I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 15, 27, 37 and 50 together.
The European Council in Madrid last December unequivocally confirmed 1 January 1999, the latest date envisaged by the Treaty on European Union, as the commencement date for Economic and Monetary Union. The European Council also named the single currency the Euro and set out a reference scenario for the transition to it.
The reference scenario sets out the following timetable; as early as possible in 1998, the European Council will decide which member states meet the criteria for entry to Economic and Monetary Union. On 1 January 1999, Economic and Monetary Union will begin. The exchange rates of the participating currencies will be irrevocably locked, the Euro will come into being as a currency in its own right and the European Central Bank will begin to operate the single monetary policy attaching to it. By 1 January 2002 at the latest, Euro notes and coins will be introduced into circulation and by 1 July 2002 at the latest, national currencies will have been withdrawn from circulation in the area where the Euro is operating.
I am not aware of any plans to delay the commencement date of 1 January 1999 so recently confirmed by the European Council. I am however aware that preparations at EU and national level are intensifying on the basis of the timescale set out in the reference scenario.
The convergence criteria which member states must meet to join Economic and Monetary Union relate to inter alia the general Government deficit position. In this context, I have seen a summary of the Report from the German Institute for Economic Research referred to by Deputy Byrne. The Report apparently argues that it would be better to relax criteria than to delay the start of Economic and Monetary Union. In particular, the report seems to argue that, provided a member state met the other criteria, it should not be excluded from qualifying for Economic and Monetary Union on the basis simply that its deficit is over 3 per cent of GDP: account should be taken of the Treaty text which would allow a deficit above 3 per cent if the excess were exceptional, temporary and small. The report recommends that this approach be adopted rather than deferral of the 1 January 1999 commencement date for Economic and Monetary Union.
From the summary available to me, the Report seems merely to argue for application of text which is already in the Treaty. It will be a matter for the European Council, in the composition of Heads of State and Government, to decide which member states qualify for Economic and Monetary Union having taken due account of the reports of the EU Commission and the EMI and the opinion of the European Parliament.
As regards the survey referred to by Deputy Aylward, I understand that this survey was carried out by consultants who interviewed ten Irish executives as part of a survey of 169 top company executives in 13 EU countries. I welcome the recognition in the survey of the benefits Economic and Monetary Union will bring for Irish business.
I have no plans to establish a single forum to discuss all the implications of Economic and Monetary Union. Work on preparation for Economic and Monetary Union at national level here is structured to dovetail with the approach and timetable agreed by the European Council in December, the key dates of which I set out earlier.
The national level work is as follows: I commissioned the Economic and Social Research Institute to carry out a study on the likely economic, employment and sectoral implications of Economic and Monetary Union for Ireland in order to deepen our understanding of the opportunities and challenges which Economic and Monetary Union will present for the economy. Persons and groups with material to contribute to that end were invited to submit it to the ESRI consultants. The ESRI study is to be completed by 30 June 1996 and its findings will be made public. In the meantime, the National Economic and Social Council, on which the social partners are represented, will consider the question of Economic and Monetary Union among others in the context of the follow-on report to the council's Strategy for Growth, Competitiveness and Employment intended to precede the negotiations on a successor to the Programme for Competitiveness and Work. I made a presentation last week to the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs about Economic and Monetary Union. My presentation was the first in a two-day debate which the Select Committee held on Economic and Monetary Union. The Committee has indicated its intention to return to the issue later in the year. I have made arrangements to set up an informal group representative of relevant interest groups in the private sector to advise my Department on technical issues, such as rounding, etc., which will be discussed at EU level in the course of this year and in the run-up to the 1998 Council decision on which member states qualify for Economic and Monetary Union. When the 1998 decision has been taken, I expect this informal group will form the nucleus of a more formal structure to oversee the practical arrangements needed to manage the transition to the single currency.