Mary Harney
Ceist:9 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin with the President of the EU Commission, Mr. Jacques Santer. [7512/95]
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers (Resumed). - Meeting with EC President.
Bertie Ahern
Ceist:10 Mr. B. Ahern asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his recent discussions in Dublin with Mr. Jacques Santer, President of the EU Commission. [7569/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 10 together.
I met the President of the European Commission, Mr. Jacques Santer, on Tuesday, 11 April 1995. I was accompanied at the meeting by the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dick Spring, and by the Minister of State for European Affairs, Deputy Gay Mitchell.
We had a wide-ranging discussion concentrating mainly on European issues, notably the timetable and agenda for the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference and enlargement of the European Union. We also discussed the Northern Ireland situation.
Did the Taoiseach raise with the President of the European Commission, Mr. Jacques Santer, the matter of the disallowance to Ireland of £100 million in relation to the handling of beef intervention and other matters by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry?
I did indeed. I expressed the very strong view that account should be taken by the European Community of the fact that Ireland spent a very large sum of money on the Tribunal of Inquiry into the Beef Processing Industry seeking to investigate and eliminate such abuse and that the Commission should take account of the political will of the Dáil, expressed in that tribunal, to stamp out abuse.
What was the response of the President of the European Commission? Did the President say he would do something on behalf of the Irish Government, or is that the end of the matter?
As the Deputy would expect, the President's response was non-committal.
Will we have to pay it early on?
I hope not, but that is a matter that remains to be seen. Obviously, the President took note of the points I made to him. He pointed out to me, although he did not need to, that the stage has not yet been reached at which a decision has been taken on this matter. There is a number of appellate procedures we can go through before any final decision is taken. Obviously it is for us to go through those first before any question comes to be determined at Commission level. I felt it was important in the course of a meeting of this nature, the second I have had with the President of the European Commission within a relatively short period, to emphasise our commitment to stamp out fraud, our sense that the calculation of the fines in this instance was unfair to Ireland in view of the political commitment we have shown to stamp out fraud in this area.
I agree with the Taoiseach that the fact that this House and the country generally have shown much greater awareness than other member states of the necessity to eliminate fraud is something which should stand to our credit. Regarding the Taoiseach's discussions with the President of the European Commission on the Intergovernmental Conference to be held in 1996, what indications of support did the President indicate for the Irish agenda outlined by the Taoiseach prior to that meeting?
The items on the Irish agenda have not been fixed at this point. A number of issues are essential to us, the first of which is maintaining our position of having a Commissioner of Irish nationality at all times. There are also wider questions of concern to us in regard to our position on the Council of Ministers, of the Presidency to which we are entitled on a regular basis but, on a deeper, less specifically Irish level, we have a very deep concern to ensure that the power of initiative of the Commission is maintained. As a country that has benefited enormously from European integration we would regard the Commission and its power of initiative as the principal motor of European integration. On that issue, there is a very strong affinity of interest between Ireland and the Commission because we are one of those countries protecting the power of initiative of the Commission and seeking to enhance it in certain areas. We would share the view, expressed by many, that the pillars of the European Union where the Commission does not have the power of initiative, namely, pillars 2 and 3, have not been as effective as pillar 1, particularly in regard to justice and home affairs where there should be a much stronger European effort undertaken to stamp out drug trafficking and related crime. The lack of the Commission's power of initiative in this area has been one of the factors that has meant we have not seen the progress at European level we ought to have seen on this matter of combating crime and drugs.
Were I to be asked what were Ireland's broad priorities for the forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference I would say, first, to improve the effectiveness of European institutions in the light of prospective enlargement and, second, to bring the European Union closer to public opinion within Europe. On both those issues we need to strengthen the hand of European institutions in dealing with the crime problem because, if we can do so, we shall be not only strengthening those institutions in a broad sense but also bringing them closer to public opinion, allowing Europe to deal with an issue of paramount importance to its citizens, namely, the safety of themselves and their families.
Nobody on this side of the House would argue against co-operation on combating crime, particularly that related to drugs, having witnessed the quantity of drugs coming in here which has forced the market value of ecstasy from £30 at Christmas to £3 last weekend, thus demonstrating the enormous need for such co-operation. When are we likely to see the White Paper on which the Tánaiste has been sitting for many months past? Does the Taoiseach know anything about it? We were promised it several months ago.
I do not know in what country Deputy Ahern has been living if he thinks the Tánaiste has been sitting on this issue. As anybody who takes even a passing interest in foreign affairs will know, the Tánaiste has been conducting an extensive series of seminars nationwide, consulting the electorate and those interested in foreign policy on these important issues. It is of enormous importance that that be done. Indeed any conclusions reached in that White Paper will be all the more valuable for the fact that, unlike previous efforts in this regard, this Government and this Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs have taken the trouble to consult people throughout the country on this issue. The proposals he brings to Government for consideration will reflect the wide range of opinion he has heard throughout the country.
He was very grateful to all those people who agreed with him and he violently disagreed with those people who contradicted him.