asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether he is satisfied with the information available to the general public on this country's application for membership of the EEC, with particular regard to the responsibilities attendant on EEC membership and the consequences which will follow for those engaged in the agricultural and industrial sectors.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Membership of EEC.
12.
The Government have undertaken a co-ordinated and comprehensive programme of information on all aspects of the European Communities and the implications for Ireland of membership. This information programme, which is being progressively intensified, serves the general public, Members of the Oireachtas, the press and broadcast media and sectional and vocational interests.
Would the Minster agree that even now there is a great lack of official information which would inform the people of the effect of entry on jobs. prices and the fabric of rural life? Would he agree that there is widespread ignorance among the vast majority of our people of these vital matters? Would he also agree that much of the responsibility for this is directly attributable or certainly partly attributable to the lack of offcial information and that the blame for the ignorance to which I refer is to some extent to be laid at the door of his own Ministry?
I cannot accept responsibility for the ignorance of people who need not be ignorant. From the very beginning the Government have in a White Paper analysed the implications for Ireland of membership and it was debated here in the House. The Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries produced a White Paper on agriculture and the implications for it; and there is absolutely no reason why any Member of this House who wanted to study these matters should not be quite au fait with the implications in so far as they can be predicted. I have also circulated to Deputies progress reports, and there will be another one quite soon. As the Deputy knows, there has been a fairly sustained interest here at Question Time when very full answers 8ave been given. I have analysed these questions according to the Deputies who put them down, and if the Deputy is interested in the interest shown I can let him know. After a short time we should have fuller information on what the transitional conditions will be after negotiations, and then we should be in a better position to make some predictions about the effects on the various sectors. This would call for a new documentation for discussion by the Dáil before the decision is taken to join the Communities. As well as that information to Deputies, a Section of Information was set up n the Department of Foreign Affairs. They have proceeded on the basis that over about a year all the information must be made available to the public. As yet the information is, of necessity. incomplete. What has been produced is what it has been possible to produce. We have planned a series of booklets, one of which has been published. and it is meant to simplify matters for the public. It was criticised in the House for not being more informative, but then the White Paper is there. I cannot get anything in between the two for those who will not read the White Paper and those who think the booklet is too simple. As well as this series of booklets, leaflets have been produced on fisheries and the implications for land purchase. I have made a series of speeches based on information on the Communities. There are something like 25 or 26 of these speeches which contain very interesting information. if the Deputy would like to read them.
We have had press briefings, and. as I said before, the correspondents from the Irish newspapers and RTE who have followed negotiations have been very thorough n their study of the situation and very accurate in their recounting of it. We have had visits from members of the Commission and from members of the Council. These visits have brought their own concentration on EEC matters, with information from the people with special knowledge like Dr. Mansholt, Mr. Malfatti, Mr. Deniau and so on. There is also an inquiry service for the public in the Department of Foreign Affairs which is being used. As I say, I cannot accept responsibility for those who do not read what we give them. The information campaign will be intensified as time goes by, and I can only hope that the general public will show more interest than some people who have been criticising our information service.
The Minister will accept that the largest trade union in the country has complained about the lack of information, and especially in the areas of employment the complaint has been frequently heard that, as yet, in so far as we can go on predictions, there has not even been a quantitative assessment of the effect of entry on the various areas of employment. This is one of the points made by the Irish Transport and General Workers Union when it published its recent pamphlet.
The Deputy will agree this type of document would depend on knowing the final negotiated position for the transitional period, which would be the difficult period. I think people in the trade unions will accept that any prediction about the future to or out of the Community can only be an estimate, sometimes very technical and, perhaps, something which it is not possible to gear for the public at all.
Would the Minister not think that, in the interests of comprehending what is involved in this so-called challenge, even assessments of employment should be available? I would describe this pamphlet simply as a house brochure of the EEC.
That is all it is meant to be.
Does the Minister think there is any need for propaganda of this kind at the present time?
As this House is a microcosm of the country. the main need is to have people interested. and as the Deputy is aware, it is difficult to get people interested because the matter itself was not imminent enough to cause concern. Now that negotiations are going towards a successful conclusion, there is a great deal more interest. and when we have a complete picture of the conditions under which we shall go through the transitional period and of certain other matters on which I think we should seek concessions for this country and which are not related to the transitional period, then we shall be better able to assess our position in the future. It is not a question of an accurate assessment in every sector but of making up our minds whether we should be better off in or out of the Community. Most people seem to forget that the quantification of being outside the Community is as difficult as the quantification of being in it.
Would the Minister not think it would be worth while to provide information as to the average income in various jobs in Europe, the social benefits that are paid, the children's allowances, old age pensions, and the amount of money a worker there pays out of his wages, so that these figures could be compared with those prevailing in this country and so that our workers would know where they stood?
By the time the rest of the series of booklets has issued, the information the Deputy wants will be available to the public. We have one of a series of six booklets already published. The others are in the various stages of printing.
You can get that information in the New Statesman.
The preparation is made. It is a matter of getting the booklets printed and published.
Does the Minister not realise that the continual propaganda from his Department and from himself in particular in favour of our joining the Common Market is weakening his position in the negotiations? Does he not realise that instead of talking all over the country in favour of going in he should be keeping his mouth shut?
No. The Deputy is mistaken there. The negotiations are for membership. What is being negotiated is the circumstances that will apply to us during the transitional period. There is no doubt in anybody's mind that membership of the Community is the course to take. At least, there is no doubt about it in my mind. I would like those other people who are not so well acquainted with the facts of the Community would be of the same opinion. The actual negotiations are in no way undermined by this because what we are negotiating is the transitional period. What would be difficult would be to negotiate membership of the Communities, and then, for lack of information, to have the wrong decision made.
The kernel of our concern about entry rests purely on our apprehension about the jobs of Irish workers. In the series of books to which the Minister referred could he envisage a book which would at least give some estimates in respect of various employment areas so that the Irish trade union movement could make a realistic assessment of this EEC adventure?
That is a fair question as long as the Deputy would take it that accuracy of prediction in regard to membership of the Community as against non-membership would be the criterion on which they would make their decision, not whether they want the present position to continue, which is not possible, or membership. What we have to face is the decision whether to stay outside the Community, which would totally change our trading position, or whether to go in. If they accept that, then the other question is a fair one.
13.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs in what respect the Norwegian or British proposals to the EEC on fisheries are (a) acceptable and (b) unacceptable to this country.
I do not think that our interests in the negotiations would be served by my commenting publicly. as the Deputy has asked, on the proposals in question. As I stated last week, each of the applicant countries has put forward the proposals on fisheries which it considers would best protect its own particular interests.
Is the Minister aware that the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand expressed concern today at a possible proposal that after the five-year transational period a veto could be applied against New Zealand butter entering the Common Market? Is there any risk that a veto could also be applied in respect to our fishing proposals?
I do not think that anyone in this situation used the word "veto". What is true is that the Council of Ministers do not intend to make any decision unless that decision is unanimous. They would not make a decision against the vital interests of any one of their members. That being so, the present situation in regard to our fisheries should persit so that our vital interests should be protected by our representatives on the Council of Ministers after accession. I do not see any problem there for us.
Whether it is described as a veto or not, the Deputy Prime Minister expressed concern today that at the end of the transitional period it was possible, under the proposals, for the members to exclude New Zealand butter.
My only concern is the position of Ireland in the negotiations.
I am asking whether there is any ask that the same consensus of opinion could be applied in respect of fishing rights as the Deputy Prime Minister asserts may be applied in respect of New Zealand butter?
New Zealand is not an applicant for membership and would not be represented at such a meeting. The Deputy does not seem to understand that what I want to achieve is that our present situation in regard to the 12-mile limit for our fishermen should persist into membership and that we, as members, would have a full say in protecting our national interests in that situation. If we accepted or had to accept the Community rule as it was and became members we would have to accept full access into our shores and then to try to make a change, when the Deputy's point would arise.
Is it not correct to say that we are only negotiating on entry terms? Is it not true that when we go in we will be told that the Treaties of Rome and Paris must operate? In fact, what Deputy Cosgrave is referring to is that a problem like that of New Zealand's might be considered after we are in. I agree with Deputy Cosgrave that what is most likely to happen, if we are unfortunate enough to get in, is that we will be stuck with the Treaties and will be told that it is too late to do anything about the position.
A small country would be far better off with the protection of the Treaties. Anybody who wants us to stay in our present position in regard to our trading arrangements, with a big partner who can make his own rules. is not considering the national welfare. We are better as a member of the Community, protected by the Treaties of Rome and Paris.
We ought to stay away from Killorglin at periods. May I ask the Minister whether he will be shifting from his insistence on maintaining the 12-mile limit?
I have no intention of moving from this. This is our proposal as distinct from any other proposal. This is the Irish proposal and I do not want to move from it.
I am calling Question No. 14.
Would the Minister tell the House the period in which we would be striving for this limit to be retained? Would the Minister be in a position to tell us the number of years for which he will be seeking to have the 12-mile limit?
I explained that the proposal I made was that the 12-mile limit would be allowed to stand until enlargement. After that, any change in the regulations would have to be made by the Community of Ten, and we would participate in the decision. I would set no time on maintaining the limit which we have found necessary for the development of our fishing industry. We need that 12-mile limit for the development of the industry which is very important to this country.