Vol. 459 No. 3
2 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach his views on whether there will be any resultant inward investment potential flowing from the visit of President Clinton to Ireland in view of the enormous United States media focus on Ireland. [18085/95]
3 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach the impact, if any, on Ireland of the visit of President Clinton; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18086/95]
4 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the discussions he has had with President Clinton. [18089/95]
5 Mr. B. Ahern asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his discussions with President Clinton. [18142/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 to 5 inclusive together.
President Clinton's visit was very successful and I believe will have a very positive impact across a broad range of issues in both the political and economic areas. Probably the most important dimension to the President's visit was the additional momentum it provided to the core objective of the 28 November communiqué — namely the commencement of all-party negotiations on an agreed settlement based on consent.
The main focus of my discussions with the President was the Anglo-Irish communiqué, my assessment of the reaction to it and probable developments in the short to medium term. We also discussed the situation in Bosnia.
Naturally, I used the opportunity to express our deep appreciation for President Clinton's whole-hearted endorsement of the communiqué and his constructive and even-handed assistance throughout the entire peace process.
We discussed the nature of the tasks to be undertaken in implementing the Dayton accord on Bosnia and, in particular, the peacekeeping role to be played there by US troops. The President expressed great admiration for the many Irish people who had assisted in UN peacekeeping missions for almost 40 years. This point was emphasised by him publicly on a number of occasions during his visit.
We also covered EU/US and Irish/US relations and, in particular, the efforts being made to further develop Ireland' attractiveness as a destination for US investors. Already the US is Ireland's second largest trading partner, our fourth largest export market and the largest source of inward investment.
As the House will be aware, the US Commerce Secretary, Mr. Ron Brown, accompanied President Clinton. Secretary Brown had a meeting with the Ministers for Finance, Enterprise and Employment, Tourism and Trade and Transport, Energy and Communications. The discussions covered issues of mutual interest across their areas of ministerial responsibility, a review of activity since the Washington Conference and the proposed follow-up conference.
During the visit, two co-operation agreements were signed. The Minister of State with responsibility for Science and Technology, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, signed a joint statement with Commerce Secretary Brown on plans for Ireland and the USA to co-operate in science and technology activities of mutual benefit. The Minister for the Marine signed a Memorandum of Understanding that will allow Ireland to draw on the resources of US marine research agencies.
The International Fund for Ireland announced its support for RADIUS, the technology-based, market-driven programme that will support company to company product development between companies in the Border area and the US and between companies in Northern Ireland and the US.
The Tánaiste and Secretary Brown had a very successful, productive meeting with some 200 people representative of businesses in Ireland and the US, State agencies and local government. Again the proposed follow-up conference was the key item of discussion.
Overall the President's visit demonstrated to the world how the situation in Ireland has been transformed over the past 15 months, serving to highlight the real benefits arising from peace and, at the same time, challenging everyone to build on it.
I should like to avail of this opportunity to pay a special tribute and say a special word of thanks to all those who, whether serving in the Garda Síochána, the Army or the various branches of our public service, Protocol and so on rendered this such a successful visit. It is important to recognise that months of intensive preparation, work and dedicated commitment went into making this visit the success it was. It is appropriate that we should acknowledge and record that fact in the House.
I join the Taoiseach in his expression of thanks to all those involved in the preparation for the US President's visit.
Would the Taoiseach accept that President Clinton acted as a catalyst in the run-up to last Tuesday evening's launch of the twin-track approach and that his visit and efforts behind the scene made that possible?
The imminence of the United States President's visit and his well known and continuing interest were certainly very helpful to the British Prime Minister and me in establishing the necessary momentum to obtaining the agreement. I am very happy to express my thanks to President Clinton in that regard.
I join the Taoiseach in his expression of thanks to all those involved in the preparations for the US President's visit and congratulate them on having made the visit so successful. It was a major contribution to the peace process.
The Taoiseach said last week that President Clinton's visit was the catalyst for an agreement to be reached between the two Governments that probably would have happened anyway, whereas he was quoted in newspapers over the weekend as having said on the telephone to President Clinton that if we do not make it now we will never make it. Would the Taoiseach say which is the true version?
I do not actually recollect using those words on the telephone to anybody but I would acknowledge there was a sense of urgency about the matter arising from the objective situation on the ground, from a sense of frustration and exasperation that movement was not taking place, which was added to and given focus by the imminence of the US President's visit and his well known interest in the subject. All of those factors combined to help us make the breakthrough on Tuesday last, 28 November, and I am very happy that that happened. I am also happy to acknowledge the role of very many people in that endeavour, as I did in the House in reporting on it.
Would the Taoiseach accept that President Clinton made it very clear, both in public comments and in private briefings, that the American Government did not wish to tell us what to do but rather wanted to be supportive and was very keen to ensure that Americans were even-handed in their approach to the difficulties in Northern Ireland?
Indeed. Members will recollect that in the course of my visit to the United States in March last I made the point repeatedly in public that the United States Administration was and should continue to be balanced and even-handed in its approach as between the two communities and the various points of view held in Northern Ireland. That is extremely important. It is very important that, if the US President and the United States in general are to play the constructive role they have played to date, both communities feel they will receive an attentive ear in Washington. It is also very fair of Deputy Harney to make the point that the US President has said that his role, and that of the United States, is one of assisting the parties to reach an agreement but not one of prescribing the nature of that agreement. Members will recollect that in an intervention at the press conference after the agreement had been signed in Downing Street I made the point quite firmly that the agreement the British Prime Minister and I were announcing that evening was one between the British and Irish Governments, that it was our agreement. Having said that, I am happy to acknowledge the assistance and the catalytic role — or whatever discription one might wish to attach to it — of the United States and the President in particular.
Would the Taoiseach comment on the core statement of President Clinton that anyone who renounces violence should have the right to participate in talks? Since Ms Nancy Soderberg was quoted over the weekend as having said that the White House considers the idea of an assembly worthy of serious discussion but as forming part of talks, not substituting for them, what is the Taoiseach's view on her remarks? Since is now appears that the Leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, Mr. Trimble, has rejected an involvement in Strand II of the talks, why does the Taoiseach consider it so important to give so much credence to the idea of such an assembly?
I attach a lot of importance to the constructive role the United States can and must continue to play in this area. As I said in response to Deputy Harney, it is very important, if the United States is to play that role, that it be seen to be balanced and even-handed between the different points of view. I will not, therefore, respond to the Deputy's invitation to comment on particular quotations he has chosen from what President Clinton said. I am sure he could have chosen other quotations that might, were I to comment on them, have given a slightly different impression from any comment I might make on the selection of quotations the Deputy chose to put to me. I will not comment on any of those remarks. President Clinton' own words and his record in this area speak for themselves without any embellishment from me.
I join others in congratulating all involved in the visit of President Clinton. I also congratulate the Chair on his handling of the visit here in the Chamber in his own inimitable fashion.
The Deputy should not think that will allow him to get away with disorderly remarks. The Ceann Comhairle is just as even-handed as President Clinton.
It is sometimes difficult to get the Taoiseach to speak. On other occasions it is difficult to keep him quite. On the matter raised by Deputy Ahern — the refusal of Mr. Trimble to participate in Strand II of the three-stranded talks process — can the force and influence of President Clinton's visit be further put to the test in relation to the three-stranded talks? Is the Taoiseach committed to the three-stranded process as the way forward?
These supplementary questions are more appropriate to Question No. 6 and subsequent questions which will be taken in a few moments.
I have one or two other points on the Taoiseach's initial response.
The time for dealing with Priority Questions is fast running out.
The Taoiseach's very long reply covered many issues, not just the Northern issue. Are there proposals for an economic conference referred to in the discussions held with Secretary of State Browne? When does the Taoiseach think the follow-up conference will take place? Will it be in the form of another conference, and will it take place here or in Washington? Will the Taoiseach elaborate?
That matter is being worked upon at the moment. I cannot give the Deputy the sort of detail he is requesting. I will make the appropriate inquiries and give the Deputy the up-to-date position as soon as it is available. As of now, all I can say is what I said in my reply, that there will be a follow up conference and that its subject matter, scope and location are under discussion. When there is a greater degree of decision on the matter I will communicate with Deputy Burke.
The Taoiseach did refer to President Clinton's praising the role of peace-keepers from this country over the last 35 years. In view of the recognition of that role by President Clinton, will the Taoiseach acknowledge that our peace-keeping role in the world is better served in the manner in which we do it today than by any military alliance?
That is quite an extension of this question.
The Deputy is certainly approaching the visit of President Clinton from a very acute angle. The matter of military alliances did not arise during the course of my discussions with President Clinton.
Question No. 2 refers to inward investment potential from the visit. Is the Taoiseach aware of the disquiet among the Border Members from all parties about the possibility that International Fund money will not be focused directly on proper infrastructure within the Border areas. The Taoiseach is probably aware that many Border areas experience difficulty in attracting inward investment because they do not have serviced sites for industrial investment, and where they do have sites they do not have buildings. I believe that there is £35 million in peace initiative money available for investment in the Border areas which has not yet been earmarked. Will the Taoiseach use his good offices to ensure that these funds are used to put in place the infrastructure for any inward investment that may result from these conferences?
I noted what Deputy Ahern said. These questions should more appropriately be addressed to the Ministers for the Environment, Finance, and Enterprise and Employment to whom I will convey the concerns Deputy Ahern has just expressed.
On a point of order, I ask for the co-operation of the Chair and the Taoiseach, It is likely that the Taoiseach will take the remaining questions together and we have about four minutes to deal with them. As this is probably the last time this year we will have an opportunity to ask questions on Northern Ireland, I ask that these be put back until tomorrrow. It would be unsatisfactory to be able to ask only two or three supplementary questions.
I appreciate the Deputy'a difficulty where a large number of questions are taken together and there is a limited amount of time.
To be fair to the House, there are no questions down for tomorrow.
There are some six minutes left.
I agree with Deputy Harney. As there are only three minutes left, I would prefer to postpone these questions until tomorrow.
I do not want to postpone them. These questions are in order. I would prefer to take the time and deal with them now.
The initial questions Nos. 2 to 5 are quite substantial questions relating to President Clinton's visit. The Taoiseach gave quite an extensive response. Could he elaborate on meetings with the Secretary of State Brown?
I will not allow the Deputy to circumvent my ruling. I want a decision now as to whether we shall proceed to utilise the remaining time, limited though it be, in disposing of a very large number of questions which I understand the Taoiseach will take together.
It was the furthest thing from my mind——
We are having an erosion of that precious time. Does the Deputy appreciate that?
That is not my intention. The Taoiseach gave a very elaborate response to the first set of questions Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5. He referred in particular to various meetings with Commerce Secretary Brown. There were some points I would like to have elaborated on.
I ask the Deputy not to approach matters in that regard.
It is a very serious matter.
I have come to the end of dealing with this group of questions.
A Cheann Comhairle——
I am on my feet. I have come to the end of dealing with Questions Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 which were taken together. The question now arises as to whether we will take the balance of the questions in the little time remaining.
On a point of order——
Deputy O'Rourke, you may not put a point of order while I am still on my feet.
When you sit down.
Do we utilise the time available?
I am happy to answer the questions now if the House will agree to some extra time, say, a quarter of an hour.
The time has concluded now.
I would appreciate it if the Taoiseach would agree to postpone them in view of the fact that the Opposition parties have been very supportive of the Government on developments in Northern Ireland. We deserve an opportunity to ask some decent supplementary questions. That will not be possible if we continue.
Is it in order for a Member to withdraw a question?
Certainly, but there must be good and cogent reasons for such a request.
In the circumstances of last week, there was an obligation on us all to welcome everything in an uncritical way. There are many questions on the communiqué which I wish to ask and tease out and we cannot do so. Two weeks ago the Taoiseach could not give us any answer and we accepted that. There are now many questions on the communiqué which we would like to tease out and I want to take those questions tomorrow. We will have an hour tomorrow and we have not used that allocation for three weeks. I second Deputy Harney's motion that we take her questions tomorrow.
It seems the Chair has no alternative but to adjourn questions to the Taoiseach. I was prepared to give a little latitude but it would have been totally inadequate having regard to the number of questions involved. Questions to the Taoiseach will be dealt with tomorrow.
