I attended the second Asia Europe summit which took place in London from 2 — 4 April and was accompanied by the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Kitt, who has responsibility for international trade. The summit came at a significant time for Asia and Asian-European relations. While it was a planned part of the ASEM process begun in Bangkok in 1996, its occurrence at this time when many of the Asian participant countries are in deep financial and economic crisis, served to heighten its importance and focus its deliberations. Of course, it also took place at a significant time for Anglo-lrish relations and provided opportunities to progress some of the outstanding issues which led to the final Agreement with regard to Northern Ireland. The financial crisis in south east Asia, its impact on the economies of the region and on the global economy and prospects for growth, dominated the discussions of the Heads of State and Government. This was true of the formal closed sessions, bilateral meetings and informal discussions which took place.
However, it was not just economics that leaders focused on, but the impact on people. Issues, such as employment and migrant workers and access to education and health care were also considered. The chairman sought to ensure the three pillars of the ASEM process, economic, political and other areas, were each dealt with appropriately. I have been seriously concerned at the effects of the financial crisis in Asia, especially on those who are poor, and we are determined to assist in so far as we can to help restore economic stability throughout the region.
One of the three plenary sessions was devoted to discussion of regional political issues: two Asian, the Korean peninsula and Cambodia, and two European, Bosnia/Kosovo and EU enlargement. Over dinner the Foreign Ministers discussed Cambodia, European security architecture, EU-ASEAN relations and Burma — Myanmar. I welcome the notable progress which has been made in the two years since the Bangkok summit in discussions on regional and international political and security issues of common concern.
The political dialogue is guided by principles included in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of the Bangkok chairman's statement. These include the promotion of human rights and commitment to the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the fiftieth anniversary of which we celebrate this year. In the drafting of the chairman's statement for this meeting, Ireland insisted on maintaining the reference to these paragraphs. Overall, the ASEM discussions are well reflected in each of the statements, the statement on the financial and economic situation in Asia and the chairman's statement, which were agreed by the leaders. Both documents have been placed in the Oireachtas Library.
Perhaps one of the most important facts about the recovery measures put in place to assist Asian countries is that 29 per cent of the overall funding for such measures is provided by the European Commission and its member states. This very significant practical assistance needs to be highlighted for two reasons. First, to make it clear that the EU is concerned at the impact of the crisis at both a regional and global level, and that Europe is responding generously. The decision to issue a stand alone financial statement, distinct from the chairman's statement, rightly signals the seriousness with which the Asian crisis is viewed by European leaders. Second, the statement reinforces the role of the IMF at the centre of the global response to the crisis. The EU is confident that recovery can be achieved in the short to medium term, in many circumstances. It is critical that the resources made available to the worst affected countries are used to support appropriate economic restructuring.
Already a number of the Asian countries have adopted measures which have restored some level of confidence in their economies. In contrast, those countries who have delayed taking corrective action have failed to halt the downwards spiral of their economies. It was essential that ASEM leaders and, in particular, the European members, were seen to be fully supportive of the restructuring programmes advocated by the IMF, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.
At a practical level, the ASEM leaders welcomed the creation of the ASEM Trust Fund, at the World Bank, and the Financial Crisis Expertise Network — both of these initiatives will enable the provision of economic and financial advisers and experts to the relevant Asian Governments. Such practical assistance, combined with a positive approach by international banks in the restructuring of the debt and the provision of trade credit, will help restore the conditions necessary for resumed and accelerated economic growth. Only an integrated package of national action, intergovernmental assistance and private sector co-operation will be effective in stabilising and restoring the damaged economies.
Early recovery is possible given the sound fundamentals of many of the economies concerned. While confident of recovery, EU leaders do not seek to minimise the hard domestic choices which Asian governments will face. Strong government leadership in the adoption of reform measures, with international assistance, will help to restore the essential climate of investor confidence. Clearly, ensuring accountability and transparency in financial markets represents a difficult but vital condition of recovery and investor confidence. There was a frank recognition, both among the individual leaders to whom I spoke and in the context of the formal closed sessions, of the poor regulatory systems, bad investment analysis and, in some instances, corruption, which had contributed to the crisis. Equally, there was much resentment at the role played by international currency traders and speculators and a call, especially from some of the Asian leaders, for improved regulation of such activity. From an Irish standpoint, I was pleased that the need to resist protectionist measures was recognised and that a positive attitude was adopted towards future WTO negotiations.
The adoption by ASEM leaders of action plans on trade facilitation and on investment promotion served to underline the ongoing commitment of ASEM participant countries to further open up trading and investment opportunities. The Business Forum which took place in tandem with the Summit provided a useful impetus to the development of inter-regional trade. There was agreement between the leaders that high-level business missions would examine opportunities in Asian economies for European investment.
I welcome the forward looking approach of the chairman's statement. It confirms that the next meeting will take place in Seoul, in the Republic of Korea, in the year 2000 and records the mechanisms put in place by the leaders in preparation for same and for the development and deepening of Asia-Europe relations in the interim.
I have already mentioned the ASEM Trust Fund, the Expertise Network and the trade and investment action plans, but a much wider range of issues was examined by the leaders. Many of these topics are of interest to Ireland and have been raised with me by Deputies. These include international arms control, disarmament and nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The important issues of child welfare and the fight against the commercial and sexual exploitation of children were raised, together with the combating of international crime in areas such as drug trafficking and money laundering. All these are areas where international co-operation can have a significant beneficial impact.
The wide area of social and cultural co-operation discussed by leaders included also the promotion of co-operation on information and communications technology. This is of particular interest to Ireland and to myself, given my responsibility for the Information Society Commission. I believe there are many areas of opportunity for co-operative and complementary relations to develop between Irish and Asian companies, exploiting differing time zones, skills and market expertise — and this was a theme of many of the discussions which I had with individual Asian leaders.
The diverse range of financial, economic, political, technological, social, educational and cultural relationships which link Europe and Asia in the ASEM process will be progressed in the context of the Asia-Europe Co-operation Framework which the leaders endorsed. The framework which sets out agreed short-term priorities will allow for the development of the initiatives I have outlined and others mentioned in the chairman's statement. As for the longer term, the vision group which was formally launched by the leaders will chart the future development of the ASEM process itself. There are so many areas of potential mutual benefit that it is necessary for a structured approach to be adopted to the development of the process. Deputy Albert Reynolds represents Ireland on the vision group and I am confident that the group will develop the requisite strategic plan to guide ASEM in the early years of the new millennium.
In the context of longer-term consideration and in the context of discussions on political dialogue generally, it is worth noting that the EU enlargement process which is now firmly under way was of particular interest to Asian leaders. Clearly, the issue of ASEM membership arises on both the European and Asian sides, because, as both EU and ASEAN membership grows over the coming years, there are obvious implications for ASEM. Asian concerns over membership reflected deeper concerns that EU enlargement, completion of the Single Market and the introduction of the Euro would promote a more introverted European Union. With my European counterparts, I indicated clearly my belief that the reverse would be the case. A strong and stable Union with a stable currency would be seeking to open further Asia-Europe opportunities for trade and investment.
While I believe there will be little progress on the ASEM enlargement issue in advance of the Seoul Summit in the year 2000, a generally balanced and inclusive approach should be adopted. There was little discussion at the meeting which decided that consideration should continue on the timing and modality of membership.
I had discussions with all the Asian leaders at ASEM. I also had a number of very worthwhile formal bilateral meetings in London, in addition to those with Prime Minister Blair which related to Northern Ireland. The Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, deputising for Minister Andrews, also met the Thai and Indonesian Foreign Ministers. Details of these meetings will be addressed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs in his statement.
I took the opportunity to seek the support of individual ASEM leaders for Ireland's candidature for one of the non-permanent seats on the UN Security Council in the elections in the year 2000. I also raised this issue with each of the leaders with whom I had formal bilateral meetings.
I had bilateral meetings with the Chinese, Malaysian and Singaporean leaders. I thanked Premier Zhu Ronji of China for the early opportunity to meet him so soon after his recent appointment. I indicated my appreciation of the major economic and social reform programme which he has set out. Premier Zhu expressed his satisfaction with improving Sino-lrish relations and noted the recent successful visits by Foreign Minister Andrews and Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, to China. I accepted Premier Zhu's invitation to visit China and invited him to visit Ireland.
I indicated Ireland's desire to improve trade relations and suggested there was substantial experience of industry restructuring to be found among major Irish companies, especially in the agri-food sector and, given the restructuring and privatisation of State companies planned in China, that Irish public and private sector companies might have a useful contribution to make.
I noted the planned visit by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland, to China in September and the improving openness in China in this regard. Deputies will wish to know that the first EU-China Summit took place in London immediately prior to ASEM. It included substantial discussions on human rights.
Discussions with Prime Minister Mahathir of Malaysia centred on the financial crisis in Asia and the impact on Malaysia and neighbouring states, especially Indonesia. I indicated support for the financial statement agreed by ASEM leaders and the specific measures it contained to assist the worst affected countries.
Prime Minister Mahathir outlined the difficulties which devaluation of the currency had produced in terms of Malaysia's ability to import or secure credit. The cumulative effect of these problems would slow recovery and the rate at which Malaysia would approach Western standards of living.
Prime Minister Mahathir raised the issue of speculators and the need to regulate their activities, especially to protect developing economies. The Prime Minister also highlighted the issue of Indonesian refugees and the problems they presented for Malaysia.
Another specific problem which Prime Minister Mahathir raised was that of overseas students and in this regard he thanked me for the efforts of the Irish universities who were seeking to alleviate the problems for the 700 approximately, mostly medical, students, from Malaysia who are studying in Ireland.
In addition to the financial crisis, I discussed with Prime Minister Goh of Singapore the future of ASEM and the question of enlargement to include both European and Asian members.
I also raised the issue of bilateral trade relations and suggested information and communications technology and financial services as areas where time zone differences could allow for investment, joint venture and other co-operative activities.
Singapore has a large volume of overseas investment and I highlighted Ireland's excellent reputation as an investment location, especially, regarding software and total US investment into Europe.
In my meeting with Prime Minister Dehaene of Belgium and Prime Minister Guterres of Portugal, I raised the general issue of Agenda 2000 and the recent, 18 March, proposals published by the Commission. I indicated the need for appropriate transitional arrangements for Ireland in relation to Structural Funds, the importance of continuing eligibility for Ireland for Cohesion Funds and the particularly unacceptable nature of the Commission's proposals for CAP reform. I stressed that any changes must not impact disproportionately on any member states, and that was the case with the draft agriculture regulations of 18 March.
We noted that negotiations on the next round would be likely to continue for a year at least before any deal would emerge. Both leaders accepted the case for a "soft landing" for Ireland and other regions set to lose Objective I status and noted that Ireland had made good use of EU funding.
I also briefed both Prime Ministers on the Northern Ireland peace process indicating the substantial progress that was being made by both Governments at that time. In relation to East Timor, I raised with Prime Minister Guterres Ireland's concerns and indicated that these had been conveyed directly to the Indonesian Foreign Minister Alatas by the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt.
I thanked Prime Minister Blair for his skilful chairmanship of a successful summit in tandem with intensive negotiations on Northern Ireland. Overwhelming goodwill was conveyed to me by all the ASEM leaders in relation to the Northern Ireland peace process. I am confident that the good trade and cultural relations with Asian countries which Ireland enjoys can be further improved on foot of the useful meetings and contacts I had in London. Ireland will play its part in developing the many initiatives adopted in London and in this way and through participation in the vision group, assist in the preparation for the Seoul summit in 2000.