Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 26 Oct 2000

Vol. 525 No. 1

ASEM III Summit: Statements.

The Taoiseach

I attended the third Asia-Europe meeting, or ASEM III, which took place in South Korea on 19 and 21 October. I was accompanied by the Minister of State at the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, Deputy Ó Cuív, who deputised for the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

While the venue for this year's summit, Seoul, was agreed at ASEM II in 1998, the holding of the summit in Korea proved timely, given the recent award of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Kim Dae-jung. Naturally, therefore, our discussions at ASEM took account of the efforts of President Kim to promote peace and reconciliation throughout the Korean peninsula, and the implications arising from his recent meeting with Kim Jong-il of the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea. I am delighted to announce that a Declaration for Peace in the Korean peninsula was agreed by leaders at the summit. This declaration, together with the Chairman's statement and the Asia-Europe Co-operation Framework, also agreed by leaders, has been placed in the Oireachtas Library.

ASEM has led to a number of Euro-Asian co-operative measures, in a variety of areas, including the Asia-Europe Foundation in culture, and the ASEM Business Forum. This third Asia Europe meeting provided an opportunity for leaders to review progress and achievements so far, to build on what has already been achieved and to plan for comprehensive and sustained co-operation between the two regions. I believe this third summit was a success, not only for Europe-Asia relations, but particularly for Ireland.

Proceedings opened on Thursday, 19 October, with a preparatory ministerial meeting to finalise the key topics for discussion during the closed leaders' sessions. Heads of State or Government met in three sessions, without officials, over Friday, 20 and Saturday, 21 October. We considered a range of topics related to the three strands of the ASEM process, namely, the promotion of political dialogue, economic and financial co-operation and co-operation in the cultural, educational, social and people-to-people fields. Leaders also discussed the future of ASEM at a working lunch between sessions on Friday, 20 October.

ASEM III differed from previous Asia-Europe meetings in that there was no fixed agenda. Instead, a range of topics under each of the three pillars of ASEM was proposed for discussion by leaders. In addition, as an alternative to prepared interventions, President Kim, who chaired all sessions, encouraged a free-flowing format which allowed for much deeper discussion across a wider variety of issues.

During the first session on political dialogue, discussions naturally focused on developments on the Korean peninsula, and President Kim's recent award of the Nobel Peace Prize. While the dialogue between north and south was warmly welcomed, President Kim himself indicated that the greatest challenges remain ahead. Regional security issues were discussed during the first session, with developments in the western Balkans and the recent appointment of President Kostunica in the former Republic of Yugoslavia being of particular interest to our partners. During discussions on European security and defence policy, I indicated that in the context of our forthcoming membership of the UN Security Council, we look forward to close and mutually reinforcing co-operation between the EU and the UN in the maintenance of international peace and security.

We also discussed developments in the Asian Regional Forum, which recently admitted North Korea as an observer. I welcomed the growth and evolution of this new organisation, as a valuable forum for the discussion by Asian countries of their security concerns. The forum will provide a means for addressing and resolving potential disputes through peaceful negotiation.

In the first working session there was a lengthy discussion on human rights, during which some criticism of the European approach, and that of the wider western world, was expressed. I pointed out that Ireland and the EU are fully committed to upholding the rights of the individual and, in particular, the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, association and religion. I also noted that we do not believe that the enjoyment of these rights is dependent on the attainment of a particular level of socio-economic development by a state, but rather that they are the absolute minimum to which all human beings are entitled. I also indicated that human rights have now been firmly established as a cornerstone of Ireland's foreign policy and that our commitment to furthering the cause of human rights will be carried through in our work on the UN Security Council. I am pleased to report that my intervention was welcomed by many Asian and European leaders alike who wish to see a real and frank dialogue develop across all areas of EU-Asian relations.

In discussions on the UN, I restated Ireland's support of Secretary-General Annan's reform efforts. I also noted that the reform should be about making the UN more effective in the economic, social, humanitarian and other fields, and cannot simply be about cost-cutting. I reaffirmed my belief that there is a need for increased levels of development assistance from wealthy nations if significant progress is to be made in reducing the number of people living in extreme poverty. I also indicated that Ireland was ready to play its part by reaching the UN target for overseas development aid by the end of 2007.

In the working lunch which followed the first closed session, discussions on the future of ASEM took place. Leaders decided to increase the frequency of meetings between Finance Ministers and Foreign Ministers, to ensure a deeper dialogue between the two regions, and asked Foreign Ministers to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of ASEM and its activities, including its initiatives, for consideration by leaders at ASEM IV, to be held in two years. From now on, these meetings will take place annually rather than every second year. In 2001, Finance Ministers will meet in Japan, while Foreign Ministers will meet in China.

The effect of future enlargement of both the EU and the Asia region was also discussed. Leaders agreed on a set of principles, the Asia-Europe Co-operation Framework 2000, which provides a road map for Asia Europe relations to 2010, and also sets out criteria for future enlargement of ASEM. Under this framework, ASEM partners have agreed to work for the common goal of maintaining peace and stability, as well as promoting conditions conducive to sustainable economic and social development.

There will be an increased focus on building mutual awareness and understanding between the two regions. The potential synergy between Asia and Europe will be of tremendous value, not only in addressing economic challenges posed by globalisation, e-commerce and the new economy, but in meeting the social and political challenges of poverty, development, fundamental human rights and the creation of a peaceful and stable world order. This commitment to working together will be given expression through the more frequent meetings at ministerial and senior official level, and the increased co-operation between the ASEM partners in other international fora, such as the United Nations.

During the second session on economic co-operation, the main discussions focused on multi-lateralism and the WTO, the knowledge based society, the impact of globalisation, the current price of oil, e-commerce and the Internet. Whereas ASEM II had been dominated by the effects of the Asian financial crisis, it was clear from discussions during this summit that the majority of Asian countries present have made significant recoveries over the past two years and are looking forward with much greater optimism. We considered the possible measures which could be adopted to sustain long-term economic stability, and to prevent a recurrence of such economic crises. The role that the IMF can play in this regard, including increased transparency in economic and financial activities, enhanced surveillance and the observance of international codes on fiscal and monetary policy was considered.

There was also a wide degree of agreement between the EU and Asian partners on the importance of launching a new round of multi-lateral trade negotiations under the WTO. There is much to be gained from a new round, with a broad and embracing agenda which recognises the concerns and aspirations of all participants, both developed and developing. I hope that a timeframe for a new round of global trade negotiations can be agreed in the near future.

With the Minister of State, Deputy Ó Cuív, I attended a formal dinner hosted by President Kim Dae-jung on Friday evening. This afforded me an opportunity to have informal discussions with each of the Asian leaders and to raise Ireland's Asia strategy with them. At the third and final working session, which took place on Saturday morning, discussions focused on co-operation in cultural and other fields. I indicated to leaders that Ireland was delighted to have had the opportunity in June this year to host the fourth Asia-Europe Young Leaders Symposium in Limerick, which I attended. This mechanism affords a unique opportunity for increased co-operation and exchanges between potential leaders of the future. The symposium in Limerick provided an excellent opportunity to promote understanding and knowledge between the Asian countries and Ireland in particular. I also indicated that under our Asia Strategy, Ireland will continue working to develop closer links in the educational and cultural area in addition to building links in the trade, investment and economic fields.

As regards the Chairman's Statement, effectively the conclusions of the summit, leaders expressed satisfaction at the progress made in the ASEM process since the Bangkok and London Summits and looked forward to intensifying the process in the run up to ASEM IV, which will be held in the autumn of 2002 in Copenhagen during the Danish Presidency of the European Union.

The statement commends the contribution of the ASEM process to Asia's recovery from the financial crisis of 1998, and it also welcomes political and economic developments in Europe, such as the launch of the euro and strengthening EU institutions, as well as positive developments in Asia, such as Cambodia's accession to ASEAN, the Association of South-East Asian Nations, and the successful ASEAN+3 Summit held in Manila in November of last year.

In our statement, leaders expressed satisfaction at the progress being made in restoring stability to East Timor and encouraged further efforts by UNTAET, in co-operation with the countries closely involved, in order to guarantee the success of the transition process. I was pleased that we could agree to work together for reform and renewal of the United Nations and the promotion of dialogue in relation to international arms control and disarmament.

I am pleased that we were able to agree on the future use of the ASEM process to co-ordinate the European and Asian response to issues of international concern, such as environmental protection, the impacts of globalisation and infor mation technology on the world economy, the needs of the developing world, transnational organised crime, and especially the promotion and protection of basic human rights and freedoms.

The summit also approved a number of initiatives in various fields designed to further co-operation in the areas of globalisation, information technology, transnational and law enforcement matters, human resource development, the environment and health.

As I have already indicated, I had discussions with all the Asian leaders during the ASEM Summit. I took the opportunity to thank those members who expressed support for Ireland during our recent campaign for election to the UN Security Council. I also congratulated Prime Minister Goh on Singapore's election to the Council on the same day.

I had a brief meeting with Prime Minister Blair on Friday, 20 October. I had previously met the Prime Minister in Scotland at the funeral of Mr. Donald Dewar on Wednesday, 18 October. We discussed the ongoing work by officials in Dublin, London and Belfast, and the forthcoming Ulster Unionist Council meeting which will take place this Saturday.

I was particularly pleased to have an opportunity for a frank and informal discussion with President Wahid of Indonesia on the margins of the summit. He informed me of a new and ambitious plan to resolve the crisis of refugees in West Timor. President Wahid, together with the East Timorese leader, Mr. Xanana Gusmao, and Mr. Sergio de Mello, the UN Head of Administration in East Timor, will visit one of the largest refugee camps in West Timor. I understand Prime Minister Howard of Australia may also accompany the group on this visit.

President Wahid informed me that he intends to initiate a registration procedure whereby refugees in West Timor will be asked if they wish to remain in West Timor or return to East Timor. Those wishing to return will be given protection and secure passage home, while those who opt to stay will be moved to more appropriate and secure accommodation.

I welcome the President's plans and raised with him the need for early disarming and disbanding of militias in the area. I also assured him of our support to promote peace and stability throughout the region. I have asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, to monitor developments in this regard.

I also had a formal bilateral meeting with Premier Zhu Rongji of China. Premier Zhu congratulated me on Ireland's election to the UN Security Council and indicated that China looked forward to working closely with us over the next two years. I thanked him for the hospitality and warm welcome afforded to the Tánaiste and the trade delegation that accompanied her during her visit to China in September this year. Trade between Ireland and China is on an upward trend, with a record high of more than £400 mill ion estimated for bilateral trade during the first six months of this year. This rapid growth in trade since 1998 is largely due to our focus on building and strengthening links with China under our Asia Strategy. We discussed this increase and possible options to develop and strengthen these links further.

Mr. J. Bruton

Will the Taoiseach yield? Did the Taoiseach, in his discussions with Premier Zhu, raise the issue of China's relationship with Taiwan and the possibility of a more peaceful relationship existing within China?

The Taoiseach

He raised these issues with me again, reiterating his one China policy and his desire to move to more friendly relationships. As the Deputy will know from having seen the reports, in the week before the ASEM Summit, the Prime Minister of Taiwan was interpreted as stating a changed position on the one China rule which, hopefully, will allow for progress. China is certainly prepared to do business, if that is the position. Its one precondition is that the one China rule must be stated clearly before it enters into any discussions. That is also its position on the Dalai Lama. China says that that position must be publicly stated. The Dalai Lama said it privately but China wants it stated publicly so that it can move in a more progressive way on this issue.

I recalled the visit of Vice-Premier Li to Ireland earlier this year and I invited Premier Zhu to visit Ireland.

At my meeting with President Kim, we discussed developments on the Korean peninsula. President Kim outlined his views to me and was interested in hearing our observations on the recent developments in North-South dialogue in Korea and our experiences with our own peace process. He was particularly interested in our views on the challenges that lie ahead for Korea in furthering dialogue and the process of peace and reconciliation. I encouraged President Kim to pursue his policy of openness and dialogue. The House will be aware that a small number of EU member states indicated their intention at ASEM to establish diplomatic relations with North Korea. There are aspects of North Korea, however, which remain of concern to us and to other member states, particularly in the area of human rights. Accordingly, while I look forward to being able to consider the establishment of diplomatic relations eventually, quantifiable progress will have to be made in a number of areas, particularly in human rights and non-proliferation, before any decision can be made.

I briefed President Kim on our work to promote Ireland as a trade and investment location for Korean business interests, and the priority we are affording to Asia through our Asia Strategy. I also took the opportunity to invite President Kim to Ireland.

Following the conclusion of the summit, I addressed a lunch hosted by the Irish Ambassa dor to Korea, Mr. Paul Murray. This was attended by senior representatives of the Korean business and academic community, and members of the Irish community living in Korea, including many religious members and NGOs. I took the opportunity to inform the audience of the primary objectives of Ireland's Asia Strategy, namely, the establishment of enhanced business and political links between Ireland and Asia, and the raising of awareness of Ireland as a source of high quality exports. A copy of my speech has been placed in the Oireachtas Library.

In recognising the excellent trade and investment links that already exist between Ireland and Korea, I highlighted the potential for further development of these relationships.

I also visited a language workshop organised by MEI/Relsa, and launched a Korean language brochure on studying English in Ireland. This brochure is aimed at advising students on where they can study in Ireland, and I am delighted to inform the House that its production was partly funded by the Asia Strategy Group.

The fostering of educational and cultural links between the ASEM partners is a key element of both the ASEM process and Ireland's Asia Strategy. I was delighted, therefore, to attend the signing of an agreement between Changwon University and Trinity College, Dublin. A similar agreement was signed between Changwon and Limerick University earlier this year. I was especially pleased to be able to mark the occasion of the first visit to Korea by an Irish Taoiseach by announcing the donation by the Department of Foreign Affairs of a substantial number of books to Kyung Hee University.

I would like to record my thanks to President Kim for his excellent chairmanship of the ASEM Summit. I would also like to record the good will conveyed to me by the Asian leaders in relation to our recent election to the non-permanent membership of the UN Security Council. Our success in building relations within Asia is due in large part to our Asia Strategy. For my part, I will continue to support, in concrete ways, the development of this strategy by, for example, leading a major trade mission to Japan in March next year. I am confident that by the time of the next ASEM Summit in Copenhagen in the autumn of 2002, we will have significantly deepened and strengthened our political, economic, trade and cultural relations with our Asian partners.

Mr. J. Bruton

I propose to share my time with Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, if that is agreed.

Acting Chairman (Mr. McGrath)

Agreed.

Mr. J. Bruton

I would be interested to know who will respond to this debate. I presume it will not be the Taoiseach but it would be a pity if the response was to be given by somebody who is not listening to it, who will come in here and read some script that was prepared before the debate even began. Given that we, as party leaders, have taken the trouble to be here, the person who will reply to us should take the trouble to be here too, and not read a script that was probably written yesterday by somebody who is imagining what we will say without actually hearing it. We all have self-respect as party leaders. If we are having a debate it should be a debate, not a process of reading out stuff.

Acting Chairman

The Minister for Education and Science is listed as responding to the debate.

Mr. J. Bruton

But is he listening to the debate?

Acting Chairman

I cannot confirm that.

Mr. J. Bruton

That is the point.

ASEM was very interesting. I was Taoiseach at the first meeting. The involvement of China is the most interesting aspect of ASEM. There are real concerns about the build up of military strength in east Asia. It is one part of the world in which the level of arms is increasing and there are some difficult territorial and other disputes in the area such as those between the Philippines and China, Taiwan and China and there was a difficult issue in Korea. Anything which involves China in dialogue with its neighbours reduces tension and is important for world peace. Chris Patten recently pointed out that the Second World War started in Europe but ended in Japan. If there is another world conflagration, and please God there will not be, east Asia is probably the most likely place in which it will start.

I am a little disappointed by the way in which ASEM has developed since its inception. At our meeting in Bangkok we had quite an ambitious agenda of issues to be addressed. One of the most notable issues which stuck in my mind was the proposal for increased co-operation between universities. There was the suggestion that while many Asians studied in European universities, virtually no Europeans ever studied in Asian universities, and that this form of cultural colonialism was not good for Europe or Asia. This would involve significant language difficulties but it should be attempted as far as is possible. Very little progress has been made on this issue, but I welcome the announcements between Trinity College and Changwon University.

The other significant omission from the agenda is the issue of greenhouse gases. China is comparatively under-developed but is developing very rapidly. If China and the rest of east Asia develop on the European model, with European levels of pollution and a European model of social engineering, the level of greenhouse gases and other pollutants produced in a developed China, as distinct from a half-developed China, will destroy the world's environment.

I can understand why the Taoiseach might be embarrassed about raising this subject, as Ireland has not published its greenhouse gas abatement strategy. However, on the scale of things, an understanding between Europe, America and Asia on greenhouse gases is extremely urgent but was not dealt with at ASEM. I am not suggesting that ASEM would duplicate or replicate what has been done by other institutions. However, as it is a forum for politicians to talk politics, one of the major political issues which Asia and Europe have to deal with together is greenhouse gas abatement. This is a difficult issue in any country and it should be discussed by politicians at the highest level.

I also wish to refer to the proposed project for a Euro-Asian network for the monitoring and control of communicable diseases. I welcome this proposal as there is great concern in Ireland about strains of tuberculosis which are resistant to antibiotics. It is suggested that some of these are being introduced into Ireland by people from other countries, particularly from eastern Europe. We need to adopt a common health strategy to this issue and a common approach to the use of antibiotics.

The Euro-Asian network, which is a good idea, should be extended to include eastern Europe. A Euro-Asian network on the monitoring and control of communicable diseases which does not include Russia, whose prisons are infested with tuberculosis, is not addressing the problem. The Taoiseach should give this matter his full attention.

ASEM has an impressive range of meetings – ministerial, senior official and all sorts of other meetings involving officials and experts. However, there are no meetings involving parliamentarians. ASEM should have a parliamentary dimension as, ultimately, parliamentarians are the people with a mandate to do things alongside governments. A parliamentary dimension to ASEM would be useful. Such a forum might meet in the same city and at the same time as the ASEM summit itself so there would be an interaction between those with executive and parliamentary responsibilities. If we wish to promote democracy it must have a visible manifestation associated with ASEM. One way of doing so would be to have parliamentary meetings associated with the summit.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

I endorse Deputy Bruton's comments on ASEM which I hope will develop along the lines he proposes. I wish to focus on one aspect of ASEM which arises, in particular, from our election to the UN Security Council and is appropriate given the Taoiseach's recent return from Asia.

Ireland's position must be underpinned by a wider diplomatic network, particularly in Asia where we are very thin on the ground. Ireland has a very good reputation because of the impeccable reputation of our diplomatic corps in terms of their personal integrity and intellectual ability. Because of cost and other factors we are not in a position to make every appointment at ambassadorial level. For this reason, successive Governments which have tried to extend our diplomatic network have developed the honorary consul system. This network has acted as a support for the diplomatic corps, particularly where we do not have resident embassies.

As we extend our tentacles of influence across the world, and because of the need to safeguard our reputation, these appointments have always been carefully considered and the most complete investigation has always taken place before an appointment is made. I am personally aware of this process as I spent five years as Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Quinn

I am not sure we did it successfully in Pakistan.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

I am coming to that point. I am deeply conscious of this proud tradition and the high standards expected of our honorary consuls.

It is the Opposition's job to ensure these honourable traditions are continued and to be vigilant regarding all appointments of honorary consuls. Yesterday was one such occasion when I raised the recent appointment of the honorary consul to Pakistan by way of a parliamentary question. The previous honorary consul, Dr. Nadeem Beg, resigned in 1998 having enjoyed a reputation for incorruptibility. His refusal to depart from the straight and narrow caused him problems on occasions, particularly regarding a report he produced on fraud in the Indus Bank in Pakistan.

Since part of his job involved the issuing of visas to Ireland and the charging of fees, Dr. Beg was most careful in his screening and accounting procedures. He introduced a rule that applications would not be accepted from travel agents who, in certain circumstances, stood to profit handsomely from the granting of visas.

In his reply to my parliamentary question, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, disclosed that the Irish ambassador to Pakistan, who is resident in Tehran, interviewed 12 people who had expressed an interest in or had been recommended for the position of honorary consul to Pakistan. Mr. Hasib Ahsan was duly appointed by the Government and took office earlier this year.

Acting Chairman

I am sorry to interrupt but I misled the Deputy earlier when I said the Minister for Education and Science would conclude the debate. The Minister for Defence, Deputy Michael Smith, will conclude the debate.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

I hope he is in a position to reply to these matters I am raising.

Acting Chairman

He is in the House now.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

What was not disclosed in the reply to my parliamentary question yesterday are the following matters which I understand are facts. First, I understand that Mr. Ahsan is a tra vel agent employed by American Express Travel Services. I understand the appointment of a travel agent would be a complete departure from the previous tradition, where visa applications were not even accepted from travel agents.

Second, I understand that Mr. Ahsan was not the first choice recommended by our Ambassador, that in fact the recommendation for the appointment of Mr. Ahsan came from an unusual source. That recommendation came from a Member of this House, Deputy Ellis.

Third, I understand that Mr. Ahsan, the person appointed by the Government as Ireland's Honorary Consul in Karachi, is a friend and associate of Mr. Sohail, who is, or certainly was, as I will explain in a moment, the chairman of the Indus Bank to which I referred earlier.

Fourth, I understand that Deputy Ellis is, or certainly was, a director of the Indus Bank of Pakistan.

Fifth, I understand that it is now alleged that the newly appointed Irish Honorary Consul to Pakistan overcharged applicants for visas, either at double or treble the rate, and that during the period from June to August upwards of £3,000 in extra charges were charged and collected by him. I further understand that that practice has now been stopped because a complaint was made directly to the Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin by letter of 8 August.

I mentioned that it is my understanding that our Honorary Consul, our man in Karachi, was appointed on the recommendation of Deputy Ellis, a director of the Indus Bank, and that he is a friend of Mr. Sohail of that bank. I further understand that in recent weeks the licence of the Indus Bank has been withdrawn. It is the first time in the history of Pakistani banking that a licence has been withdrawn. Various reasons for this are quoted in the documentation in my possession but at this stage I do not want to go into them in detail other than to say that these facts indicate a very murky tale surrounding the appointment by the Government of an honorary consul in Pakistan.

The circumstances, as outlined by me, require the most complete explanation from the Government of the circumstances surrounding the appointment of our Honorary Consul to Pakistan, the manner in which he has carried on his activities in the name of Ireland since his appointment and the extra charges which he made on people applying for visas. The Government has a duty and a responsibility to the country to explain the full details of this murky tale.

There must be an examination by the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs of the circumstances surrounding this appointment and I intend to ask the committee to examine the issue, to call all necessary witnesses in order that we can get the complete story on this issue and to provide to the people of Ireland the full and unadulterated truth surrounding the appointment of our Honorary Consul in Pakistan.

It is important for Ireland that we maintain the reputation for absolute integrity in the diplomatic corps. Such reputation must exist not just among the professional diplomatic corps but perhaps even more so among those people we choose to appoint as honorary consuls to act for and in the name of Ireland in other countries. When I raise in the House the suggestion that we extend our diplomatic corps, I state that any such extension must be based on those principles.

The facts, as now disclosed, indicate that an appointment was made in the most suspicious circumstances. I want to know why the Government this year caused this man to be appointed as our man in Karachi and I intend, on behalf of my party and of the Opposition, to pursue this issue until we have all the facts. If the Government is not prepared to immediately disclose all those facts, I will ask the members of the Government to come before the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs to be cross-examined in this issue.

Mr. Quinn

The allegations put on the record of the House by Deputy O'Keeffe, a senior and respected Member of this House, are very serious. I urge the Taoiseach to respond to them as quickly as possible. It may not be possible in the context of this debate for him to do so, but I have known Deputy O'Keeffe for a long time, I respect his judgment and I, on behalf of the Labour Party, can say sincerely that those charges would not have been made lightly. They certainly require substantial and immediate investigation. The House in general, but certainly the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, should be informed of the nature of the appointment, the way in which it was made and if the allegations are true.

On the procedure of the House, with all due respect to the Minister for Defence, Deputy Michael Smith, if we are to have a debate which we lightly call Statements and since the Taoiseach correctly sat through this debate, it seems that it makes more sense – although this is a procedure which existed before Deputy Ahern became the Taoiseach and therefore I am not criticising this Administration – that the person who made the initial statement to which we replied should respond. If the response to our contributions is given by somebody else, it is not the most efficient way to proceed.

I will comment on the Taoiseach's comprehensive report from the ASEM III Summit. Having read the chairman's report, which, in effect, as the Taoiseach stated, contains the conclusions of the gathering, there are a number of interesting issues which arise from it. First and foremost it is fair to say, as I am sure Deputy Bruton would agree, that ASEM came into existence as a welcome regional political response to the phenomenon of globalisation. We are beginning to see regional groups of states of one kind or another dealing with issues which are being thrown up by globalisation. Certainly the agenda of ASEM and the range of meetings listed in the report on the website, which accompanied the chairman's statement, is extensive. Because of time constraints, I will address just a few of them.

In the context of the alleged clash of cultures between Europe and Asia, and of the World Trade Organisation and the opening up of markets for free competition, there is an allegation, most famously made by Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, that the Asian culture, in terms of its understanding not only of the welfare state but of human rights, was different to that of Europe. Consequently matters like trades union rights, human rights and child labour were raised as a kind of reverse protectionism, where Europe was trying to impose upon Asia and emerging Asian economies standards of market behaviour and production which were, in effect, anti-competitive, and that the competitive advantage Asia possessed regarding labour costs was one which Europe was trying to overcome through the "spurious" argument of human rights. I reject this point of view and would like the Taoiseach or the Minister for Defence to indicate whether this was raised in any of the debates or in the free flow of discussion in Seoul at the ASEM conference.

From my point of view and that of the party of European Socialists of which I am a member, the right to join a trade union and to bargain the cost and price of one's labour is not a human right, it is a market contractual right. If one takes trade union rights and puts them into the basket of human rights, one is actually failing to recognise what a free market is. If we have, under the WTO, the right to enforce contracts in relation to the sale of property, for example, or if we have, within the context of the WTO because they are seen as market rights, the right to enforce ownership of intellectual property, which used to be a great point of contention, particularly with Korea in its earlier days of development and now, and if those rights are seen as commercial rights that fall within the framework of commerce and trade, I put it to the Taoiseach that what Europe and Ireland should be arguing is that the right of workers to organise themselves to maximise the value of their commodity in the marketplace, which is their labour and their ability to sell it, is fundamentally an economic right and not a human right. The fact that in Europe the historical struggle for trade union recognition was confused with human rights obscures the essential nature of the point I am making.

In essence, if we open up markets and liberalise them, then they have to be fully and completely liberalised. It is not sufficient in the context of globalisation that aspects of the market are opened up and liberalised and are enforceable and policed by international treaties such as the WTO but that other aspects of it are deemed to be not opened for liberalisation and are not, so to speak, policed by international treaties. In saying this, I am not saying that labour costs and labour standards of a European scale should be imposed on Indonesian or ASEM groups of countries. I am simply saying it is an integral part of globalisation that Indonesian workers or any Asian workers have the right to organise themselves as they see fit. They will make the trade off between increased costs and job losses in the same way trade union leaders all over the world do.

As Leader of the Labour Party and as part of the European socialists, and, indeed, the Socialist International, the American trade union movement and many others, I have been arguing for the transfer of this point of view out of the human rights basket into which it has been successfully pushed by a combination of spurious counter cultural arguments coming from some Asian leaders on the one hand and European and American right-wingers on the other. The right to organise labour and to sell it to its maximum value is as much an integral part of a liberalised market as the right to enforce contracts or to ensure the ownership of intellectual property.

The Taoiseach

I agree with the Deputy. I would like to highlight what I said in the debate, and I know Deputy Quinn is not taking issue with me. I pointed out that Ireland and the EU were fully committed to upholding the rights of the individual and, in particular, the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, association and religion. I also had a fairly friendly but heated exchange with my Malaysian colleague and I said that we do not believe that the enjoyment of these rights is dependent on the attainment of a particular level of socio-economic development by the state but rather that they are the absolute minimum to which all humans are entitled.

Mr. Quinn

I thank the Taoiseach for that clarification, which I welcome. I am just concerned that, in the context of opening up Europe's markets to other countries, the debate on liberalisation, which I support, and, indeed, the point that was made very strongly by President Museveni of Uganda in respect of access for agricultural products, if we are going to have globalisation, goes in both directions. In many of these countries which are not yet functioning democracies, there is a need for that point of view to be articulated but I welcome the Taoiseach's elaboration on his text.

I move to some of the other points I would like to raise on globalisation before I talk about some of the points the Taoiseach made in his speech. The euro has been successfully launched in Europe, although to read the Anglo-Saxon press one would think the euro was a failure. I would love to see the level of currency speculation and instability that would surround all the peripheral currencies of Europe today if we did not have EMU and if we had to face the prospect of the soaring value of the US dollar. The Economist of three weeks ago stated that the New Zealand dollar has dropped 44% in value reference to the US dollar since 1996 and that the Australian dollar has dropped in value by approximately 35% in the same period. It is not a question of the euro falling vis-à-vis the US dollar, it is a question of the US dollar soaring vis-à-vis every other currency in the world.

I think the time has come, within the context of ASEM, for the European Union, countries within the euro zone in particular, and the Asian countries to look for a fundamental change, since and post Bretton Woods, in the pricing of certain basic international commodities. Specifically, there is an argument for geo-political economic stability if we were to remove the monopoly of pricing that the US dollar currently possess in respect of oil and other commodities such as cotton, coffee and any other commodity traded internationally. That they are priced exclusively in US dollars is a function of history. It was, and for many it still is, the only global reserve currency. It has now been matched by the yen on the one hand and the euro on the other. There is a compelling argument in terms of geo-political exchange rate stability and from our point of view to have a barrel of oil, which is the most obvious example, and other international commodities that are traded priced in a weighted basket consisting of the euro, the yen and the US dollar, instead of being priced exclusively in US dollars which gives the United States extraordinary economic advantage.

I suggest to the Taoiseach that, in the context of the ASEM, in particular, such a rebalancing of commodity pricing is a strategic interest that should be pursued. It will not be easily yielded because the United States will not yield that dominant position readily but it is something that is in the interests of the two regions and I would like to hear the Taoiseach's comments in respect of that.

I turn now to points the Taoiseach made in relation to some of the issues that surrounded the visit. I regret we are not in a position to discuss the Biarritz informal Council but I understand from what the Taoiseach said that we will hear from the Government fairly soon in the publication of a document outlining its position, which I welcome. We have been threatened from Berlin to Boston by members of this Government with debates on Europe but when they come home, they seem to be remarkably silent. Indeed, on that point, where has the Taoiseach put the Tánaiste? She has not been in the House for the last three days. I hope she is not sulking or hiding, but when she finally comes out of her purdah, perhaps we will have the debate she wants to have on Europe. However, we will have to await that for another day.

Mr. M. Smith

The Deputy should not worry.

Mr. Quinn

I am not worrying.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

The Minister got his nomination.

Mr. Quinn

I have my nomination already.

In relation to Korea, I share the Taoiseach's diplomatically expressed words of regret that the United Kingdom, our friends, allies and neighbours, jumped the gun in the recognition of North Korea. It has some of the hallmarks of the former West Germany jumping the gun in the premature recognition of Croatia which was not helpful in the context of what subsequently happened in Yugoslavia. A long road has yet to be travelled in relation to how North Korea is brought fully and properly into the international community. I endorse and strongly support the view, if I interpreted it correctly, that the Taoiseach was diplomatically putting into the media that this is a matter in terms of common foreign and security policy. If it means anything within the European Union and if we have learned any of the lessons from Croatia and the subsequent destruction of Yugoslavia, that should be done in concert and should have been co-ordinated. If the common foreign and security policy means anything within the European Union and if we have learned any lessons from Croatia and the subsequent destruction of Yugoslavia, this is something that should be done in concert and in a co-ordinated way on the basis of collective recognition and full diplomatic participation, including perhaps resident embassies, with the full force of European support behind it, rather than having solo post-imperialist runs from dear friends and neighbours. I share the concerns expressed by the Taoiseach.

Germany's experience of unification has been costly and the lessons to be learned from it are extensive. There has been some writing on the probable cost of reunification of Korea. It is probably not the Taoiseach's bedtime reading, but the New Left Review of 1995 contained an interesting article by George Habernas on the implications of unification for Germany and for Korea. As Deputy Bruton said, Korea is one of the last potential trouble spots that could trigger off a major regional, if not global, incident. Therefore, how we handle the reintegration of Korea into the world community is a particularly sensitive task and I commend the Taoiseach for the action that has been taken so far and support the view on it expressed in so far as I have read it.

The Taoiseach also referred to his meeting with President Wahid. As reported in an article by Conor O'Cleary on 20 October, the indication given to the Taoiseach by President Wahid that he, along with Mr. Xanana Gusmao of East Timor and the UN administrator, Mr. de Mello, and possibly the Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, would visit West Timor and verify a process whereby more than 100,000 East Timorese refugees, who appear to be held against their will in refugee camps in West Timor, would be interviewed or allowed individually to signal their desire to return to East Timor, has been greeted, according to Conor O'Cleary's article, with some scepticism by UN administrators in East Timor. The Taoiseach may want to clarify the reaction of other people to that proposed process and how he assessed the seriousness or the validity or the real intent of what President Wahid—

The Taoiseach

May I intervene?

Mr. Quinn

Yes.

The Taoiseach

I was talking about other issues and then I moved on to East Timor, particularly the militias, and he informed me about his intention. However, when I spoke to some others about it there was some scepticism about it. I went back to him on a later occasion and he gave me the date of the meeting; I think it is this weekend or in the next few days.

Mr. Quinn

It is next Saturday. My reference was wrong, the article to which I referred was dated 21 October.

The Taoiseach

He gave me the date and the time. The only point about which he was unsure was whether John Howard would be there. I asked who it would involve and was told it will involve all 150,000 people. There was scepticism about it and we will have to see what happens, but he was clear in his mind about his intentions.

Mr. Quinn

I thank the Taoiseach for that clarification. Perhaps notwithstanding these statements, we are having the debate and getting the clarification we would have liked.

For reasons many of us know but few can explain, the plight of East Timor has become extraordinarily connected to the concerns of the Irish people. I can think of no other country with the exception of perhaps Nicaragua in terms of size relative to geography that has impacted so much in terms of people's concerns. Tom Hyland as well as many others, including the former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Andrews, has much to do with that. Ireland as a small country with a particular history can demonstrate a presence in Asia by expressing extraordinarily strong and sustained solidarity with East Timor. It is a country wishing to become a state with none of the necessary infrastructure. The place was devastated as a result of the referendum. The Taoiseach might indicate on this occasion or at some stage in the future what type of sustained programme we could provide for East Timor having regard to our commitment to move to full compliance with UN targets by the year 2007.

Minister for Defence (Mr. M. Smith)

Táim anseo thar cheann an Aire Gnóthaí Eachtracha nach raibh in ann teacht é féin.

As the Taoiseach made clear in his statement, this third meeting of ASEM was a success in terms of the documents it produced and the number of practical initiatives it endorsed in areas of interest or concern to both sides. The follow up meetings and seminars, which these initiatives will now require, will provide further and expanding synergy, which will bring into contact with each other many further elements of our respective Administrations, not to speak of representatives of other sectors. This will lead to further co-operation and a deepened understanding to strengthen the common purpose of both sides. In addition the free flowing nature of the discussions between the heads of State and the Government not only allowed them to understand each other's positions better but provided wide areas of agreement that will further the process.

The occasion also provided for Ministers or their representatives to engage in parallel discussions on matters such as developments in the Korean peninsula and UN peacekeeping, the latter area is one on which there is also greater common concern and greater involvement by a number of Asian countries. Given the extent of our experience in UN peacekeeping, this provided an opportunity for us to share some insights into our experiences.

Regarding Deputy Bruton's comments on the educational exchanges, all present recognised there was a defect that should be addressed. The vision group proposes a target of a fivefold increase in such exchanges before 2020. While the summit did not set targets, this is the goal we are keeping in mind.

With regard to greenhouse gases and the environment generally, several speakers addressed the importannce of The Hague follow up to Kyoto and the importance of early ratification of SEECO. As yet the ASEM process does not have a parliamentary tier. It may well develop one in that way, but I remind the Deputy that the ASEM process is one which only moves by consensus. The Deputy's suggestion is one we will continue to bear in mind.

Regarding the points made by Deputy O'Keeffe, I do not have details with me which would enable me to reply fully to his comments. I have noted what he said and will examine it. Pakistan is not a member of ASEM.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

Not yet.

Mr. M. Smith

That matter will be seriously addressed by my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

Comments were made about what we have done about the establishment of embassies and contacts in other places. Since we came back to power, an embassy has been opened in Singapore and consulates have been established in Shanghai and in Sydney. In addition, extra consulate posts have been established and filled in the embassies in Beijing and Tokyo. Enterprise Ireland has joined the consulates in Sydney and Shanghai in an Ireland House arrangement and the Enterprise Ireland representative in Beijing will function from that embassy.

With regard to Deputy Quinn's points on the World Trade Organisation, international labour standards did not arise in Seoul. The main thrust of the exchanges was an urgent need to kickstart the WTO process, with both sides recognising that an early restart of a comprehensive and inclusive new round within the WTO following the fiasco in Seattle is of the utmost importance. Negotiations are ongoing in Geneva concerning the terms of the new round. The points made by the Deputy are among those currently under discussion and negotiation there.

I listened with interest to Deputy Quinn's comments on the price of oil and the dollar. We had exchanges in Seoul on the price of oil because of its global importance, but it is not clear whether ASEM is the forum in which to debate the suggestions made. There was a general feeling in Seoul that achieving a stable price in oil was a priority not just for ASEM but for the world as a whole and poorer countries in particular.

The documents produced by the summit indicate the range of topics covered and the Taoiseach has already mentioned this. I emphasise the three separate pillars which the ASEM talks addressed and which made the summit interesting and important – political co-operation, economic and financial co-operation as well as cultural education and co-operation between people. Taken together, these strands provide a comprehensive framework for intensified and deepened co-operation between Europe and the Asian countries in ASEM in the years to come.

By some calculations the ten Asian countries involved will, in 20 years, equal or exceed the combined economic output of Europe and America. Even if this proves not to be the case it will still prove to be a huge and important bloc accounting for a quarter of the world's population and a quarter of its trade at present as well as a proven track record of economic growth over the past two decades. Several of the countries have also achieved impressive rises in living and health standards over that period, with the number of people classified as poor in the ten countries declining sharply since 1975.

The ASEM process is important because it brings together the leaders of Europe with the emerging and established economies of Asia in an informal setting which encourages frank exchanges of views. This is of considerable importance in the areas of human rights, democracy and security. It is also important for the future in that of its very nature it is forward-looking and because each summit has sought to encourage deeper and more intensive co-operation between the countries involved, which account for approximately half of the world's economic activity.

The exchanges at ASEM III look to the future, as do the initiatives adopted. There were valuable exchanges on the major issues likely to dominate the 21st century – globalisation, e-commerce, the information society and the so-called digital divide – and also on how to assist the poor of the world to participate in the technological knowledge-based revolution. ASEM has also agreed an initiative designed to grapple with some of the unsavoury aspects of globalisation such as transnational crime, trafficking in women and children, drugs and the spread of worldwide contagious diseases.

Throughout the proceedings in Seoul there was a clear recognition that the countries assembled owe a responsibility to the poor and less fortunate of the world to help them towards a better future. The ASEM process is also important to Ireland; as the Taoiseach said, we have signalled our interest in Asia with the adoption of a major strategy last year and we have expanded our diplomatic and trade representation in the countries in Asia participating in ASEM. Therefore, at the time Ireland is poised to join the Security Council we will be in a position to intensify our links bilaterally in both the political and economic spheres in these countries. Foreign Ministers are being tasked to look at ASEM and make recommendations as to how its work might be improved and our Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, will participate in these deliberations with a view to reporting to heads of Government at the next ASEM summit in Copenhagen in 2002.

Regarding Deputy Quinn's comment about East Timor, I could not agree more with the necessity to try to help in every way we can. The Taoiseach and I visited East Timor and saw at first hand the work of our troops there. One could not come away without a sense of purpose to do more. An incident that will be forever in my mind relates to a school in a little village in the mountains where there were 50 children, one teacher, one chair and no desks, pencils, books, pictures or crayons. There was nothing. We were fortunate that we could respond to that need through my Department, but it highlights the deprivation these diminutive people, for all their capacity to withstand struggle, have suffered. The militia tore down the electricity wires on their way back to Indonesia, leaving areas without power, yet these people display huge courage in the face of having lost one third of their population in the last 24 years. In consultation with the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs I will undertake to see to what extent more can be done within the limits and demands that are there. It is a special case as far as I am concerned.

Regarding diplomatic relations with North Korea, it is, as Deputy Quinn suggested, desirable to have this matter dealt with in a co-ordinated way within the CFSP and we will endeavour to see that that is done.