: I move:
That Dáil Éireann takes note of the Reports:
Developments in the European Communities—Thirteenth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth and Sixteenth Reports.
When preparations were being made for Ireland to join the European Communities it was decided that it would be appropriate if reports on developments in the Communities were published every six months. Accordingly, section 5 of the European Communities Act, 1972, provides that the Government shall make such a report twice yearly to each House of the Oireachtas.
The reports which are the subject of the motion we are taking today cover the period from July 1978 to July 1980 and, since the Fifteenth Report deals with developments in the period of Ireland's Presidency of the Council and of European Political Co-operation, it is I think of special interest.
It is a matter of some regret to me that it has not been possible to find time for debates on these reports at an earlier stage. Ideally these debates should, in my opinion, be held as soon as possible after the date of publication of each report. Deputies may have noted that recently arrangements have been made to have the reports published within approximately two months of the end of the period of review. It is important that we should consider the developments outlined in the reports as soon as possible after they have occurred and therefore I would wish to see debates on motions such as we are considering today taken on a regular basis.
I would like to refer briefly to some of the major developments in the various areas of Community activity during the period of the reports.
However, since many of the events reported have now been superseded by more recent developments, I will concentrate on the current situation in the Community. Deputies may wish to advert to other matters not covered in my introduction to this debate and I will be happy to deal with these matters in my reply.
The established format has been followed in these reports; reviews of meetings of the European Council held during the period are included, lists of ministerial regulations made under the European Communities Act, 1972, are given as annexes as are tables showing subsidies, grants and loans received by Ireland.
At the outset I would like to mention the fact that during the period under review the negotiations for the accession of Greece to the European Communities were concluded. Deputies will be aware that Ireland ratified the Treaty of Accession last December and now that all member states and Greece have completed their ratification procedures, Greece will become the tenth member state of the Community on 1 January 1981. In regard to Portugal and Spain, accession negotiations are continuing.
I would like to make clear our position in regard to the general question of enlargement and to the particular concerns which Ireland has expressed in the context of the accession of Greece, Portugal and Spain. I wish to reiterate that Ireland has at all times expressed support for enlargement, but we have insisted that enlargement must not adversely affect present common policies or the future development of the Community. We have received the support of our partners for this view of enlargement. I might in this regard mention in particular the position adopted by the Council at the time of the opening of accession negotiations in 1976, namely, that appropriate provision would be made for the needs of an enlarged Community; that the nature and future development of the Community would not be adversely affected by enlargement, and that institutional reform would be undertaken to enable the Community to act effectively after the accession of new member states.
It was and remains our understanding that the Community is committed to ensuring that enlargement does not result in a weaker and less cohesive Community. In the course of the internal debate in the Community on enlargement we stressed the necessity of implementing measures aimed at reducing the regional disparities which exist within the Community as at present constituted. Both in direct relation to the prospective enlargement and in the context of other developments, such as the establishment of the European Monetary System, we have achieved a certain degree of success. I would mention in particular the measures for infrastructural aid for the West of Ireland which have recently been agreed and in the area of institutional reform Deputies will know that the Committee of Wise Men have submitted their report to the Council and it is at present under active consideration.
I would like to emphasise that our concerns are in no way aimed at the applicant states. They are matters which must be resolved by the existing Community and indeed they would have to be tackled regardless of the enlargement context. In particular the provision of adequate resources for the Community as at present constituted is a matter of pressing concern. Deputies will be aware that agreement was reached last May on the concerns of the UK in regard to her net contribution to the Community budget. This enabled the Community to come to an agreement on agricultural prices and related measures which, while far from ideal, contrasted very favourably with what was originally proposed by the Commission. The text on fisheries, too, which was agreed at the same time by the Council of Foreign Ministers, is a cause of satisfaction. I will return to developments in the agricultural and fisheries sectors later.
These agreements on the budgetary and related problems have shown that the European Community continues to have the ability to resolve serious and substantial differences of opinion among its member states. At the same time it would be idle to pretend that the accommodation reached last May leaves us free from worry for the future.
Part of the agreement reached by the Council at that time was that a general examination of Community policies and their financial implications would be undertaken by the Commission with a view to preventing the recurrence of unacceptable situations for any member state. It was agreed that the examination would not call into question the common financial responsibility for those policies which are financed from the Community's own resources nor the basic principle of the common agricultural policy. The Commission's findings will be presented to the Council before 30 June next. It is unfortunate, to say the least, that this examination of policies is taking place at a time when Community expenditure is on the point of reaching its present fixed limit of 1 per cent of value-added tax. Given, on the one hand, the important share of agriculture in Community expenditure and, on the other hand, the importance to the Irish economy and to Irish society generally of a strong and prosperous farming community, it is clear that we shall have to be on our guard to ensure that no so-called "solution" to future budgetary problems creates for us that unacceptable situation for a member state which the Council is pledged to avoid. We shall be on our guard. Let there be no doubt about that.
As far as we here in Ireland are concerned, what is wrong is not that we receive too much from the Community budget; no responsible body of opinion in Europe believes that. What is wrong is that the regional and social funds are inadequately funded to make a significant contribution to one of the Treaties' fundamental objectives, namely, the convergence of member states' economies. The fact of the matter is that in 1979, for example, Ireland received over £400 million under the common agricultural policy. Important as our receipts from the regional and social funds are—amounts approved in 1979 were £38.7 million and £41.7 million respectively—it is clear that they are far from adequate to make a really significant contribution to closing the prosperity gap between Ireland and the better off members of the Community. We hear much nowadays about restructuring the Community budget. For too many people in Europe this has come to mean the spending of less money on agriculture. We may be forgiven here for believing that it should mean increased expenditure in the weaker areas of the Community. The debate on these questions for many people in our partner states is constrained by the 1 per cent VAT limit to Community revenues. It is totally unreasonable that this should be so, not merely because the EEC is facing enlargement from nine to 12 members—though that in itself is a powerful reason—but because within that limit the Community cannot adequately finance in the years to come the agricultural policy which is one of its main achievements, and for us its main attraction, and at the same time hope to bring the economies of its members closer together in mutual prosperity.
The present limit to revenues is archaic. It was fixed at a time when economic conditions were very different from what they are today and when the demands of financial solidarity were lower. It is natural in an organic, developing Community that the requirements of the common purse should grow and develop with the Community itself. It would be a denial of the Community's raison d'être to refuse to accept this and to insist on maintaining an increasingly unreal and artificial limit to the Community's possibilities.
The period under review saw the European Council, at its meeting of 4-5 December 1978, adopt the formal resolution on the adoption of the European Monetary System. This decision marked a significant step forward in the development of the Community. That it was possible to successfully embark on such a progressive venture as the EMS, in an economic climate which was less than favourable to common action of such magnitude, must augur well for the future unity and development of the Community.
The EMS continues to function satisfactorily and, although some limited realignments were necessary in September and November of last year, exchange rates have remained fairly stable overall. The performance of the punt within the system has been good—we have been in the upper part of the band of currencies for some time now—and the subsidised loans being provided within the EMS are being used to good effect to strengthen this country's economy. Unfortunately, much public attention has been focussed on the performance of the punt vis-à-vis the pound sterling rather than the punt's performance within the EMS. The change in the relationship with the pound sterling has been due, not to the weakness of the punt, but rather to the relative strength of the pound sterling against all the EMS currencies.
The European Council, held here in Dublin last November, reaffirmed the objective of moving to the next stage by establishing the European Monetary Fund and requested the Economic and Finance Council to pursue agreement on the details of the fund. Discussions are continuing on the complex technical details of the fund in the Monetary Committee and in the Committee of Central Bank Governors.
In the context of its development co-operation policy the Community has continued to introduce greater coherence into its overall policies in trade, agriculture and other fields.
The first ACP-EEC Convention of Lomé, which expired on 29 February 1980, was a unique model of relations between developed and developing countries and represented the most comprehensive expression of the Community's co-operation policy so far. A successor to this convention was signed in October 1979 during the Irish Presidency of the Council of the European Communities, and is expected to enter into force later this year.
The new convention consolidates and improves upon its predecessor. The funds available for expenditure on ACP-EEC co-operation have been increased by 62 per cent and amount to nearly £3.8 billion of which Ireland's share will be £18.6 million, payable over a period of eight years.
I might add that during the period under review the Community's relations with Turkey, Yugoslavia, the countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations and others have been developed significantly.
The most significant development in the field of regional policy during the period under review was the establishment in the regional fund of a non-quota section, representing 5 per cent of the commitment appropriations from the fund, which will finance specific Community regional development measures. In October 1979 the Commission submitted proposals for use of the non-quota section to the Council for assistance to five areas in the Community including Irish border areas. I am glad to state that, although adoption of the regulations was held up pending resolution of the British budgetary problem, they were adopted at Council on 7 October 1980. The measures for the border regions concern five counties directly adjoining the Border on the southern side and eight district councils adjoining on the northern side and are aimed at economic activities in the fields of tourist accommodation, tourist-linked infrastructure, communications and artisan enterprises. The financial allocation will be £10.7 million for the southern side and £5.3 million for northern areas over the period 1980-84. With regard to approvals from the fund during the period under review, Ireland received a total of £23.62 million in approvals in 1978 and this increased to £41.73 million in 1979. It is expected that approvals for 1980 will amount to approximately £48 million.
As regards the social fund, approvals for Ireland amounted to £29 million in 1978 and £38.7 million in 1979. It is expected that approvals for 1980 will amount to £56 million approximately.
In the agricultural sector the major developments in the period covered by the reports concerned the changes necessary to take account of the European Monetary System and the agreement on agricultural prices for the 1979-80 and 1980-81 marketing years. In December 1978 the Council had considered a proposal aimed at neutralising the impact of the European Monetary System on the common agricultural policy. France linked their agreement to this proposal with progress on elimination of monetary compensatory amounts. Following lengthy discussion on these issues during which the entry into force of the EMS was delayed, the member states, with the exception of the UK, finally agreed in March on the elimination of new MCAs arising during the first two years of the operation of the EMS. At the same time the Council declared its determination to reduce progressively existing MCAs.
The Commission submitted its proposals on agricultural prices for the 1979-80 marketing year to the Council in February 1979 and agreement on an overall increase of 1.5 per cent for all products other than milk—for which there was a price freeze—was eventually reached in June 1979. While the price increase was relatively modest the agreement also included a number of measures of benefit to Ireland which added up to a satisfactory package for us.
During the period of the Irish Presidency of the EEC—the second half of 1979—progress was made in a number of areas in agriculture. Most notable was the agreement on important changes in the wine sector designed to bring about a better balance between production and consumption of wine in the Community.
The major development in agriculture during the first half of 1980 from the Community viewpoint was, of course, the prices agreement for 1980-81. Considering the tight budgetary situation and the pressures which are being exerted against the common agricultural policy, this price package was quite favourable to Ireland and represented a substantial advance on what was first proposed. The overall price increase of 5 per cent was twice the original proposed and, as I mentioned earlier, of major significance for us was the agreement on a set of structural measures for the west of Ireland which will mean investment of £300 million over a ten year period; 50 per cent of the money for these measures will come from Community funds. Other positive elements in the package of importance to Ireland were the agreement on a common sheepmeat policy which came into operation on 20 October and Community subsidies for beef suckler herds.
Of major significance to Ireland also was the fact that none of the main antisurplus measures proposed by the Commission will apply this year. This means no super levy, no cuts in sugar quotas and no suspension of beef intervention.
The reports outline the difficulties in reaching agreement on a common fisheries policy which would govern fishing in the 200-mile zone which the member states established as from 1 January 1977. It has proved very difficult to reconcile the positions of the member states on the basic question of quotas, conservation policy and access. However, during the periods covered by the reports several important measures designed to help the development of the Irish fishing industry were adopted. A sum of 46 million units of account—approximately IR£30 million—was allocated to Ireland for the five-year period, 1977 to 1982 to build up our fishery protection and surveillance capability. The Council also adopted a regulation providing for investment aid amounting to five million EUA's in the period under review for restructuring the inshore fishing industry. This measure especially assists Ireland by a grant of up to 50 per cent of the cost of new fishing vessels of specified length and aid also for mariculture projects.
At the Council in December 1979 a significant breakthrough was achieved when Ministers undertook to decide early in the New Year on Community measures for conservation and management of fishery resources for 1980. Agreement in principle on total allowable catches and a common system of recording and notification of catches was reached on 29 January and progress was also made in regard to agreements with third countries.
A major impetus towards settlement of the fisheries question was given by the declaration of the Council of Foreign Ministers on 29 May 1980 which laid down guidelines for the establishment of a common fisheries policy before 1 January 1981. Since then significant progress has been achieved with agreement on a Community conservation policy. Discussions are taking place at present on the allocation of national quotas and other elements such as structural policy, marketing proposals, and control measures, which will form part of a revised common fisheries policy with the aim of meeting the 1 January deadline set by Ministers.
In the period under review the most significant development in relation to the institutions of the Communities was the holding of direct elections to the European Parliament in June 1979.
There was a general feeling that this democratisation of the Community was a major step and that it would alter the relations between the institutions to some extent and, in particular, relations between the Parliament and the Council. Direct elections were invested with differing degrees of significance by various observers. It is probably premature to make a judgment but perhaps it is fair to say that the results have not fulfilled either the most optimistic or pessimistic forecasts. Finding a role for itself within the competences conferred on it by the Treaties is bound to be a gradual process as far as the Parliament is concerned and one which must emerge through a highly political process.
It is clear, however, that a directly elected Parliament to be meaningful must have enhanced influence in the Community decision-making process. There is probably a need to adapt existing procedures to ensure such an enhanced influence in particular in relations between the Parliament and the Council. We are open to suggestions on how this could best be done. In the coming months there will be discussions on this matter at all levels in the Community and the new Commission will no doubt look at the matter also.
Institutions which function efficiently are essential to progress towards European Union particularly in the period just ahead when the Community faces serious economic problems.
While recognising that political will and cohesion in the face of immediate difficulties are the most vital elements in progress towards European Union we have always advocated that strong institutions maintaining the competences and balances laid down in the Treaties can make a major contribution to decision-making. Within these parameters we can look at the performance of the institutions and support reform or adaptation where necessary.
The system of European political co-operation, whereby member states consult together on world political issues and where possible and desirable work out common positions and policies, is a significant aspect of our Community membership.
Through the activities of political co-operation and also through the Community's external relations activities, the Europe of the nine is increasingly regarded by the external world as a coherent entity in world affairs.
At the United Nations the nine's practice of seeking to concert their views on matters before the Assembly and of adopting common voting positions whenever possible is now well established. As the country holding the Presidency during this period, Ireland had the task of ensuring co-ordination among the nine, both in New York and among the capitals of the nine, on issues before the General Assembly and of presenting agreed nine views to the Assembly, whether in plenary session or in one of the seven main committees. I might add that following our recent election to the Security Council, Ireland will be involved in a special way in the work of the United Nations over the next two years.
The second review meeting of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe is scheduled to begin in Madrid on 11 November. A preparatory meeting is currently taking place. The nine are continuing their detailed preparations for the Madrid meeting and are consulting closely on all developments in the CSCE process.
The Nine have on many occasions, most recently in the Venice Declaration of 13 June 1980, stated the principles which in their view are fundamental to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. These are, in particular, the right to existence and security of all states in the region, including Israel, and justice for all its peoples, which implies recognition of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people who must be allowed to exercise fully their right to self-determination. The Nine have made clear that the achievement of these objectives requires the involvement and support of all the parties concerned and that the principles set down apply to all and thus to the Palestinian people and to the PLO, who must be associated with the negotiations.
The situation in Lebanon is of continuing concern to the Nine. Following the tragic death of three Irish soldiers serving with the UNIFIL force in Southern Lebanon last April, both the Nine Foreign Ministers and the European Council denounced the acts of violence committed against UNIFIL and demanded that the force be permitted to carry out its mandate in full.
Since the taking hostage of the American Embassy personnel in Tehran on 4 November 1979, the Nine have condemned this flagrant breach of international law and have made repeated calls for the immediate release of the hostages.
As regards the outbreak of hostilities between Iran and Iraq, the Nine have expressed their support for the efforts of the Islamic Conference and of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to secure a peaceful settlement.
In Africa the Nine have reiterated their condemnation of apartheid in South Africa and indicated their determination to exert every pressure which would bring the South African Government to abandon that system.
The Nine supported the new plan for the independence of Namibia and reject unreservedly efforts to impose a so-called internal settlement. The lack of progress in implementing the United Nations plan is of concern and the Nine have requested the South African Government to accept fully its implementation without any furthere delay.
As regards Afghanistan, the Nine believe that an acceptable solution must be found which will provide for a withdrawal of foreign troops and an opportunity for the people of Afghanistan to determine their own future.
Also in Asia, the Nine have over the past year intensified their consultations on the problems of Indo China particularly in relation to the Vietnamese refugees and the famine in Cambodia. While in recent months the situation in Cambodia has improved, the Nine are continuing to monitor the situation closely and the Community is continuing to contribute to the relief effort. However, we believe that a permanent solution to Cambodia's crisis can only be achieved in the context of an overall political settlement in the country.
In this introduction to the debate I have done no more than draw attention to some of the important developments in Community affairs in recent years. I will be happy to respond to all points made by Deputies when I come to reply.
