asked the Minister for Finance if newspaper reports suggesting that there was agreement at the meeting of the EEC's Finance Ministers, held on 17 April 1978 to adopt policies to achieve the growth targets suggested at the Copenhagen summit, are correct.
Ceisteanna—Questions . Oral Answers . - EEC Growth Target Policies .
10.
: At its session on 17 April the Council of Ministers for Financial and Economic Affairs was concerned with establishing procedures for devising an overall strategy designed to realise the objectives of growth and stability laid down by the European Council in early April. The question of reaching agreement on the policies needed to attain these objectives did not arise on that occasion. This matter will be considered by the Council at its forthcoming meetings.
: Who attended on behalf of the Government? It was two days after the Minister had his car accident and I understand why the Minister could not be there.
: Ireland was represented at the meeting on 17 April by our Permanent Representative in Brussels and the Secretary of my Department.
: I understand that, but I am sure the Minister will appreciate that neither of these put themselves forward for election and, if the increased body of Ministers of State, which the Taoiseach assured us was necessary because of the increased workload imposed by Europe and, in addition, this Government has a Minister for Economic Planning, and this was an economic debate, and the Government was not represented at political level——
: This is a statement.
: I notice at the last finance and economic meeting on 22 May we were represented by a Minister of State in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs despite the fact that the Minister, the Minister for Economic Planning and Development and the Secretary to the Department of Finance could and should have been available.
: In regard to the meeting on 17 April, as I have indicated, what was involved was not decisions on economic policy but rather decisions on the procedures for devising the strategy required. On that particular occasion, as the Deputy has said, I had been involved in a car accident and the amount of time available to make alternative arrangements was extremely limited and so it was not possible to make alternative arrangements. With regard to the second meeting referred to by the Deputy, he can take it we were more than adequately represented at that meeting and, indeed, the reports available indicate that quite clearly. He can also rest assured that on any occasion when arrangements of this kind are made account is taken of the nature of the business to be transacted, and certain priorities have to be observed and are observed.
: Would the Minister not agree that since three Ministers of the Government are concerned with economic and financial affairs, to send another Minister who is not in any way concerned with those matters to a very important meeting does not do justice to this country in Europe? Further will he agree that at the first meeting on 17 April, in spite of the undertaking given by the Federal Republic of Germany at the summit meeting in Copenhagen, the Finance Minister of that country said he knew nothing at all about the proposed target of 4½ per cent growth rate to be achieved by the European communities by mid-1979? This was considered at the summit meeting a fortnight earlier as being one of the most important methods of moving the nine countries of the EEC out of the recession.
No. 11.
: Question
: In the country with the greatest possibility of achieving that, there was evidently disagreement between the Minister for Finance and the Chancellor. I am sure the Minister will agree it was important that this country should have been represented——
: Question No. 11.
: The Deputy can rest assured that our interests were fully and very adequately safeguarded on the occasion in question. The Deputy's understanding of what was involved in the reference to a target is slightly inaccurate. I do not blame him for that, because some press reports to that effect appeared but they were somewhat inaccurate.
: Can the Minister assure me that in future at what are possibly the most important meetings for this country—the Council of Finance Ministers—he or another senior Minister related to the Department of Finance will attend?
: The Deputy may take it that at all times we will be adequately represented and the nature of the representation will take into account the nature of the work to be transacted.
: I am sorry for pursuing this but I must ask the Minister if he will agree that, no matter how adequately we were represented by civil servants, this is a council of elected Ministers of Government and it is essential that somebody who can talk to them on the same level should be present to argue Ireland's case.
: All I can say, as I have said already—and I do not want to repeat myself unduly—is that on the occasion to which the Deputy is referring, no other course was open to us due to circumstances outside my control.
: On 22 May other courses were open which were not taken.
: They were, but the Deputy does not agree with them. That is another point.
: I do not agree with them at all.
: It is not the Deputy's responsibility in that area. It is mine and I am satisfied——
: It is precisely because the Minister is responsible that he should have been present. I understand about the first meeting but not the second meeting.
: The Deputy is entitled to his opinion and I am entitled to mine. I am responsible for exercising my judgment in this area and I exercised it.
: I have called Question No. 11.
: I am sorry. I was unable to hear the Chair.
: This debate could take place on an estimate or some place else. Question Time is not the place for it.