John Bruton
Ceist:8 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the number of times the Cabinet Committee on European Affairs met in 1999; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2203/00]
Ceisteanna – Questions. - EU Meetings.
John Bruton
Ceist:9 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the consultations he had with other EU Heads of Government on the formation of a new Government in Austria. [3309/00]
John Bruton
Ceist:10 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the com munication, if any, he has had with the new Chancellor of Austria, Mr. Schussel, following his appointment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3311/00]
John Bruton
Ceist:11 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the preparatory meetings, if any, he will have in Ireland prior to his visit to Australia and the USA in March 2000; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4030/00]
John Bruton
Ceist:12 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if, further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 1 to 15, inclusive, of 26 January 2000, he will make a statement on the discussions or correspondence he has had with other EU Heads of Government and the President of the EU Commission on the convening of the intergovernmental conference in February 2000. [4031/00]
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:13 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the discussions, if any, he has had with the new Austrian Chancellor, Mr. Schussel; the discussions, if any, he has had with other EU leaders regarding the composition of the new Government in Austria; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4147/00]
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:14 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet Committee on European Affairs last met; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4148/00]
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:15 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he was consulted by the EU Presidency prior to the issuing of its concerns relating to the entry of the FPO into the Government of Austria; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4149/00]
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:16 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will give details of his proposed visit to the United States and Australia; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4150/00]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:17 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the discussions, if any, he has had with the other EU Heads of Government concerning the EU and Irish responses to the formation of the new Austrian Government. [4159/00]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:18 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach the consultations, if any, he has had with EU Heads of State on the recently installed Government in Austria. [4384/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 to 18, inclusive, together.
The Cabinet Committee on European Affairs, following its establishment in May 1999, met three times during the year. It will meet as required as key issues arise on the EU agenda and in preparation for European Councils. It met again last Tuesday to consider yesterday's launch of the Intergovernmental Conference, the co-ordination of Ireland's approach to the Lisbon Special European Council on Employment, which will take place on 23 and 24 March, and other European issues of a current nature. Since the Helsinki European Council I have not had further discussions at Heads of State and Government level on the Intergovernmental Conference.
I spoke to the Portuguese Prime Minister, Mr. Antonio Guterres, on Sunday, 30 January about the proposed composition of the Austrian Government. Mr. Guterres was making contact with member states of the EU to ascertain their individual bilateral responses. An agreed approach on behalf of the 14 member states was developed by the Portuguese Presidency on foot of these consultations and after it had been conveyed by Prime Minister Guterres to the Austrian President it was made public.
Following this statement I spoke to Prime Minister Guterres again. In addition, my office has maintained frequent contact with the Portuguese Prime Minister's office on this issue. I also received a telephone call from the then Vice Chancellor and acting Foreign Minister, Mr. Wolfgang Schu1ssel, on 2 February in relation to the proposed programme of the new Austrian coalition Government. I took the opportunity to stress the essential importance of the common European values of democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the need for a clear reaffirmation by the new Austrian Government of its intention to honour these values and its adherence to its international obligations in the EU and other international fora.
The statement from the 14 member states relates to the broad conduct of bilateral relations with Austria. It will, of course, remain for individual member states to determine the operational application of the measures in the statement. Importantly, as the Portuguese Presidency and the President of the Commission, Mr. Prodi, have made clear, the work of the EU in its institutions is not affected.
I will depart for Australia on 6 March, travelling en route to East Timor, where I will visit the Irish contingent serving with the peacekeeping operation there. I plan to meet with the East Timorese Leaders, Mr. Xanana Gusmao and Mr. Jose Ramos Horta, as well as representatives of Irish NGOs currently working there.
I will then travel on to Australia where I will meet Prime Minister Howard and other political leaders. I will also meet with Australian business leaders and, of course, with the Irish community in Australia. I will arrive in Washington from Australia on Wednesday 15 March. While in Washington, I anticipate, in accordance with tradition and established practice, that I will meet with President Clinton on St. Patrick's Day, attend a lunch hosted by the Speaker on Capitol Hill and participate in a number of receptions and media events. During my visit I hope to chair a meeting of the Ireland-America Economic Advisory Board. On Saturday 18 March I will return to Dublin.
My programme for Australia and the US is cur rently being finalised by my Department in consultation with the relevant Government Departments, embassies and the Defence Forces, and I will meet with them as appropriate in advance of the visit.
Does the Taoiseach agree that it is a fundamental principle of the rule of law that an accused person should be heard before being sentenced? Why did he go along with a process of dealing with the Austrian coalition in which the 14 members conducted their business by telephone instead of convening a Council meeting at which accusations and concerns could have been put to the Austrians and the Austrians allowed to reply before a decision was taken?
There was much discussion and deliberation on the issue. My role is as described but some heads of member states have been raising the issue for several months. Some felt very strongly about the nature of the statement and the demands which should be made of the Austrian Government. For my part, I believed that because this took place over the weekend in advance of the establishment of the Government, a clear line should be set down on fundamental human rights issues in response to the statements made by the party leaders on a number of occasions. It was the least that could be done. There were demands to do other things.
Yesterday, representatives of the Austrian Government were given an opportunity to attend the General Affairs Council to make their case. That is what Mr. Schüssel had asked for. They attended the meeting and now we must watch the position carefully. Mr. Schüssel said to me what the Austrian Minister for Foreign Affairs said to the General Affairs Council yesterday, that the Government should be judged on its actions.
Normally I would not agree with interference with other Governments but some of the things Mr. Haider has said are outrageous. I was given some of the statements he made during the general election by the Portuguese. Frankly, if anyone in this House made a statement similar to the least offensive of them, there would be an outcry. Making the statement was the least we could do, notwithstanding that we should not interfere. Some member states and some colleagues were extremely angry about it. However, that was a matter for the Austrian people, not a matter in which we should interfere. We had a right to set down basic principles. It enabled the President of Austria to ensure these matters were dealt with in the preamble to the new Government.
After yesterday's meeting the British Foreign Secretary announced that regardless of the facts and the performance of the Austrian Government, the bilateral sanctions agreed by the 14 other member states will continue in place as long as it is in power, no matter what it does. Does the Taoiseach agree this is the position adopted by the Foreign Secretary? Can he confirm if this is the position of the EU as a whole and of the Government?
The Government agreed to the statement on the three principles laid down and they stand until they are rescinded. I am convinced of the need to underpin the Union's values. All the member states comprise a community of shared ideals and values and are committed to fighting racism and xenophobia. Our common policy in this area cannot be endangered and overthrown by a single state. The joint statement by EU member states with which I agreed – I have not gone along with all the statements that have since been made – was one of firm intent, rather than a list of sanctions.
I do not see it as being a matter of sanctions, although some measures affect ambassadors and others. Mr. Schüssel and the Austrian Foreign Minister asked that their Government be judged by its actions. However, the formation of that Government could not proceed without some action by the other member states. In this regard the Portuguese Presidency under Antonio Guterre had to work hard to obtain agreement on what was a moderate statement. Many member states would have preferred a different kind of statement.
Does the Taoiseach accept that all in this House condemn the sentiments of Mr. Haider and have no patience with his demagoguery? Given the apparent sanctions in place, is it the policy of the Government that no Minister will receive the Austrian ambassador?
That is part of the statement and it is the present position.
Does the Taoiseach agree that one of the founding principles of the European project has been to prevent the re-emergence in Government of the right which polluted Spain under Franco, Portugal under Salazar, Greece under Papadopoulos and fascist Germany and Vichy France? Does he also agree that the driving force underpinning the European project is to ensure that while people have the right to express their views, those views will not be accorded the authority of government and that the advent of the so-called Freedom Party into government in Austria is a memory check for everybody in Europe with regard to the role the right has played in the past?
Will the Taoiseach confirm that the Government will send a clear signal to the Austrian Government, or to any government, that there is a conflict between the pursuit of the European ideals, as embodied in the European project, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the presence in government, as distinct from the presence in Parliament, of people who express the views the Taoiseach referred to in the course of the recent Austrian election campaign? Does he not agree there is a paradox and a difficulty with enlargement given on the one hand, the prospective difficulties which some member states may have with enlargement, some of whose political parties are opposed to enlargement, and, on the other hand, the prospect that parties within some of the applicant countries do not share the democratic values and views on which the European project is based?
I think I recently stressed in the House what must happen concerning human rights before people can gain acceptance for enlargement, which now involves 12 countries, another six having become involved today. I mentioned this in particular in the context of Turkey. We can argue about the legal position, but Article 5 clearly states that people must be mindful of human rights and what the Union stands for. Let us not talk about sanctions, which come under article 6, unless—
It is not an economic club.
Precisely, and Article 5 proves this. It states that the values must be shared and the principles must be followed. It was on that basis that Antonia Guterre acted. When I spoke to Wolfgang Schu1ssel before his appointment I stressed the essential importance of the common European values of democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the need for clear reaffirmation by the proposed Austrian Government of its intention to honour these values and adhere to its international obligations both within the Union and in other international fora. I laid down this as the issue concerning the Irish Government. In fairness, it was the wish to the Austrian people, or at least the system, which gave the result, notwithstanding the enormous differences between people, including the Austrian President who stated his position. The president succeeded in having included in the preamble issues with pro-European standards and we must wait to see how these standards are adhered to. I have spoken to some of my colleagues on different issues in the past week or so, and we will see how the new administration performs.
(Dublin West): Does the Taoiseach agree that Mr. Haider was heard loud and clear when he praised Nazi forced labour policies, when he praised members of the Waffen SS death squads, and when he targeted the Turkish minority, particularly for verbal attack, since coming into office? Does the Taoiseach share the concern of a significant section of the Austrian people that the arrival of Haider's party in Government is a very sinister development?
The Dublin Convention could allow asylum seekers to be sent to Austria to have their applications heard if that is where they first entered the EU. Is the Taoiseach concerned whether, in the climate which Haider's party is building against immigrants and asylum seekers, those who might be sent there would get justice, fair play and a fair hearing?
Will the Taoiseach commend the mass public protests of the labour movement, including Youth Against Racism in Europe and other groups, against Haider in Austria and which are determined that fascism will not be allowed breed again in Central Europe?
I do not wish to get involved in discussing different political movements in Austria – I will not fall into that trap. Our concern is that the EU treaty, of which we are part, is adhered to, and we have stated our position in that regard and have joined all the other members and other countries in this regard. I hope the policies Mr. Haider very clearly put forward many times will not be followed by the members of the new administration. This appears to be what the President of Austria has said and what the General Affairs Council said yesterday. There is no doubt this matter will be kept under very close scrutiny and review in the months ahead.
What must the Austrian Government do for the Taoiseach to allow a Minister to receive the Austrian ambassador to Ireland? On the upholding of the treaties, does the Taoiseach consider it might have been better to have confronted the members of the Austrian Government at a meeting rather than decide on the sanctions before they were confronted?
The sanction is in place, it is an indicator. If this Government follows the policy it has set down perhaps matters will change, but that can only be done at European Council level. Mr. Antonio Guterres had a difficult position getting a moderate statement. It was not what was said to him by many countries, including bigger and smaller ones. He used skill and judgment to get a reasonable statement.
Would it not have been better to allow the Austrian Government state its case, face to face, in the same way as a person in an unfair dismissals case would be entitled to due process rather than have the job done by telephone, behind their backs and without their involvement, in such a fashion as to increase the popularity of Haider in a way that is entirely undesirable?
Whether that is the effect is for another case; we will see that happening in the future. The thinking behind it was it was the weekend prior to the establishment of the new administration. Many people did not like it but it is not their business. Their business is their make-up and the policies they pursue against the treaty. The view was that putting on this pressure could assist the position, which it did. The President was not only able to insist, due to international press ure, that issues be put into preamble but was effectively told he could write the preamble. He got all the issues into the preamble and people will have to live by them. From that point of view it was a good manoeuvre. I agree with Deputy Bruton that it is not always satisfactory to try to do such things on the telephone, particularly on a Sunday night, but it probably had the desired effect.
Does the Taoiseach agree that the action taken by the Portuguese presidency was in accordance with the European treaties? The action in advance of the formation of the Austrian Government strengthens the hand of the presidency and a signal has been sent very clearly not only to the Austrian people but also to the Belgians, French and anyone else who would wish to vote for a far right party. While their democratic rights to vote for whoever they like may be respected, the prospect of such parties forming part of a Government within a deepening European Union is something that is at variance with the values of the European project and, as a consequence of that, the forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference, and future enlargement raises fundamental issues of politics rather than economics that this Government must address. What steps should the Government take in respect of that issue?
Is the Taoiseach aware that Socialist Chancellor Kreisky had four of these party members in his Cabinet and nobody said anything? Does he agree that, even though we join him in condemning some of the things Mr. Haider has said, the manner in which the decision was made in this case has set a woeful precedent for larger member states to hijack the role of the European Community, particularly given that for the first time the Amsterdam Treaty made provision for the suspension of member states which did not meet the criteria set down? Why was it necessary to bypass these institutional arrangements? Given what is happening on this island, will we be subject to public opinion in France or elsewhere before we decide how the State should be governed? A total of 27% of Austrians are not fascists and the issue should not have been dealt with in this manner.
(Dublin West): I am concerned that Fine Gael is going soft on the extreme right again. Given Mr. Haider's well stated hatred for ethnic minorities, will the Government forbid anybody seeking refuge here from being sent to Austria under the Dublin Convention while his party is in Government in the interests of justice and human rights?
Member states have made their statement, which was balanced. It did not go into the measures that some countries wished that weekend – they did not get their way. The Presi dency's function was to produce a balanced statement and I believe it did that even though it creates some difficulties. I totally accept that countries getting involved in other countries' business is not good and I recognise all the dangers involved. There could be groups and all types of allegations could be made within the Community.
The way we are working our own peace process is by bringing in people from the extremes, is that not right?
It is right—
Give them responsibility and they become more responsible.
—but some people wanted to fuel the extremes far more than Antonio Guterres, who tried to deal with this in a balanced way. It was successful because that pressure had a major influence on trying to get the new Government in Austria to honour its international commitments. It did that and that demonstrated good action by the Presidency.
I do not know whether refugees from Ireland would be sent to Austria, but naturally these matters would have to be taken into account if such a situation arose. In fairness to the new administration, I do not believe that it will follow anything like the threatening statements Mr. Haider has made in the past. I do not envisage this becoming a difficulty. We should not prejudge the administration. It stated that it would follow the rule of law, democracy and human rights, and we will wait and see how that develops.