asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will ensure that any agreed alteration in Britain's EEC contribution will not result in increases in the Irish contribution, the present position regarding Britain's application for a reduction in her contribution and the Government's attitude to this application.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - EEC Contributions.
15.
Deputies will be aware that at the meeting of the European Council in Dublin on 29-30 November last the Commission proposed certain modifications to the financial mechanism. If these modifications were accepted Britain would get a net refund of 520m EUA—£350 million. The European Council agreed that this Commission proposal could form a useful basis for a solution.
The Commission was also asked to submit proposals for additional expenditure measures in the UK. The Commission submitted a paper to the Council of Ministers on 5 February 1980 and this paper is under discussion by the Council. The paper, a copy of which is available in the Dáil Library, suggests that additional expenditure measures for the UK could cover such areas as coal exploitation, transport infrastructure and urban renewal. Furthermore, on the general question of convergence, the Commission suggests ways of assisting regions and zones in the less prosperous member states. Following consideration of these proposals by the Council of Foreign Ministers and of Finance Ministers, they will be discussed by the European Council at its next meeting at present scheduled for 31 March-1 April.
In general the Government consider it desirable in the interests of the Community that a solution to the British budgetary problem be reached as soon as possible. Any such solution must, in our view, be consistent with Community principles and, in particular, must not infringe the principle of own resources nor introduce the principle of juste retour.
I can assure the Deputy that Ireland's principal objective in seeking a solution to this problem will be to ensure that our position is not adversely affected and that any solution agreed is consistent with the promotion of convergence of the economies of the member states which is the context in which this matter is being discussed.
I appreciate that the matter has not been fully resolved as yet but I should like the Minister to tell the House how he thinks a solution could be found that will (a) allow a reduction in the UK contribution and (b) not have the effect, directly or indirectly, of increasing our contribution. In that context how would the Minister explain such a solution in the context of our commitment to the principle of convergence?
Our very strong case and position, which is the same as that of Italy, is that countries with a lower GNP than the UK, as is the case with Ireland and Italy, should not be penalised in any way. Any benefit that the UK may obtain from its proposals in this direction should not in any way adversely affect those countries who have a lower GNP. Britain is seventh in the GNP league and Italy and Ireland are eighth and ninth. That has been our approach to the matter.
I appreciate the approach and I agree entirely with the Minister's viewpoint. In the context of the offer to Britain of £350 million at the Dublin Summit or in the context of the present suggestion, will the Minister explain how the matter can be finalised without Ireland, either directly or indirectly, having to make an increased contribution?
Through either the Ortoli facility or through an increase in regional aid we would hope to be more than compensated for any contribution increase that might arise. This is the way we are thinking. Our approach in principle has been accepted by the Commission because it is absolutely rational that the two countries I mentioned—Italy and Ireland—should not in any way be prejudiced because of a concession given to the UK. Any concession to the UK will have to be carried by the more prosperous countries within the Community.
Will the Minister state if that viewpoint is acceptable to other members of the Community?
We are still in the course of discussion at Commission level. The matter has not yet been considered by the Council of Foreign Ministers. Probably we will consider it at our next meeting and it will then be considered at the summit on 31 March.
The Minister has set great store on the principle that any change in the British contribution should not reflect adversely on those economies that have a lower GNP than Britain. Is it accurate to say that this principle has not been accepted by EEC member Governments however favourably it may be looked on by the Commission?
We have not met yet to discuss it.
Has the Minister any indications as to whether there will be any worthwhile support for this principle at the political level, which is where it will really count when the chips are down?
That will be part of my job in the Council of Ministers with the support of the Commission. I hope that the rationale of the position will be accepted because it is a logical Community stance.
Would the Minister like to comment on the repeated claim by the British Prime Minister that Britain is one of the poorest countries in the Communities? Does he regard that as an accurate statement of fact?
I have no comment to make on what that good lady says. That is her business as British Prime Minister.
Do I understand from the Minister that he is going to wait for the Council of Ministers to meet before he can ascertain the attitude of other countries?
We have had discussions——
If that is so why does the Minister not answer the question put to him by Deputy Horgan?
The formal meeting of the Council of Ministers at which the matter will be formally discussed has not yet taken place but numerous informal meetings have taken place at official and ministerial level. There is much to-ing and fro-ing on this matter at the moment.
Deputy Horgan asked the Minister if he had any indication of support. Surely that can be answered.
Deputy Barry, it is not in order to discuss the outcome of a meeting which has not taken place.
I can tease out the Minister's answer. The Minister in reply to a question by Deputy Horgan said that at the Council of Ministers meeting he would find out.
I have gone very far and explained our thinking on the matter. We will leave it at that.
The Minister may have an answer to Deputy Horgan's question but he is not going to give it to the House.
One final thing. It is an important issue apart from the council meeting. At the Dublin summit there was an offer of approximately £350 million made to the UK which they did not accept and therefore presumably the basis on which that offer was being made was settled at the time.
This is information which the Deputy is giving.
I am asking the Minister for my information and the information of the House and the country, is it not a fact that if that offer had been accepted by the UK it would have cost us a sum of money that was estimated at the time as in the region of £7 million per annum?
Any such contribution in which we would be involved in relation to Britain must be compensated and more than compensated by a contribution to Ireland through some other mechanism, be it the Ortoli facility or an increase in the Regional Fund. That is Italy's position as well and we have the support of the Commission. Beyond that I cannot go. That is the present position.
Where is all the money to come from?
Did the Minister agree to this offer in December? Is he saying yes or no?
We are talking about the next summit now on 31 March.
We are not permitted to talk about the next summit. I am asking what happened at the last summit. The Minister is nodding his head. Does that indicate agreement on his part?
I have answered the question.
Yes or no?
I have been more than fair in giving the information to the House.
Could I ask the Minister to give me yes or no?
I am calling the next question.
I ask for one word, yes or no. Did the Minister and this Government agree to the terms of this offer? Is the Minister refusing to reply?
The Dublin summit failed to come to any agreement and the Deputy is well aware of that.
Did he agree to the offer that was made to the UK?
Is the Deputy talking about the offer of £350 million?
Yes.
That was the minimum. Everybody knows that. There was an offer of £350 million open to the UK at the Dublin summit which the UK refused.