Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 4 Nov 1998

Vol. 496 No. 1

Ceisteanna — Questions. - Ministerial Responsibilities.

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has to reconsider his decision not to appoint a Minister for European Affairs in view of the fact that no Minister from the Department of Foreign Affairs attended the recent EU General Affairs meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19392/98]

Proinsias De Rossa

Ceist:

2 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has to alter areas of responsibility allocated to different Ministers, in particular in relation to European affairs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21607/98]

I propose to answer Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.

I have no plans to revise the content or allocation of current ministerial areas of responsibility. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has responsibility for European matters and I have no plans to appoint either a Minister or a Minister of State with responsibilities in this area. With regard to attendance at meetings of the General Affairs Council, I understand the Minister for Foreign Affairs attended the last GAC meeting which was held on 26 and 27 October.

I raise this question in support of the Government and of the efforts of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy O'Donnell, with regard to the Northern Ireland process. However, of the 14 meetings which the Minister for Foreign Affairs could have attended, two were trade related and were attended by Deputy Kitt, Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and of the rest, the Minister attended only seven. Three other Ministers of State, Deputies Ó Cuív, O'Donnell and Cullen have attended meetings. I accept that the Minister for Foreign Affairs has a very important role vis a vis Northern Ireland but having regard to the importance of the European dimension, whether in respect of regionalisation or other matters, does the Taoiseach not agree that our European interests are not being properly served by this intermittent and changing representation at the General Affairs Council? We have all had experience of various European General Affairs Council meetings and we know that unless there is continuity of personnel our interventions will be made without the required authority.

I accept the spirit in which the Deputy has asked this question. There were difficulties in the early months because between September of last year and April of this year the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for State at the Department of Foreign Affairs went to Northern Ireland regularly on Monday evening and normally returned on Thursday evening or Friday. Since then the Minister has been able to attend the General Affairs Council and of the ten meetings of the Council held since the early part of this year the Minister has attended all but two or three. On two of those occasions Deputy Kitt attended because the agenda was trade related and on one occasion the Minister of State at the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, Deputy Ó Cuív deputised for the Minister. I know it is the Minister's intention to attend at all times possible.

Given the choice of going to Canada to accompany the President or attending a meeting of the General Affairs Council, the Minister for Foreign Affairs chose to go to Canada. Having regard to the practice of the previous administration where there was, in the Department of the Taoiseach, a person with responsibility for European affairs, does the Taoiseach agree that we are in danger of losing out because of the overload of responsibilities carried by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and because the Government coalition arrangements oblige the Minister of State to be in Belfast rather than in Brussels?

If a difficulty arises I will appoint a co-ordinating Minister but no such difficulty has arisen. Recently, the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Cullen, attended a General Affairs Council meeting when Agenda 2000 was being discussed, having been briefed by the Department of Finance. Deputy Kitt has also attended. The only other representative to attend meetings of the council is Deputy Ó Cuív, Minister of State at the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands. In no case was Ireland's interest not attended to. Deputy Quinn is aware that the agenda of the General Affairs Council tends to revolve around arguments on how internal and external matters should be dealt with. This matter was discussed recently in Austria. I have spoken to the Minister, to the Minister of State and to officials of the Department about this matter and I can assure the Deputy there is no difficulty.

I hesitate to press this point because I have Ireland's interest at heart as has the Taoiseach. However, I have not yet referred to the two meetings at which a Minister was not present but which were attended by the permanent representative. Ministers were in place but they were so politically preoccupied that they were somewhere else. I refer the Taoiseach to his reply to Question No. 137 of 6 October last. The situation is not satisfactory. We will return to this matter and I am giving him fair notice.

As the Deputy has brought up the question, I might mention the previous record of people missing meetings but I do not propose going into that matter. Ministers should attend meetings whenever possible. In fairness to the Minister, on a number of occasions when he was obliged to choose between attending the General Affairs Council and staying in Northern Ireland I dictated that he remain in Northern Ireland.

I am not criticising the Minister for that.

Does the Taoiseach agree the problem has two sides to it. One is the burden of responsibilities on the Minister for Foreign Affairs who has a wide-ranging brief and the other is the burden of the agenda of the General Affairs Council which is also very wide. The solution being mooted by the General Affairs Council is the splitting of responsibilities between Ministers for Foreign Affairs and deputy prime ministers. What is the Taoiseach's attitude to that? Would he agree to appoint the Tánaiste, for example, as Deputy Prime Minister to take up the internal agendas which are extremely important for this country and for all members of the European Union so that we have a Minister at every meeting where issues of concern to the people are dealt with?

The Austrian Presidency was requested in Cardiff to look at the possibility of trying to manage the agenda of the General Affairs Council, which is now taking two and sometimes three days to complete. It has probably had more than a dozen formal meetings and several weekend get togethers in the first eight or nine months of this year. The demands on Foreign Affairs Ministers throughout Europe are great.

And growing.

Yes. It was suggested that they would regulate their agendas both on internal and external issues and either have them one day after the other or split them altogether. I supported the idea of splitting them and having them at separate times of the month.

With different Ministers.

When Mr. Victor Klima, the Austrian Chancellor, asked me to consider the idea of different Ministers or deputy leaders, I said I would accept that suggestion. Unfortunately, because of the arrangements throughout Europe and the different combinations of coalitions, there was not much support for that idea. The proposal at the Austrian informal meeting, that one meeting would take place on two separate days and countries could decide who they wanted to send, is still not finalised. Foreign Affairs Ministers and Prime Ministers were not prepared to separate the meetings totally. From 1999 onwards the General Affairs Council will be a two day, internal and external, meeting. Foreign Affairs Ministers will be obliged to attend both if they can do so, although they may separate them if they wish.

Surely resistance to the idea of splitting responsibilities came primarily from Foreign Affairs Ministers who were concerned about the loss of status and weight within the European decision-making processes? It would be of value to this country if a deputy Prime Minister and the Minister for Foreign Affairs represented the interests of this country at General Affairs Council meetings.

I do not have a problem with that. The Deputy is right that Foreign Affairs Ministers throughout Europe did not like the idea. This was well reported in the international press if not the Irish press. The President of the General Affairs Council attended the informal meeting for the first time in a long time to put their case, which showed that Foreign Affairs Ministers were using their influence. We were prepared to have deputy leaders, which I thought was sensible because the agenda is wide, or Foreign Affairs Ministers.

The meetings take place almost on a fortnightly basis and are heading more in that direction, as Deputy Quinn said. It is difficult for any Minister to give two days a fortnight to meetings. Up until now, ECOFIN Ministers were probably the busiest as they attended meetings one day in every three weeks.

All the more reason to appoint a Minister for European Affairs.

If one can get the Minister for Foreign Affairs or the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs to attend these meetings, all the better.

In support of the suggestion made by Deputy Quinn for the appointment of a Minister for European Affairs, does the Taoiseach recall that when coming into Government he acknowledged there was a problem in his proposal to appoint the then Minister for Defence as Minister for European Affairs and that it was only when it was discovered that this was not legal that the proposal had to be abandoned? Does that not show that the Taoiseach, even on his appointment, recognised there was a problem which has still not been resolved today and that the most appropriate course for him to adopt might be the approach adopted not just in the Government I led, but in the Government in which he participated previous to that where there was a Minister for European Affairs in the Department of the Taoiseach?

As I recall, it was not just a legality but the fact that a Minister would be subordinate to another Minister in certain circumstances, which could have created difficulties, that led me to abandon the idea. However, that Minister will continue to stand in whenever necessary. I was endeavouring to have two well briefed Ministers involved. We take great care in deciding who goes to these meetings and what issues are on the agenda. It is better if the Minister attends these meetings and, if not, the Minister of State. If it had not been for the intensity of the talks in Northern Ireland, which we hope will not go back to that stage again, where both Ministers were required three days a week, there would not have been a difficulty. If there is, I will be the first to change it.

The Taoiseach has evidence already that there is a difficulty.

If I looked back to when there were not as many meetings on the North, there were probably other problems.

The results were much better.

Were they?

We can thank the ambassadors who sat in at those meetings.

It was the quality of the representations.

Barr
Roinn