the Taoiseach say if there was an indication from the Irish representatives to the British Government that we were considering a discontinuation of the reduction in the tariffs next July and, if so, what, if any, reaction there was from the British Government?
That matter will be further discussed and I do not think there is any point in talking about reactions at this stage.
Is it not a fact that a payment of £10 million made or agreed to be made by this country to Great Britain about 30 years ago was in settlement of all outstanding financial matters between the two countries up to that date? Is the sum of £4 million mentioned by the Taoiseach in his reply not one of those outstanding matters? Will the Taoiseach explain if it was not covered by the £10 million which we paid in 1938? If it was not how was it excluded?
It was specifically excluded in the Agreement subsequent to 1925. It was provided for in the Agreement of 1925 and the British insisted on its payment up to now.
Did the £10 million we paid in 1938 not cover it? I thought that covered all outstanding financial differences up to that date.
Payments in respect of damage to property are one of three financial obligations specifically excluded, the other two being payment in respect of agency services or ordinary inter-governmental transactions, payments in pursuance of any agreed arrangements in respect of unredeemed bank notes, withdrawal of British silver coin, trustee savings banks and double taxation. Those were three specific exclusions.
Is the Taoiseach not aware that this was a sort of luck penny thrown in by the Cumann na nGaedheal Government in 1925?
Old man mischief.
If our EEC ambitions were referred to in the discussions presumably the rupture in relations between the British and the French Governments was mentioned. If it was mentioned is it the view of this Government that we side with the British statement of their side in this dispute? Do we accord in fact with the British view of this disagreement with France or do we take a neutral position in this dispute?
We have not taken any sides in this issue.
Could the Taoiseach inform the House as to what specific agreements the British Government made in relation to our agricultural exports in view of the fact that it has been mentioned that Britain herself is expanding exports? What specific guarantees did we get other than the word of British Ministers on which one cannot rely too much because of what has happened over the past two years?
I have received such guarantees from the British Prime Minister and the British Minister for Agriculture. Those guarantees have been repeated by the Ministers who met our negotiators in London last week.
What were the guarantees? Were they just verbal statements?
The Free Trade Area Agreement provides for our expansion in agricultural as well as other exports.
Surely the Taoiseach will agree that in the Free Trade Area Agreement the then Minister for Agriculture and the British Minister for Agriculture at the time exchanged letters indicative of goodwill but so far as the British were concerned the spirit and the text of those letters have been broken by their subsequent acts?
That is a matter for argument. It is open for argument and will be pursued this month.