1 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach on which cross-departmental teams and interdepartmental committees his Department is represented; the purpose of each; the regularity with which they meet; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13190/09]
2 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach on which cross-departmental or interdepartmental committees or teams his Department is represented; the role of each; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16600/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together. I am circulating with the Official Report a list for the information of the Deputy detailing the principal cross-departmental teams and interdepartmental committees on which my Department is represented:
The following cross-departmental teams or interdepartmental committees meet every two to three weeks.
|
Name |
Purpose |
|
Senior Officials Group on European Affairs |
European Affairs as required. The meetings are attended by the following Departments at Assistant Secretary General level: Department of the Taoiseach, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Department of Finance, Department of Foreign Affairs, Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Other Departments can be invited to attend where necessary. |
|
Government Legislation Committee* |
The Government Legislation Committee, chaired by the Government Chief Whip, co-ordinates and monitors progress on the Government’s legislative programme and compiles the “A” list (Bills expected to be published during the forthcoming Dáil session), and submits it to Government for approval at the beginning of each session. |
|
eLegislation Committee |
The main aim of this informal group, which includes representatives from the Attorney General’s Office, the Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s Office, the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission, the Department of Finance and the Law Reform Commission, is to see whether improvements could be made to the electronic Statute Book in the short to medium term without commitment of any significant resources. |
|
Senior Officials Group on Labour Market Issues** |
To consider measures in the area of employment activation. |
*Meets every few weeks while the Dáil is in session, and regularly during the Dáil recess.
**Group has met regularly since establishment in November 2008.
The following cross-departmental teams or interdepartmental committees meet on a monthly basis.
|
Name |
Purpose |
|
Interdepartmental Co-ordinating Committee on European Affairs [Chaired by Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Dick Roche T.D.] |
The Interdepartmental Co-ordinating Committee on EU Affairs works to ensure that there is a co-ordinated Irish approach to key policy issues at European level. The committee has a particular focus on ensuring the timely transposition of European measures by Ireland. The committee is also briefed on issues arising at key working groups in the EU. The meetings of the committee serve to share information among Government Departments on EU issues. A senior official from every Department and also the Office of the Attorney General sits on the Interdepartmental Co-ordinating Committee on EU Affairs. |
|
Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion |
To support the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion, Children and Integration. |
|
Senior Officials Group on Health |
To support the Cabinet Committee on Health. |
|
Steering Group on Transforming Public Services |
Supports the work of the Cabinet Committee on Transforming Public Services in the implementation and monitoring of progress on the Transforming Public Services agenda. |
|
Working Group on Single Point of Telephone Contact |
Examine the feasibility of putting in place a single “lo-call” number for all public services as recommended in the Government Statement on Transforming Public Services. |
|
Financial Shared Services Working Group |
Examine the feasibility of a shared services model for financial services for the Public Service. |
|
HR Shared Services Working Group |
Examine the feasibility of a shared services model for administrative HR and pensions for the Public Service. |
|
Working Group on Mechanisms to Simplify the Provision of Means Information to Public Bodies |
To undertake a detailed study of the issues involved and report to Government on the feasibility and value of introducing mechanisms to simplify the provision of means information to public bodies. |
|
Interdepartmental Group on Review of the Economic Regulatory Environment (Chaired by Department of the Taoiseach) |
To oversee the review the economic regulatory environment committed to in the programme for Government. |
|
Marine Co-ordinating Group |
To promote increased co-ordination among relevant Departments in relation to marine related matters. |
|
Interdepartmental Committee on Science, Technology and Innovation |
To support the Cabinet Committee on Science, Technology and Innovation |
|
Senior Officials Group on Climate Change and Energy Security |
To support the work of the Cabinet Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security and ensure appropriate synergies with the relevant cross-departmental teams. |
The following cross-departmental teams or interdepartmental committees meet three to four times yearly.
|
Name |
Purpose |
|
Interdepartmental Committee on Development |
The role of the Interdepartmental Committee on Development, IDCD, is to ensure greater coherence on development policy across all Government Departments to benefit Ireland’s development aid programme, in line with the commitments in the 2006 White Paper on Irish Aid. The IDCD is chaired by the Minister of State with responsibility for overseas development. Membership of the committee is at senior level and all government departments are represented. The meetings also receive reports from the two Sub Groups the IDCD established to progress its work. |
|
Training and Development Committee |
This committee has responsibility for driving and overseeing the implementation of the Framework for Civil Service Training and Development. |
|
Interdepartmental Group on Drugs |
To co-ordinate the implementation of the national drugs strategy. |
|
National City and County Development Boards Co-ordination Group |
To oversee the implementation of the Indecon Report recommendations to strengthen and develop the city and county development boards. |
|
High Level Group on Business Regulation (Chaired by Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment) |
To look at ways of reducing unnecessary administrative burdens in five priority areas identified by Irish business as being the most burdensome. |
|
Emergency Response Co-ordination Committee |
Under the National Emergency Plan for Nuclear Accidents, this committee meets. Its purpose is to recommend countermeasures to protect the population in the event of a nuclear accident-event. |
|
The Government Task Force on Emergency Planning |
This task force, under the chairmanship of the Minister for Defence, aims at ensuring that a co-ordinated response to possible emergencies is provided by Departments and by those public authorities with an emergency planning function. |
|
Interdepartmental Working Group on Emergency Planning |
This group encompasses all Departments and those public authorities with key roles in emergency planning. The group works under the guidance of the Government Task Force on Emergency Planning and is a forum for the discussion and sharing of information as well as providing strategic guidance to all those Departments and public authorities involved in emergency planning. |
|
Transport 21 Monitoring Group |
To monitor progress of Transport 21 initiative. |
|
Technical Analysis Steering Group on Climate Change |
To oversee the analysis and modelling of cross- sectoral impacts of climate change. The group reports to the Cabinet Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security. |
|
Smarter Travel Interdepartmental Working Group |
To oversee the implementation of the Smarter Travel Policy. |
|
Climate Change Awareness Campaign Steering Group |
To oversee the public awareness and communications campaign on climate change. |
|
Interdepartmental / Agency Group on Fuel Poverty |
To ensure the effective delivery of a comprehensive approach to addressing energy affordability. |
|
Freedom of Information Interdepartmental Working Group |
Its purpose is to provide a background source of support to secure the successful implementation of freedom of information by providing advice and guidance on policy areas. |
|
Interdepartmental Committee on Reconciliation Fund and Anti-Sectarianism Fund |
To make recommendations to the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the disbursement of funding under the Anti-Sectarianism and Reconciliation Fund. |
|
High Level Interdepartmental Committee on North/South |
This group meets at Assistant Secretary level to exchange information and to co-ordinate Government policy on North/South matters. |
|
North/South Interdepartmental Co-ordinators Group |
This group meets at Assistant Secretary/Principal Officer level to exchange information and to co-ordinate Government policy on North/South matters. |
The following cross-departmental teams or interdepartmental committees meet twice yearly.
|
Name |
Purpose |
|
Senior Officials Group on Disability |
To consider implementation issues around the national disability strategy. |
|
Inter-Departmental Committee of the National Women’s Strategy |
To oversee implementation of the strategy. |
|
National Youth Justice Strategy Oversight Group |
To oversee progress on the implementation of the strategy. |
|
High Level Group on Travellers |
To oversee the implementation of the report of the high level group. |
|
Positive Ageing Strategy Working Group |
To oversee the development of a positive ageing strategy. |
|
High level Group on the Asia Strategy |
The high level group was established to oversee the Government’s Asia Strategy in order to maintain a strategic view of progress regarding implementation of the strategy and to ensure that the strategy reflects, and is responsive to, the dynamics of the priority Asian countries. |
The following cross-departmental teams or interdepartmental committees meet on a yearly basis.
|
Name |
Purpose |
|
Interdepartmental Co-ordinating Committee on the Council of Europe |
An Interdepartmental Committee on the Council of Europe meets annually. The last meeting took place on 27 June 2008 which discussed Ireland’s role in the organisation and its impact on political debate within Ireland, particularly through its standard setting function and its monitoring of member states compliance with these standards. Given the fact that the Council of Europe is the leading institution on human rights in Europe, Ireland affords a high priority to its responsibilities and obligations under Council of Europe conventions, including the European Court of Human Rights and the European Social Charter and these issues are central to the discussion at the Interdepartmental meetings. The next meeting is scheduled to take place in the early summer. |
The following cross-departmental teams or interdepartmental committees meet as required.
|
Name |
Purpose |
|
QCS Research Group |
Carries out and, as required, commission research to bring forward proposals in support of the implementation of recommendations in relation to quality customer service. Develops and oversees research projects in support of the wider QCS agenda. |
|
Assistant Secretary Steering Group on the Review of the EU Budget |
The negotiations on the Financial Framework 2007-2013 agreed in December 2005 were overseen by an Assistant Secretary steering group, chaired by the Department of Finance. In preparation for the review of the EU budget, agreed as part of the deal on the Financial Framework for 2007-13, it was decided to reconvene the Assistant Secretary steering group, as the Assistant Secretary Steering Group on the Review of the EU Budget, in order to guide Ireland’s approach to the review to achieve the best deal possible for us and the EU as a whole. This group will again meet following the publication of the Commissions report on the review later this year. |
|
Senior Officials Group on the Constitutional Amendment on Children |
To explore the full implications of the proposed amendment in terms of policy issues, legislative impact and practical implications including resource implications. |
|
Cross-departmental Working Group on Integration |
To contribute to the formulation of integration policy and to support co-ordination of service delivery across Departments. |
|
Implementation Group of Secretaries General |
Responsible at an administrative level for overseeing the public service modernisation programme. It co-ordinates and develops policy on the modernisation programme, as well as its implementation. |
|
Interdepartmental Committee on Ageing in the Public Sector |
Examine the extent of the ageing problem in the medium and long term within the public service. |
|
Cross-departmental Group on Administrative Burdens(Chaired by Department of Enterprise, Trade & Employment) |
To facilitate reaching the 25% target for the reduction in administrative burdens on business arising from national regulations by 2012. |
|
Interdepartmental Committee on Services Directive(Chaired by Department of Enterprise, Trade & Employment) |
To facilitate the timely implementation of the services directive. |
|
Attorney General’s Consultative Committee on Law Reform Commission |
This is a consultative committee comprising representatives of the Departments of the Taoiseach, Finance, Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Enterprise, Trade and Employment and Health and Children, the Bar Council and the Incorporated Law Society, under the auspices of the Office of the Attorney General. Its purpose it to assist the Attorney General in his consultations with the commission in relation to research programmes, in the selection of specific topics for examination by the commission and monitor the implementation of the recommendations of the commission. |
|
Senior Officials Group on Economic Renewal |
To support the work of the Cabinet Committee on Economic Renewal |
|
Cross Departmental Group on Unique Business Identifier |
To progress work towards a unique business identifier |
|
Tax Strategy Group |
To examine and develop proposals for measures in the areas of taxation, PRSI and levies, for budget and Finance Bill within agreed Government parameters for the overall budget position and in the context of the framework of a medium-term and longer-term strategy set out in the Government’s programme, and to examine the strategic approach for a general social welfare package and to assess the interaction of income tax-PRSI-levies proposals with social welfare proposals including child income support, and in particular the impact of this interaction on the labour market and income distribution. |
|
Steering Group on the Dublin Port Study |
To facilitate and oversee the work of the Dublin Port study and to exercise a quality control function in relation to the reports to be furnished in relation to same. |
|
Dormant Accounts — Interdepartmental Committees in relation to Persons with a Disability, Economic and Social Disadvantage, and Educational Disadvantage |
To consider applications for funding from the Dormant Accounts Fund. |
Does the high level interdepartmental committee on North-South matters, the function of which was to exchange information and co-ordinate Government policy on North-South matters, still exist? Does it meet or function in any shape or form? Is the North-South interdepartmental co-ordinators group still in place? Will the Taoiseach outline the function of these groups? Has the level of North-South co-operation increased and is the Government working proactively to increase the level of co-ordination?
Is the interdepartmental group on drugs still in existence given the continuing increase——
I have no wish to interrupt Deputy Ó Snodaigh, but a ruling of the Chair exists to the effect that when a reply is to be published in the Official Report and not given orally, it is wiser for Members to await the reply and then perhaps pursue the matter again, rather than to do so now through a supplementary question. The recommended procedure is that if the Member wishes to pursue the matter subsequently, he or she may do so by putting a question to the line Minister. The difficulty is that the Deputy is asking questions, which I realise are relevant, but the Taoiseach has already stated that he will circulate the reply for publication in the Official Report.
There is only one more part of the question and the Taoiseach will have the answer before him. He will be able to say whether they exist and whether they are contained in his reply. It is quite simple. Does the interdepartmental group on drugs exist and what is its membership?
In respect of the rule governing this matter, when an answer is printed in the Official Report and not provided orally, I understand the rule is that Members await a reply rather than pursue matters by supplementary questions. Upon receipt of the reply, there will be an opportunity to put various detailed questions based on the considerable number of committees which have been communicated. I believe this is the best way to proceed. I do not have any information other than the tabular information.
3 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if guidelines have been issued to those working in the Government information service or the Government press office in regard to the circumstances and manner in which they contact RTE; if they have issues in regard to a particular programme or item; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14322/09]
4 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the projected cost to date in 2009 of the communications unit in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15538/09]
5 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he plans to retain the communications unit in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15570/09]
6 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if it is intended to retain the communications unit within his Department. [16420/09]
7 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach his plans to alter the role or remit of the communications unit within his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16601/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 7, inclusive, together. The Government press secretary and the staff in the Government press office and the Government information service are subject to all current guidelines applying generally in the Civil Service, as set out the in the Civil Service code of conduct, staff circulars and relevant legislation. No particular guidelines have been prepared with regard to the circumstances and manner in which they contact RTE, or any other media organisation.
The Government press secretary is constantly engaged with all elements of the media, including RTE, communicating news and information in respect of Government policy and the presentation of policies. He has the primary responsibility with regard to the arrangements for interviews with officeholders and any dialogue with media on their reports and features relating to officeholders and official policy. He works very closely with me and I am pleased to account to the House for any action taken by him in the discharge of his official duties.
The staff of the Government information services are engaged in the dissemination of information and communicate with all media organisations on a daily basis regarding the communication of Government policies. The projected cost of the communications unit in 2009 is €294,083, with €153,038 being a direct cost to my Department and €47,005 on average being borne by three other Departments who have staff seconded to the unit.
The projected cost for 2009 represents a reduction of 2.6% on the 2008 cost, of 11.4% on the 2007 cost and of 20% on the 2006 cost. In fact, it is the lowest cost since 2003. This has been achieved through greater efficiency in the operation of the unit and the application of Government policy on reducing staff numbers. I have no current plans to alter the role of the communications unit. The role of the unit is under continual review in terms of its efficiency and cost effectiveness.
Following a recent review of the work of the unit, in conjunction with an audit of Departments' usage of external media monitoring companies, various possibilities were explored with a view to improving efficiency, eliminating duplication and implementing cost savings. To assess whether a viable solution was available that would achieve these objectives, my Department issued a tender for a centralised Government contract for the provision of a press cutting and media monitoring service for all Departments. Following a detailed examination of the tenders, it was decided not to proceed with the award of the contract. In fact, it became clear that the current arrangements were considerably more cost-effective than the alternatives proposed.
Subject to current budgetary constraints, consideration will be given to updating the current somewhat dated equipment in the unit with a view to improving its efficiency and service provision to Departments, thereby reducing the usage of outside media monitoring companies.
What guidelines are in place and what is the manner in which the Government press secretary and the Government press office deal with complaints, especially to RTE? I note from a reply to a written question from Deputy Varadkar on 1 April that two complaints have been made by the Government press secretary to RTE since May 2008. One was in June of last year and the other in March of this year. The latter complaint related to the drawings hung in the National Gallery of Ireland, which I believe was a rather juvenile exercise.
My concern is not related to that issue as such, but we have heard reports concerning the way in which the complaint was made directly to the director general of RTE. Will the Taoiseach indicate if this was the case? If it was the case, does the Taoiseach consider it appropriate that the Government press secretary should deal with RTE on matters of programme or news content? I do not have any objection to the Government press secretary making contact with news editors and I expect he does so on a very regular basis. However, I was surprised to read that the approach was made directly to the director general. Was this the case and what is the Taoiseach's view in this regard?
There are no guidelines and I do not believe there should be any strict rules of engagement. There is always a two-way communication process between Government and media organisations and this also applies to Opposition party press officers. It would be unhelpful to have any form of ban or restrictions on such communications or to suggest that there should be guidelines on Government communications with the media which would not apply in the case of Opposition parties. Such a scenario would be absolutely unworkable.
Last month, I read of reports of the communications personnel of the main Opposition party making direct contact with the director general of RTE regarding complaints. Therefore, it is inaccurate to refer only to disagreement between Government and the media. People cannot have it both ways. There should not be a different set of rules for certain press advisers who complain to RTE but not others. There will always be issues in the relationship between the media and the Government and between the media and Opposition parties. The matter cannot be dealt with through a vague set of written guidelines. I am not in favour of any restrictions and a two-way relationship remains appropriate.
Regarding the specific matter in March raised by the Deputy, the Government press secretary contacted RTE regarding a broadcast last month. It stated it had already decided the particular broadcast was inappropriate before any complaints were made and this is an important point. I understand a number of complaints were received.
Regarding the question of contacting the director-general, it may have been that the news editor was not available at the time but I do not know. However, I was not involved and I did not give any instruction. Perhaps the fact that they know each other was a means by which he could communicate the seriousness of his concern as quickly as possible to a relevant member of RTE who was available.
I can understand what the Taoiseach is saying in terms of formal guidelines but there is a relationship between Government and RTE as the State broadcasting service. The Government appoints its authority and Government is primarily responsible for the introduction of legislation under which it operates. Government is responsible for the issue of the licence fee and the level of it. This is a relationship where care needs to be taken to have a dividing line between that relationship between the role of the Government and that of RTE as a State body which ultimately reports to a Department and a Minister. To maintain that distinction and the kind of day-to-day contact that will inevitably occur between the Government press secretary and programme makers within the station is a distinction that the Government needs to ensure it honours, lest there should be any suggestion that the Government is exercising any undue influence on RTE and on what it might be broadcasting.
Deputy Gilmore would know more about that than I would. I have always regarded the Deputy as an acute observer of current affairs.
I do not have the time to watch television.
No more than myself.
I do not know what goes on at all. I only hear reports. People tell me what was on the "Late Late Show" and I read about it in the papers the next day.
Like myself. At the same time, in fairness to the Deputy, they know where to find him when they are looking for him.
When people talk about the independence of organisations it does not mean that contact is precluded or that if there is a complaint to be made either way that people should be too shy about making their views known. It is important that the relationship is respectful and appropriate. In this instance the fact that it was something to do with me is irrelevant; the organisation recognised it was inappropriate and that a mistake was made or whatever. It got through the system, however it got through. I did not ask for any action to be taken but rather it was a case of people acting on their own initiative and I understand they were not alone in that.
The Taoiseach elaborated in his reply that an exercise was undertaken to look at the cost-effectiveness of the service and that it was decided that a centralised service would be less cost-effective. I ask him to elaborate on what was priced and what were the savings shown up in that exercise.
I wish to ask a general question about whether he takes responsibility for looking at the cost-effectiveness of back office services in Departments. I understand on the last count, 85 people are employed in press and information services across the 15 Departments. This seems excessive, a total of six or seven people involved in press and information services work for every Minister. Does the Taoiseach regard it as his role to examine the cost-effectiveness or has he requested an expenditure review exercise to be done on this type of back office service? It is the case now that every area is being looked at with an eye to making savings and I would be interested to know whether that area has come under scrutiny in any way.
The vast majority of the people to whom the Deputy refers deal with the information side of a Department. They provide information services. As the Deputy will be aware, there is a plethora of people interested in what is happening in the Department of Social and Family Affairs such as people in voluntary organisations and apart from the wider public who need to access information. There is often talk in this House about the need for public service organisations to be efficient in that regard. It must be recognised that the vast majority of this work relates to that side of the work of Departments rather than it being a case of press management of ministerial offices or Government issues specifically.
I do not have the details to hand beyond the reply but it was mentioned before that we should consider whether the service could be centralised and I made inquiries. When a tender was put out asking for one supplier to provide the requirements for all Departments, it showed that it was going to be more expensive than allowing each Department to provide for itself. It should be noted that Departments have specialised requirements which are different from Department to Department. For instance, the requirements of the Department of Finance are different to those of the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. While one would have thought it would be a good idea to centralise the service, when this was examined it was discovered that it would not be less expensive.
I did not hear the Taoiseach's substantive reply to these questions and I apologise if he has already answered and I am repeating. Last November I asked the Taoiseach about the then proposed putting to tender of the work of the communications unit or a part of its work. He indicated that the tendering process was then in train, that he would be subsequently advised of the result of the process and a decision would be taken about proceeding or not. Has this happened and if so, what is the cost? The real question is why are we looking again at external supports when within the system, within the public service, there are people who are clearly able and adept at dealing with the issues, apart from theraison d’être behind the communications unit.
As I stated in my reply, I inquired whether a centralised solution was available that would achieve the objectives of improving efficiency, eliminating duplication and implementing cost savings. A tender was issued for a centralised Government contract for the provision of a press cutting and media monitoring service for all Departments. However, when the tenders were received it turned out to be a more expensive option than letting the Departments provide it for themselves. The accommodation of all the needs of every Department in one tender from a single organisation turned out to be less viable than allowing Departments to work individually and collect the information particular to that Department. This may be surprising but that has been the outcome.
On a point of clarification, do I take it from that information that the tendering process did not proceed, that the Taoiseach has not allowed access to the service to external interests and that it remains an in-house provision?
Whatever the existing arrangements, the proposed new arrangement was not going to be less costly than the existing arrangement. There may be some Departments using outside media press cutting arrangements but I do not have that information available to me, although that may be the case. I am not saying it is all in-house but rather that the suggested alternative which might have been regarded as providing cost savings, on examination does not do so and therefore was not proceeded with on that basis. However, every area of expenditure must be examined for cost-effectiveness.
Is the communications unit subject to the recruitment embargo? Did members of the communications unit see last Friday night's "Late Late Show" and did they report to the Taoiseach on that?
They did not, nor did I request one.
They are not doing their job.
I always give them Friday nights off.
It is just as well. There must be people who know that. It must be well known.
It must be. We do not take offence as easily as the Labour Party. Larger parties can hack this far easier.
The Taoiseach is a real disappointment. I thought the discipline would be very strong.
I could never understand that democratic centralism Deputy Gilmore espouses and which he is very adeptly bringing into the organisation he leads. Fair dues to him. I have been watching very carefully how he has been able to do that. It is a good operation.
Is the Taoiseach looking for lessons?
Not at all. I am watching with interest the little backwash that is coming against him in certain respects as he seeks to pull his party back into the centre.
There is a touch of the new man about the Taoiseach.
It was a good effort on Deputy Gilmore's part and I wish him well.
What about the embargo?
The embargo applies across all areas of the public service subject to the consent of the Minister for Finance.
Will the communications unit die of natural causes?
I would not think so. The Labour Party gives us plenty of food for thought.
8 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the Special Summit of EU Heads of Government with the US President in Prague; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15140/09]
9 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his participation in the EU-US summit in Prague on 5 April 2009. [15142/09]
10 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the foreign visits he plans to undertake during the remainder of 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15546/09]
11 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he has received an agenda for the June 2009 meeting of the European Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15566/09]
12 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the foreign trips he will undertake during the remainder of 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15569/09]
13 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach his plans for official trips abroad for the remainder of 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15590/09]
14 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the Special EU-US Summit in Prague. [16421/09]
15 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach his priorities for the June 2009 European Council meeting. [16422/09]
16 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the international official visits he plans for the remainder of 2009. [16423/09]
17 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he has received an agenda for the June 2009 summit of EU leaders; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16715/09]
18 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach his plans to meet other EU leaders in advance of the June 2009 summit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16716/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 to 18, inclusive, together.
On Sunday 5 April I travelled to Prague to participate in the EU-US Summit. I was accompanied by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin. This meeting, attended by President Obama, took place against the backdrop of the London G20 Summit on 2 April and the NATO Summit on 3 and 4 April. The EU-US relationship is of paramount importance, bilaterally and in the context of tackling global challenges. Among the key issues we discussed in Prague were the global economic crisis, energy and climate change, and regional affairs, including the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On my travel plans for the remainder of 2009, it is my intention to attend the Eastern Partnership Summit on 7 May in Prague. I will also attend the European Council meetings scheduled for 18-19 June, 29-30 October and 10-11 December. I have not yet received an agenda for the European Council on 18-19 June and I currently have no meetings with other EU leaders scheduled ahead of the Council.
I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. Is it the Taoiseach's intention that he will go to the Council on 29-30 October having held a referendum on the Lisbon treaty? He has had discussions with colleagues on the timing of that referendum but no date has been set. I presume the October Council will be the outer limit for having a decision here, or am I mistaken in that? Does the Taoiseach share my belief that it would be helpful to indicate a date early so the campaign in support of the Lisbon treaty could begin rather than having it deferred and distracted by other political issues that perhaps were a factor in the previous campaign.
Was there a discussion at those Councils on different models for addressing the banking crisis? The German approach deserves more attention by our Government. It requires the separation of the good element of banks from within the existing banks as opposed to what is being proposed by Government. Did he have the opportunity to examine different models and draw on the experience of other leaders as to their merits and suitability? The Taoiseach will know there is a growing opinion among the economic community that the solutions being pursued by most governments are expensive for taxpayers and uncertain in their outcomes for banks. An alternative approach that focuses attention on the creation of a good bank that could borrow is being championed by many. Taxpayers' effort focuses on the good bank, not the legacy, which is left to fend for itself over time. That is the right way. It will need co-ordination across countries so that it is not just one country pursuing it. It has great attractions and I would be interested to hear whether the Taoiseach was able to explore that.
I cannot anticipate the date of the referendum. It will depend on how everything ends up at the June Council meeting. I take the general point that it would be important thereafter to try to come to a conclusion on the best time to hold the referendum and have everybody behind a "Yes" campaign who was behind it the last time. People are examining that as we speak. There is no great difference of opinion between us. I cannot say whether there will be a referendum before the October Council meeting. The Government will have to decide on that and in the context of our discussions we will have to ensure, as a precondition for our holding a referendum, that we get what we sought. Let that process proceed and things will become clearer after the June Council meeting, we hope.
There are EU guidelines on impaired assets. On that matter and the recapitalisation question, Chancellor Merkel emphasised at the outset that this is a tool kit and it is a matter for member states to choose. There is no uniform way by which member governments will come up with a solution to this problem across the union. There are different requirements, circumstances and types of problems. The broad EU guidelines that have been set out ensure it is done within a framework that is understood by everybody and involves the Commission, and ensures whatever action is taken is done in as co-ordinated a fashion as possible.
We work on the basis of advice from people with market ability and experience in the NTMA and others. We have put forward our proposals on the basis of seeking to protect taxpayers' interests in a way that will, hopefully, try to overcome this problem. The challenge is to underpin domestic and international confidence in our banking system and at the same time have people face up to the writing down requirements that exist to deal with the legacy issues, as Deputy Bruton describes them, separately from the core franchise in which banks should operate.
Is it still the Government's intention to have agreement concluded at the June summit on the texts required to enable the Government to bring forward a second referendum on the Lisbon treaty? What progress has been made on the development of those texts and at what point will the main Opposition parties be advised as to that progress? Did I detect from the Taoiseach's reply to Deputy Bruton that there is some doubt that the agreement on those matters might be concluded at the June summit?
No, I was being appropriate in not presuming on agreement until agreement and approval is provided. The Council meeting is the format in which a formal decision will be taken in that respect. In the meantime much preparatory work is being undertaken. We are working with the Presidency, which has had its own difficulties in terms of the Czech Republic's domestic politics. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has been in discussion with Mr. Alexandr Vondra from that Government on many occasions and continues to do so. Work at a technical level continues with the legal services people and the Commission. I spoke to President Barroso on the last occasion I attended a Council meeting and I intend in the coming weeks to discuss the matter with Opposition leaders.
Will the EU Council meeting in June address the so-called guarantees which the Taoiseach and his Government indicated have been won in principle? Will those guarantees be addressed at the EU Council meeting? Can the Taoiseach advise what stage these guarantees have reached? Are they in draft form? Have they moved forward from principles to actual texts? Is he prepared to publish those texts? If not, will he indicate the stage he is now at in the preparation of texts and when he hopes to have a conclusion with regard to same with his EU Council member participants? Concerning that, what mechanism is intended to make these guarantees legally binding? That is the critical interest of many people, including this Deputy.
Will the summit consider the report on active dialogue with citizens on Europe which was recently adopted by the EU Parliament? Has the Taoiseach had an opportunity to read the report? If so, did he note and does he agree with what I can only regard as its insulting conclusion that "the less educated and the less affluent a Union citizen is the more likely he or she will be to oppose further European integration".
We see here a report that equates lack of affluence with ignorance. That is an outrageous view and it was adopted by the EU Parliament. What it actually shows is the arrogance of the EU elite. As the report goes on to state, there certainly is a failure in communication but the failure is not on the part of the EU in communicating its position. That is understood. The failure is on the part of the EU to listen to its citizens. That is exemplified in the Government's position and that of its counterparts within the European elite in respect of the referenda results regarding the EU Constitution-Lisbon treatiesvis-à-vis Ireland, France and the Netherlands.
If the Taoiseach has not had the chance to read the report, will he do so? Would he agree it is an outrageous assertion to imply that a lack of affluence means ignorance and that this is insulting to citizens of the member states and to the Irish in particular? What steps will he take to have that report challenged? Will it be addressed at the EU Council meeting in June? Will the Taoiseach accept that in the changing economic circumstances, and with the advent of a new EU election——
This is a very long question.
——on 5 June, we now have an opportunity to enter into negotiations for a new treaty and to allow the Lisbon treaty to be buried with some dignity?
Obviously, I do not agree with the analysis of the Deputy in many respects, regardless of the specific report which I have not seen and on which I cannot comment. A more benign interpretation of the situation might be to say that unless we have a socially inclusive Europe, the relevance of Europe to ordinary citizens is not as obvious as it is to those who see the benefits of the economic and social construct of the European Union at present. I would be very surprised if the report were to be, given the Deputy's interpretation, but I have not seen it and am not in a position to comment on it with any degree of accuracy.
However, that would be my understanding of the point that people are trying to make. Europe must be meaningful for everybody and this must be on the basis of the social market economy which we are trying to develop. The integration of the European Union and its economy has brought us very many benefits. It has enabled us to earn a standard of living for our people far in excess of anything we might have hoped for if we had been dealing simply with a free trade area or an area that did not have common rules or was not so protective of the integrity of the Single Market that enables smaller countries, or smaller economic actors, among the big developed economies. We have been able to compete on the basis of a rules-based system that is at the centre of what the European Union has been about, namely, consolidarity and developing the Union and the nation states within it to the greatest extent possible on the basis of common policies. That would be my analysis of the situation, rather than the Deputy's. We must agree to disagree on that.
The other 26 member states asked us to deal with the concerns we have identified in respect of our rejection of the Lisbon treaty. An all-party sub-committee met and was very ably chaired and attended by Members of the House. The House did itself a great favour with the quality of the work that was done and the report that emerged. I commend everybody who was part of that process which enhanced the parliamentary process in Ireland. The majority of that committee came to the analysis, backed by empirical survey evidence, that the Irish remain very pro-European in sentiment and are supportive of the Union but obviously have concerns they want addressed. On the basis of very broad consultative process, listening to the varying views of people and various sides of the argument, the all-party sub-committee helpfully came forward with a very coherent analysis of the areas we must address to try to assuage people's concerns.
At the Council meeting in December we saw a lot of goodwill and solidarity towards Ireland and acceptance and respect for the fact that we have had these concerns. Our partners wish to help us address them adequately so that our people can look to this issue again. The contention that the rejection of the treaty means that the people are opposed to the European Union or opposed in principle to the integration of the European economy does not hold water when one analyses the sentiments people expressed. We must address certain questions and reassure people on certain issues. One of the great problems is that exaggerated arguments are made to the contrary in respect of issues that are not in the treaty at all. That does not contribute to an informed democratic debate. There have been many instances of this.
A far more moderate and accurate assessment of the situation is that, out of respect for the vote of the people, we seek to address the issues identified as those which have caused most concern and on which people need reassurance. In respect of the guarantees we received, it has been made clear by our colleagues that they do not wish to reopen the re-ratification of the treaty in their own national parliaments or in their own countries. However, they are prepared to give legal effect to those issues for which we sought legal guarantees in respect of subsequent accession treaties that would be ratified, and to incorporate them in that way. That is a mutually satisfactory conclusion at which to arrive given the necessity for us to try to address the issues involved and at the same time to respect the decision of others to ratify the treaty under their own constitutional arrangements.
Contrary to what Deputy Ó Caoláin asserted, in the lead up to the Lisbon treaty the EU was more involved in listening than it had ever been. The Minister of State, Deputy Carey, and Deputies from all parties were involved in exhaustive work, preparing the ground for the treaty. It is not that the elite is not listening. However, given the very good work of the sub-committee on Ireland's future in the European Union, does the Taoiseach envisage any further work for that group now that the Forum on Europe no longer exists? Does he believe it has a continuing role?
Finally, in respect of the frameworks for financial dealings with the banks, the EU has not included in its list the type of framework suggested by the famous economist, Joseph Stiglitz, and several other people including George Soros, namely, this "good bank" creation. Would the Taoiseach seek to have that as part of the framework, so that at least this option would be on the table and examined as part of the menu? The Government has not looked at it to date and I believe it offers really good prospects for governments right across the EU. Could he, perhaps, pursue it as a matter that should be put on the list?
The Taoiseach did not respond to my specific questions on whether the guarantees have been committed to paper in text form, what point this process has reached and what measures he envisages bringing forward in terms of their legally binding status. While Deputy Bruton referred to my point about not listening, he spoke only about the lead-up to the Lisbon treaty. My point is that the Government has failed to listen to the result of the referendum, and since.
While I do not wish to be argumentative, I do not accept that we have not been listening. We have been involved in an all-party initiative on trying to come up with constructive proposals that move us forward while at the same time upholding our national interests. Ultimately, the people will be the arbiter of these decisions. That is part of the democratic life of the country. I do not accept the idea that we must not discuss this matter any further or decide that there are ways forward other than — as Deputy Ó Caoláin would contend — a total rejection of the treaty, seeking to impose a position that the other 26 member states must accept. They want to help us find a solution to this problem other than the one Deputy Ó Caoláin suggests. In my opinion, his suggestion would have very severe consequences for our national interests. That is my strongly held view and the idea that we can come to decisions on various issues while believing there are no political consequences is very naive.
No, it is not.
It is very naive in my view.
It is a neutral position.
That is my view and the Deputy has a different view. That is fair enough and we will accept that.
I will accept that, but I did not brand the Taoiseach's opinion and I do not like mine being branded either.
The time is practically up anyway.
I did not brand his opinion, so he should not brand mine. It is genuinely held and a wholly sustainable position.
The Deputy should let the Taoiseach finish.
It is absolutely sustainable in its own terms, but it has no political consequences that would add to our position. That is the problem. It just brings everything to an end and leaves us there.
No, it does not.
It absolutely does and it suggests——
It is a new beginning.
It is a new beginning without us at the centre. That is the problem.
No, not at all.
More relevantly, on the Deputy's question, obviously the deliberative process is ongoing. When the texts are agreed and become available, we can discuss them and argue them out. However, while discussions are taking place, there is a deliberative process in train which has to be gone through. We are engaged with the Presidency and legal services on these issues.
On Deputy Bruton's point, we should examine how the Oireachtas might use this democratic forum as a means of helping to put forward views and listening to various ideas. We should consider it in the context of how we might add to people's understanding of the broad issues and the context of the decisions we will have to take. I have no problem with that.
Regarding the "impaired assets" to which he referred, obviously ECOFIN and the eurogroup will look at any ideas that are put forward to see whether they can be agreed and incorporated into the wider framework. That is a matter, in the first instance, for the eurogroup, which will come before the European Council in due course.
