Dick Spring
Ceist:15 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach the steps he proposes to take to ensure that a broad-ranging debate takes place in Ireland on the issues of European security and defence policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - EC Policies.
Michael Noonan
Ceist:16 Mr. Noonan (Limerick East) asked the Taoiseach if he has been informed by Mr. Jacques Delors, President of the EC Commission, of the views expressed, in a recent interview by Mr. Delors, that the EC, by 1995, would have agreed a common policy including a common foreign policy and military co-operation leading before 1995 to multilateral forces and a joint rapid deployment force; if his attention has been drawn to Mr. Delor's view that Ireland would not participate in such forces; if the views expressed by the President of the Commission coincide with the views of the Government on this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:17 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the reason he stated that it would not, at this stage, be appropriate for the Minister for Foreign Affairs to attend as an observer, with all his other EC colleagues, at the meeting of the Western European Union which met on the margin of the EC Summit to discuss arrangements for the delivery of emergency food aid to the Kurdish refugees; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Madeleine Taylor-Quinn
Ceist:18 Mrs. Taylor-Quinn asked the Taoiseach if the matter of integration of the Western European Union and the European Community member states was discussed at the Heads of Government meeting in Luxembourg on Monday, 8 April 1991; and if he will make a statement on the position taken by the Irish Government in this matter.
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:19 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach his views on whether there is a need for the widest debate and informed discussion on European political, monetary and economic union; and the steps, if any, he will take to contribute to that debate.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 15 to 19, inclusive, together.
The matter of integration of the Western European Union and the European Community member states was not discussed at the special informal meeting of the European Council in Luxembourg on 8 April 1991 and consequently the question of the Irish Government taking a position on that occasion on any such integration did not arise. Following a brief discussion of the long term implications of the Gulf War for the definition of the future Political Union, it was simply agreed that this aspect should be pursued actively in the Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union and the major options set out for the meeting of the European Council fixed for next June.
As I shall be indicating in my statement to the House later today, the European Council agreed to get food and other humanitarian aid to the Kurdish refugees immediately. Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the nine countries which are members of the Western European Union held a brief meeting in the margins of the European Council and decided to avail of the logistical support of that organisation to deliver the aid to the Kurds. At my proposal, in the European Council meeting, it was accepted that non-members of the Western European Union, including Ireland, would supply civil aircraft to transport aid.
It was not considered appropriate for the Minister for Foreign Affairs to attend the Western European Union meeting, as an observer, because that body is a military alliance of which Ireland is not a member.
In regard to the personal views expressed by Commission President Delors, I repeat what I said in replying to a Question here on 20 March last, that a wide variety of proposals in regard to aspects of a common foreign and security policy have been tabled and are being considered by the Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union which is at an early stage, at which it would be premature to speculate on the eventual outcome. The Government's objective remains to ensure that Ireland will be able to participate in and contribute to the Community's foreign and security policy on a basis that respects our longstanding policy positions in regard to European Union and to membership of military alliances.
Deputies may be assured that the Government will take all appropriate steps, when appropriate and useful, to facilitate a timely and broad-ranging debate on all the issues emerging in both Intergovernmental Conferences, following the initial phases which involve a great deal of discussion and clarification, after which the actual remaining questions will be sufficiently clear to provide the basis for a productive debate.
In relation to Question No. 15, can I take it from what the Taoiseach said that he does not consider it timely to have a broad-ranging discussion on the whole question of European security and defence policy at this stage? Second, would the Taoiseach not consider that if a committee on foreign affairs of this House was set up immediately it could undertake valuable work in this area because of the many complex issues involved and because of the debate which I think we should be having in this country in relation to decisions we will have to face up to in a very short period of time?
I have no doubt that we will have to have a broad debate on this whole question of the future of Europe and particularly on the question of common foreign defence and security policy. I am looking forward to the time when we may very likely have to have a referendum on the issue, so it will be necessary over a period to have as wide-ranging a debate as we can among ourselves and among the general public. It is just a question of trying to decide when such a debate would be most fruitful and most productive. The Intergovernmental Conferences are at an early stage yet. We could have a preliminary debate and parties could express their positions and set down guidelines. However, I really think it would be more helpful for us all, for the parties in particular if there was something more specific emerging out of the Intergovernmental Conferences which we could consider but that is a matter which the Whips can discuss from time to time.
On the foreign affairs committee, I told the Deputy this morning that we hope to get that into operation fairly soon.
(Limerick East): Let me ask the Taoiseach two questions arising out of the remarks attributed to President Jacques Delors. First, is the Taoiseach aware of the anxiety that arose as a result of the remarks which suggested that the EC could turn into a two track Europe, that Ireland would be on the second or slower track and that the differentiation would be between those who participated in a common security and defence policy and those who did not and that he expected Ireland not to participate? Second, could the Taoiseach state what the Government policy is at present on the suggestions made by President Delors and if he is aware of any federal or confederal political system anywhere, at any time, where one participant refused to be involved in the security or defence of that entity?
I do not know the exact import of the last part of the question. We are not dealing with a federal or confederal situation so that speculative question does not arise as far as I am concerned. President Delors is a very able President of the Commission and I yield to no one in Europe in my respect for him. I attribute to him a great deal of the credit for the success of the major move forward which Europe has been experiencing now for some years. However, on that occasion President Delors was speaking personally and giving his own view and I would not fully agree with his view.
A number of people have from time to time put forward suggestions of dividing the Community into first and second tiers. On one occasion a prominent banker thought we could divide the Community on the basis of economic performance. There were some other suggestions that it should perhaps be divided on the basis of military predilections. I reject both of those suggestions. We are a fully committed, good member of the Community. I do not think there is any member state where there is such public support for membership of the Community and for progress in the Community as in Ireland. We have demonstrated all along the line — and I give due credit to the previous Government for this — our full commitment and our anxiety to move forward as rapidly as anybody else in Europe, and as European integration proceeds we intend to be there right up front in the process. That will be our continued position. It is the duty of the Government, acting on behalf of the people of Ireland, to negotiate at the forthcoming common security policy discussions so that the views of our people and our best interests can be fully accommodated in the context of European integration and political union. I believe we can achieve that. We have a great deal of goodwill in Europe among the Heads of State and Government. I believe they that as the Intergovernmental Conference proceed and consider different formulae we will be able to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion.
I call Deputy Jim O'Keeffe whose Questions Nos. 17 and 19 refer.
I want to clarify a point with you, a Cheann Comhairle. Do you intend to call me twice?
I will call you just the once. That is why I mentioned the two questions together.
Do I take it you will allow me to pursue both issues at this stage?
Within reason.
I want to refer first to the March meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the European Council. Am I right in saying that nine Foreign Ministers of the countries which are members of the Western European Union attended, that the Foreign Ministers of Greece and Denmark, countries not members of the Western European Union, also attended as observers and that we were the odd man out in that we were the only one of the Twelve which did not attend? Am I right in saying that the meeting was held with the Turkish Ambassador for the purpose of making logistical arrangements about the delivery of emergency aid? Why did we not attend the meeting? What is the relevance of the comment made by the Taoiseach that he did not consider it appropriate for the Minister to attend at this stage? Does he envisage circumstances in the near future when he would consider it appropriate for the Minister to attend such a meeting? Can I clear those points first before I move on to the next issue?
I would prefer if the Deputy put his questions and then the Taoiseach would reply.
Let it all hang out.
That is no problem. My next question relates to the debate on European political union. Would the Taoiseach not accept that it would be helpful to the country as a whole, and to all of us in this House, if we knew where the Government stood in relation to European political union? We believe the Government are proceeding by way of a policy which is made up on an ad hoc basis, the back of the match box——
Please proceed by way of brief, relevant and pertinent questions.
These are all very relevant points, Sir. Some time ago I proposed that the Government should issue a White Paper outlining where they stood on these issues. Will the Taoiseach take that suggestion on board and issue a White Paper so that we will know what the Government are negotiating on behalf of Ireland in relation to European political union?
With regard to the Western European Union meeting in Luxembourg, this was a meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the Western European Union. The Western European Union are not coterminous with the Community; they are a separate organisation with different membership. Nine members of the Community are members of the Western European Union and other states which are not members of the Community are members of the Western European Union. I want to make it clear that they are two separate and distinct organisations: one is a military alliance while the other, so far, is an economic and social community. There is a perfectly clear distinction in our minds between our participating in Community affairs and Community Councils and participating in the affairs of Western European Union. That would be a major change on our part, and it does not arise at this stage.
With regard to the Intergovernment Conference, we do not know yet what formulae or formulations may be put forward, when all these issues will have to be considered. The simple fact is that as the Western European Union is a military alliance, in accordance with our policy of military neutrality we did not deem it appropriate to have an observer present at Western European Union. Other countries which are not members of Western European Union do not have the same view of military alliances as we do and they did not see any objection to having their people present as observers. Deputy O'Keeffe kept referring to people attending the meeting; they did not attend, they were present as observers, which is a distinct difference.
Ireland was the odd man out.
——as the Deputy knows, something can be very significant at that stage. The Foreign Ministers of other countries outside the Community attended the meeting as members because they were members of Western European Union, which we are not. That particular meeting was called to see if Western European Union could help in implementing the decision of the Community to transfer aid to the Kurds. As I explained in my reply, when that matter was discussed at the Council meeting I suggested that those countries which are not members of Western European Union could and should supply that aid by civilian aircraft. That suggestion was accepted. Therefore, from that point of view there was no reason for us to be present at that Western European Union meeting; we had already agreed that we could send our supplies by civilian aircraft.
I want to call Deputy Peter Barry in respect of questions——
The Taoiseach has not answered my question in relation to the White Paper.
I can produce a White Paper at any time but, as I said in reply to Deputy Spring, it is too early for a White Paper; the Intergovernment Conference is still at a formative stage.
What is our policy?
I have outlined our policy hundreds of times in this House.
Only in generalities.
I have already outlined it here in some detail today. I do not know what the Deputy means by asking a question like that.
Where do we stand in relation to the powers of the Parliament?
If I were to recite the Apostle's Creed the Deputy would probably ask me what my religion was.
It is the other way around. I know what the Taoiseach's religion is but I would like to know what our policy is.
I am calling Deputy Peter Barry for a final question in respect of these questions.
That was a very interesting observation by the Taoiseach. I will follow it up some other time.
(Limerick East): Is it the long or short version?
When is the last time he recited it?
In relation to the meeting of the Western European Union which coincided with the Summit, was this meeting called purely for the purpose of organising relief for the Kurdish refugees? I cannot understand why the European Community could not have organised it. If that meeting was called only for that purpose, why was it so difficult for the Minister for Foreign Affairs to attend and assist, purely from a management point of view, in organising aid?
The meeting was called entirely to facilitate the transport of aid. The Western European Union is a military alliance and has military aircraft at its disposal. It was decided in a very desperate and urgent situation that the quickest way to transport the aid to the Kurds was by means of the military capacity at the disposal of the Western European Union.
The Community could have done that also.
Eleven members of the Community attended. Ireland was the odd man out.
Deputy Madeleine Taylor-Quinn. I observe Deputy De Rossa. I have an obligation to call Deputies whose questions are before me.
Is the Taoiseach aware of the proposals which have been put forward by certain member states in relation to the integration of the European Community with the Western European Union? If so, does he attach some significance to those proposals? Does he still hold the view he expressed in 1967 that European union would, of necessity, mean military union? Will he explain to the House what he meant when he said "We are fully committed good members of the Community, we are right up front and this will be our continued position"? Will he tell the House what his position is in relation to military union?
I am surprised the Deputy has to continually ask me that question.
I have not got the answer.
I have referred to it a hundred times. As a matter of fact, the day I proposed that we join the European Community I said that if in the fullness of time the European Community brought forward its own defence arrangement, it would naturally be our position that we would favourably consider taking part in such an arrangement. That was my position a long time ago and it has not changed; I believe that would be the position of most parties in this House. If the Community were to develop its own defence arrangement for its own security, then we, in Ireland, would certainly consider participating in that. Nothing has changed in that regard.
Why is the Taoiseach avoiding the issue?
I call Deputy Proinsias De Rossa for a final question on this series of questions.
Does the Taoiseach not think——
Please, Deputy Harte.
Some months ago the Minister for Foreign Affairs indicated, as the Taoiseach has done, that he recognised the need for a major national debate on the issues before us in regard to political and economic and monetary union. On that occasion the Minister promised that there would be a series of debates in this House on these issues and promised as well, that if necessary the House would sit on Fridays in order to facilitate these debates. Does the Taoiseach propose to make any arrangements to have these debates take place because there is clearly a lack of information and debate about the issues before us? It is important to get that debate under way. With regard to the Western European Union, why is it that at this point the European Community find it necessary, when they have never done so before, to use the logistics of Western European Union? It is extraordinary that it has been found necessary at this point; is it not simply a question of establishing a de facto relationship between the Western European Union and the EC for now, with the purpose of establishing a de jure position in the future?
The Deputy can read the situation whichever way he likes but the simple position was that there was an urgent situation there. The Community were providing food and medical aid. Members of the Western European Union already had their military transports in operation in the area and it seemed to be a very logical answer — to have the military transport capacity put at the disposal of the Community to get the aid to the Kurds. After all, what everybody was concerned about was getting the aid to the Kurds as quickly as possible.
But, they are the same countries. It does not make sense.
They are not the same countries. The Western European Union has a co-ordinated command structure for doing the job; the Community has not. It was simply a question of asking the organisation which was in the best position to do the job, to do it.
Question No. 20.
(Limerick East): Can I put a very short supplementary?
I had hoped to get on to another question Deputy. A brief question please.
(Limerick East): All of us including the Taoiseach, when we are talking about these matters, use the terms European defence and European security. Does the Taoiseach see the terms as synonymous or will he differentiate between them?
It has often been said in this House that I do not see them as synonymous. There is a great deal more involved in security than in defence. "Defence" is used by most people as a code word for "military"— military defence, armaments and so on. Security has a far wider concept. The security of the Community would rest on all sorts of things, such as pursuing disarmament policies for instance, action through the UN and so on. The Community could have a major security policy which does not necessarily involve military defence capacity. All European countries except Albania are committed to a common security policy through the CSCE but there is no question of having a defensive capacity.
Could I simply point out——
Let us now deal with No. 20.
The Taoiseach has again failed to reply to my first supplementary question with regard to——
Please, Deputy De Rossa. I have given the Deputy some latitude. I am now calling Question No. 20.
On a point of order, I am simply asking for a response to my question on debates in this House about monetary and political union. Surely the Taoiseach should have an answer to that.
Question No. 20 has been called and it shall be responded to.