Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 21 Jun 2017

Vol. 955 No. 1

Pre-European Council: Statements

Amárach rachaidh mé chuig an mBruiséil le haghaidh cruinnithe de chuid Chomhairle an Aontais Eorpaigh. Tá mé ag súil le ceisteanna móra an lae a phlé le ceannairí eile na hEorpa. Ó thoghadh mé mar Thaoiseach, tá mé tar éis labhairt leis an Chancellor Merkel agus leis an Uachtarán Macron agus thaistil mé go Londain Dé Luain le bualadh leis an bPríomh-Aire May. Chomh maith leis an gComhairle, beidh cruinnithe eile agam, agus mé sa Bhruiséil, leis an Uachtarán Tusk, an Uachtarán Juncker agus an Chancellor Merkel agus leis an bPríomh-Aire Ratas ón Eastóin agus a huachtaránacht ar an Aontas Eorpach ag tosú go luath. Ag gach cruinniú, beidh teachtaireacht soiléir agam go bhfuil agus go bhfanfaidh Éire i gcroílár na hEorpa agus go mbeimid rannpháirteach sna diospóireachtaí faoi cheisteanna móra ár linne. Tá mé ag súil leis an Teach a chur ar an eolas nuair a fhillim.

The meeting tomorrow will begin with the usual exchange of views with the President of the European Parliament.

The first working session will deal with security and defence, both internal and external. This is clearly a key concern for member states and our citizens, in particular those in countries that have been the targets and victims of recent terrorist attacks. I will offer Ireland's continuing solidarity and our strong commitment to working closely with our partners in combating this growing threat. The meeting will send out a strong message that Europe stands united and firm against terrorism, hatred and violent extremism. Among the issues we will discuss in particular is the need to fight the spread of radicalism online and to thwart its financing. This will undoubtedly take concerted action. Industry too will need to play a part in detecting and removing content that incites violence. On the external dimension, the High Representative, Federica Mogherini, will report to the meeting on the implementation of the EU global strategy one year after its adoption. The strategy aims to bring all the tools available to the Union together to maximise their impact so as to protect our citizens and contribute to peace and security in our neighbourhood and beyond. We have strongly supported the EU global strategy while emphasising the need for the comprehensive implementation of all five of its priorities. This is very important if all member states are to contribute and play an active part. I particularly welcome that consideration is now being given to the issues of resilience and the EU integrated approach to external conflicts and crises.

On Thursday evening, the European Council will discuss a range of external issues, including recent international summits and Russia-Ukraine. Given the decision by President Trump to resile from the Paris climate change agreement, the European Council will reaffirm our strong commitment to the swift and full implementation of the agreement and to playing a leading role globally. As I have previously said to the House, I am determined that the Government should show a new ambition when it comes to tackling climate change, and this will be the subject of a full-day strategic meeting of the Cabinet.

Prime Minister May will then update us about developments on Brexit from a UK perspective. She will then leave the meeting and the 27 remaining EU leaders will discuss other aspects of Brexit in Article 50 format. At the last meeting in this format, on 29 April, the EU guidelines for the negotiations with the UK were agreed. As the House will be aware, the outcome was very positive from Ireland's perspective. The guidelines fully reflect our specific concerns, including the need to protect the Good Friday Agreement and the gains of the peace process, avoid an economic border and maintain the common travel area and what it means for Irish and British citizens' reciprocal civil rights: the rights to leave, work and access welfare, pensions, health care and housing in one another's countries as though we were citizens of both. At the April meeting, agreement was also reached on a declaration providing reassurance about EU membership for Northern Ireland in the event of a united Ireland within the circumstances provided for in the Good Friday Agreement. This is contained in the minutes of the meeting which will be formally adopted by the European Council in its Article 50 format tomorrow. Much has changed since the end of April. The UK has had a general election and returned a minority Conservative Government. From the perspective of the EU, we remain united at 27. We are organised and we have been ready to begin the talks with the UK for some time. I am pleased that the first round of negotiations between Michel Barnier and David Davis took place on Monday. These focused on the issues to be resolved in phase one: citizens' rights, the UK's financial liabilities and Ireland-specific and border issues. At our meeting on Thursday, Mr. Barnier will update us on the substance of these talks and the agreed way forward for the next few months. The meeting is expected to approve procedures for the relocation of two EU agencies currently located in the United Kingdom, namely, the European Medicines Agency and the European Banking Authority. Ireland is bidding for both agencies, and we offer a great location in terms of business continuity, connectivity, facilities and other factors. We will continue to advance our case vigorously between now and the time of voting, which is expected to be in October.

On Friday, the European Council will consider a range of economic issues under the heading of "jobs, growth and competitiveness". These include: Single Market strategies, trade policy, the European Fund for Strategic Investments and the European semester. I support a high level of ambition for the Single Market. There are still too many barriers to cross-border trade in services, while digitisation is making boundaries between goods and services less relevant. Europe's capital markets can also make a stronger contribution to financing investments in the real economy at a time when this investment is urgently needed. The Single Market and digital Single Market strategies can both help unlock the productivity and growth potential of cross-border trade. I want to see delivery - concrete timelines delivering early and practical results for consumers and SMEs. I will work closely with like-minded member states to drive progress in a direction that is open, competitive and innovation-friendly. I joined several other EU leaders this week in writing to President Tusk to call for greater ambition on this. On trade, I will make the case for a free and open approach within the EU and internationally. The draft Council conclusions set out a welcome commitment to this position. On the European semester, the European Council is expected to endorse this year's country-specific recommendations to member states. These have been largely agreed, although one member state has a point of contention. We are broadly happy with the tone and substance of the three recommendations proposed for Ireland, which cover fiscal policy, expenditure priorities and non-performing loans.

The discussion on migration will include updates on the migration partnership framework, the EU-Turkey statement, developments along the central Mediterranean route and implementation of the Malta declaration. The slow progress on reform of the common European asylum system will also be noted. Ireland remains at one remove from the full force of the migration crisis but we have nevertheless played a constructive role in the EU response. We have consistently highlighted the need for a comprehensive response that tackles both the effects and the route causes of migration. Ireland has provided €76.5 million in humanitarian assistance to Syria and the region since 2012, while our contribution to the EU-Turkey refugee facility will be almost €23 million. In 2015, the Government decided to accept up to 4,000 asylum seekers and refugees by voluntarily opting into the EU relocation decisions and through participating in the UNHCR-led refugee resettlement programme. To date, 785 people have arrived on resettlement and 459 on relocation, and this is ongoing.

The last item on the European Council agenda is digital Europe. This was added in the context of the incoming Estonian Presidency of the Council of the European Union, which will focus on digital issues during its term, including at a digital summit in Tallinn scheduled for 29 September. Ireland is a strong supporter of prioritising digital issues, and I commend the Estonian Presidency for its interest, focus and ambition in this regard.

As I said in my statement to the House last Wednesday, politics is far from perfect. At its best, it is a way of solving problems and helping to build a better future. The European Council provides the framework for solving our problems at EU level - often problems that cannot be solved by single nation states acting alone - and I look forward to participating actively, always keeping in mind the best interests of this country and Europe as a whole. I look forward to reporting back to the House next week on the outcome of the European Council.

Ar dtús báire, guím gach rath ar an Taoiseach ag an gcéad chruinniú a bheidh aige le ceannairí na hEorpa amárach. Mar aon leis sin, deirim leis go bhfuil sé fíor-thábhachtach go mbeidh an méid eolais a thagann amach as na cruinnithe seo i bhfad níos cruinne ná mar a bhí go dtí seo. Uaireanta, faigheann muid eolas ginearálta agus bíonn easpa cruinnis i gcroílár na bhfreagraí a fhaigheann muid ón Rialtas.

Before dealing with the summit agenda in more detail, I would like to make a few comments about how statements on EU meetings have been handled in recent years. It has been Fianna Fáil's policy during these sessions to engage constructively with the agenda of the upcoming summit.  In contrast, it has been Government policy to maximise the generalities and minimise the detail and, as we know from yesterday, the new Taoiseach believes that preventing questions being asked in the Dáil can be a priority for him.

We have been obliged to seek information in Brussels and elsewhere in order to make a substantive contribution, and this seems likely to continue.  I know that many others share our frustration at the superficial and dismissive approach by Government to real discussions of European policy. As this is the Taoiseach's first statement on Europe, he should be aware that patience has been exhausted on this matter. The reality is that the Government has seen European issues as simply another forum for domestic politics.  The defining approach to negotiations has been to say as little as possible in public so that whatever emerges can be presented as a great national victory.  In some cases, we have even discovered that Ireland had not actually tabled any proposals but the victory was claimed anyway.

Over the past six years, each year Fianna Fáil has outlined a detailed and radical approach to the development and reform of the Union.

From a point two years before the referendum, we have been addressing the specific issue of Brexit, yet in response the level of engagement with and information from the Government for the pro-EU Opposition has been lower than at any point in decades. It is long past time for a comprehensive statement to be published on Ireland's future European policy.  The debate is well under way elsewhere and some reports suggest the negotiations may even have started on the shape of the European Union in five and ten years' time.  Ireland must join this debate and must develop a strategy to influence it. There has been a poor beginning to the revised Government’s commitment to deal with the Opposition in good faith.  In the normal course of events this would be serious, but when it comes to issues such as the European Union and Northern Ireland, it could cause real damage and undermine the non-partisan legitimacy from which the Government's policy has always drawn strength. This is the Taoiseach's choice, but if the partisan positioning and press briefing obsessed strategy continues on the European Union, it will do him no good and will cause real damage to the country.

Donald Tusk has been a good President of the Council and we supported his reappointment.  He has shown a keen interest in Ireland from his first days as Polish Prime Minister and has maintained it.  In the next two years he will lead the Council through extremely important discussions on the future of the European Union. The ten-minute bilateral meeting the Taoiseach is scheduled to hold with him on Thursday clearly will not allow for a detailed discussion; it will be more like a formal introduction.  We would strongly support an invitation to him to address the Oireachtas.

Brexit is not a significant item on the summit's agenda for the obvious reason that the negotiations only started this week. As we have said repeatedly, we believe the Government’s failure or refusal to propose specific arrangements for mitigating the impact of Brexit has been an error.  Winning acceptance that Ireland is a special case is not even 10% of the battle.  Securing support for a light-touch border crossing will help only marginally.  Special status in some form for the North and the Border counties must be sought. Special status would threaten no one, but it could protect many from the worst impact of the narrow-minded decision foisted on Northern Ireland by an English majority. Equally, there is no realistic way of helping the worst affected industries within existing EU state aid regulations.  If we are to secure concessions in time, we need to be pushing now and not after the worst of the damage has been caused. We will request a full Brexit debate in the House in the coming weeks during which we will expect the Taoiseach to go beyond the vague generalities we have heard so far.

The House should know that yesterday was World Refugee Day. The summit is due to discuss the ongoing migration crisis.  On behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party, I again extend our thanks to the men and women of the Defence Forces who are working tirelessly to save thousands in the Mediterranean Sea.  In particular, I note the extraordinary professionalism and humanitarian commitment shown in recent days by the crew of the LÉ Eithne when they rescued almost 800 people and delivered a baby girl on board.  What is striking about this story is that it is a replica of what happened this week two years ago.  In July 2015 the crew of the LÉ Niamh delivered a child while rescuing people who were desperate to get to Europe.  The progress since has been limited at best. The reason there is still a migration crisis is the factors which cause people to flee their homelands remain. We support the efforts of the Council to achieve greater solidarity among member states in helping migrants seeking asylum.  However, we also believe that not even a fraction of the required funding is being provided to help people in their home countries or close to them. The overwhelming majority of migrants do not want to leave their homes and would be willing to wait nearby until they can return.  They are undertaking such desperately dangerous journeys because they have lost hope they can provide for themselves and their families. What we need from the Council is not just greater solidarity in helping those who reach Europe but also a step change in providing direct aid for people and communities in north Africa and the Middle East.

The decision of the Russian Government to support the Assad regime is the only reason the conflict in Syria escalated, fractured and displaced millions, yet both Russia and Syria are making exactly zero contribution to the provision of genuine humanitarian aid. As well as calling on the Russian and Syrian Governments to stop targeting civilians, the Council should also commence a process for increasing humanitarian aid in order that by the autumn we will not enter the spiral of heightened misery which has always followed the turn towards winter. The scheduled discussion on security and defence has not been preceded by details of what is involved.  Our assumption is that it is simply a review of agreed actions and will involve no new policy.

As part of this discussion we believe leaders should begin a more detailed approach to dealing with the exponentially-rising threat of cyberwarfare. European states such as Estonia and Sweden have been the subject of aggressive cyber-attacks.  In other cases, the use of cyberwarfare methods to interfere in democratic elections has been proved, including both service disruption attacks and the spreading of disinformation.  All of this activity has had one source.  The last two national risk assessments carried out by all parts of the public and security services have identified cyberdisruption as potentially the most damaging risk to Ireland, but little has been little done to respond to it. I have no doubt that a co-ordinated European response is the only way by which we can develop credible defences against this activity. I hope the Taoiseach will raise this matter and remind other leaders that it is a security threat on which every country, including the European Union's neutral members, can work together.

The summit will also formally sign off on the latest European semester. It may well be the worst named of the many badly named European procedures. It is simply the end of the latest cycle of economic and budgetary reviews.  The tone of the draft conclusions implies that the process has been successful.  In truth, the reviews have been helpful in only a limited number of cases.  More generally, they are either banal or ignore profound issues. They are primarily about controlling budgets but are largely superficial when it comes to measures other than structural reforms.  More importantly, they consistently ignore the need for new approaches to dealing with issues such as imbalances between countries. In addition, they do not grapple with the need for significant debt relief for Greece or provide a credible growth agenda for many other countries. One issue that has become obvious in recent months is that the current model for discussions within the Eurogroup is unsustainable. The ad hoc negotiations, devoid of an agreed procedure, dominated by side discussions and led by a Minister for Finance with no fixed term, are not a credible way to address the issues of the eurozone. As a start, a more permanent arrangement for a Eurogroup chairperson should be agreed, now that the incumbent will soon depart.

It may be that a non-agenda point concerning respect for fundamental rights within the European Union will be raised.  This relates, in particular, to a severe anti-NGO law recently passed in Hungary and some equally concerning laws in other countries. Every country that joins the European Union gives a commitment to respect basic rights.  At this grave moment, when extremists threaten the basic tenets of liberal democracy, we cannot sit quietly and say nothing.

There is no doubt that the Taoiseach will travel to the summit with the lines prepared about how successful his trip will be.  What matters is whether he is willing to do the much harder work of making concrete proposals about the future of the European Union, protecting Ireland against the impact of Brexit and ending the policy where Ireland has been little more than a bystander when fundamental issues have been discussed.

Beidh mé ag roinnt mo chuid ama leis an Teachta Crowe. My colleague will focus on key issues on the agenda for the Council meeting, while I will focus on Brexit.

Last Monday David Davis and Michel Barnier met for the first time to formally launch the Brexit talks. Britain has now agreed to negotiate the divorce deal first and then to move on to its future relationship with the European Union. This represents an embarrassing U-turn for Theresa May. The three priorities set by the European Union and agreed for the initial phase of talks are the rights of EU citizens living in Britain and vice versa, the financial settlement and the Irish question - the border on this island.

Given the disastrous impact Brexit will have on the island of Ireland, it is more important than ever, now that the formal Brexit negotiating process has started, that we secure designated special status for the North within the European Union and that the Government join in the efforts to secure it. A motion was passed by the House to that effect, although it was not supported by the Government.

Last Monday the Taoiseach was also in 10 Downing Street to meet the British Prime Minister.

Having talked tough on the issue of Brexit during the course of his leadership campaign, I was expecting him to argue the case for the North of Ireland to remain in the Single Market and the customs union. I was not expecting him to allude to the "Love Actually" movie but, that aside, I was extremely disappointed with his public call for any land border in Ireland to be invisible. I believe that entirely misses the point. Any border in Ireland, invisible or not, will be disastrous for our economy. Any border will have the most serious consequences for agriculture and small business. I believe the Taoiseach should have held firm on his earlier commitments and argued strongly against any border in Ireland. Make no mistake, he will have to argue that case very strongly with the Tory Government.

I have no doubt Prime Minister May was delighted to see the Taoiseach, as Head of Government, make a U-turn, as she may have interpreted it, on this issue. I believe that, on Monday, the Taoiseach failed the first test on his first outing and, in so doing, potentially undermined efforts to protect Ireland, North and South, from the effects of Brexit. It is vital that he does not repeat his "invisible border" comments at this week's European Council meeting. I do not think any dodgy films have been made in the Council offices in the Europa building so, hopefully, there will not be any cinematic commentary on this occasion. The Taoiseach must forcefully fight for Ireland's interests. He must inform his European counterparts that should the North be forcibly removed from the EU against the democratically expressed wishes of the people, this will have a devastating impact on nearly every aspect of life, North and South. Sinn Féin has put forward a range of measures which we believe the Government should pursue in order to mitigate the impact of Brexit, and these types of mitigations must be put on the table.

I wish the Taoiseach well. This will be his first European Council meeting and we will be watching closely. As we know, there is an appreciation at EU level of the unique challenges that Brexit poses for us here in Ireland. The job is to harness that and to represent all of the people of Ireland. The Taoiseach's remit and responsibilities stretch to the entire island of Ireland. His responsibilities do not stop at the Border - they do not stop at Newry. I ask the Taoiseach to ditch the "invisible border" line and focus on ensuring that special status for the North inside the EU is secured so that no border will be placed on this island, because no border is acceptable.

Brexit is clearly a priority issue for Ireland but there are other important things to be discussed at the European Council meeting. Two of the key issues at the Council meeting will be spending on defence, which we believe will lead to the creation of a standing EU army, and migration. I believe the EU's priorities are all wrong. The EU says it has no spare money for positive social and economic programmes such as youth unemployment projects and community regeneration or improving public services like health care, but it has announced that it will spend €1.5 billion a year on regressive military projects. People are aware of the need to improve domestic security considering the recent attacks in Brussels, Paris, London and Manchester, but the creation of this external force is an extra financial burden which is not wanted by anyone. Indeed, the Taoiseach is signing off on this €1.5 billion while a large proportion of our own Defence Forces members are reliant on lousy wages and social welfare top-ups, and in many cases are living in substandard accommodation.

The European Commission's reflection paper on the future of European defence, launched on Wednesday, 7 June, clearly outlines its plans to establish a standing EU army. I want to see Irish taxpayers' money being spent on health care services and ending the trolley crisis, making education more accessible, creating good quality jobs in urban and rural areas and on housing, not on developing and investing in a standing EU army which is able to intervene militarily and conduct war. Any EU policy which aims to increase EU militarisation is a potential threat to Irish neutrality. What is the Taoiseach going to do to oppose these plans and protect Irish neutrality? What is the Irish position on the spending of €1.5 billion on military projects?

Yesterday was World Refugee Day. On Monday the International Organization for Migration confirmed that more than 120 people, mainly Sudanese, had died in a shipwreck off the Libyan coast last weekend. It also confirmed that 77,000 people have crossed the Mediterranean to Europe this year, with at least 1,828 people having died. The preventable deaths of men, women and children in the Mediterranean are unacceptable and a stain on the EU and its member states. We must do more to stop these people dying in the Mediterranean.

According to reports on the leaked draft conclusions of the meeting which the Taoiseach will attend, EU leaders are expected to pile on pressure to get countries in Africa to start accepting citizens who have been ordered to leave the EU. Many of them may face torture and violations of human rights, as we are hearing from the various agencies working with these people. It is also reported that the conclusions will include the training of the Libyan naval coast guard as a measure to prevent people from leaving the coast towards Italy. The Libyan coast guard has already returned an estimated 23,000 people since 2016. However, those stopped are then taken to any number of detention centres, where they are likely to face abuse and exploitation. I have seen the NGO reports, read personal stories and seen photo evidence of the appalling conditions in these so-called migrant centres. The centres do not meet any humane standard at all; in fact, we have laws that would not allow anyone to keep an animal in such conditions. Hundreds of people are cramped into overcrowded and unhygienic cells, with no contact with the outside world, by what are essentially armed militias. What is happening is wrong but we will be facilitating it. How can the Taoiseach and his colleagues stand over a system where vulnerable refugees are rescued from drowning and then returned to Libya and left in appalling conditions?

I am also calling on the Taoiseach to oppose the so-called migration compacts with five African states - Nigeria, Niger, Senegal, Ethiopia, and Mali - which tie EU aid and trade to stemming flows of refugees. These are shoddy deals; they are wrong and counterproductive. Finally, I am calling on the Taoiseach to raise with his Hungarian, Czech, Polish and Slovakian counterparts their unhelpful and unacceptable boycotting of agreed EU resettlement and relocation quotas. I heard the Taoiseach earlier quoting John F. Kennedy. I agree it is time for countries like Ireland to stand up and make our voice heard, not only in Europe but across the world.

This will be an important occasion for the Taoiseach as it will be his first European Council meeting as Taoiseach at a critical time for our country and, indeed, at a critical time in the EU's history. On a point made by Deputy Martin in earlier discussions, it is unfortunate that, as the critical part of the Brexit negotiations begins, the team that represents our country and the institutional knowledge they had about Europe has been completely changed. The removal of the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Dara Murphy, the appointment of a new Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to replace the Minister, Deputy Charlie Flanagan, along with Deputy Varadkar's own election to replace the very experienced former Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny, means there will be a completely new group of people without the institutional memory of their predecessors. That will require a great deal of learning on the job and of bringing themselves up to speed.

Of course, Europe itself is undergoing change. A new French President has been elected and we are soon facing into new elections in Germany, and perhaps also in other European countries such as Italy.

The opinion polls indicate that Chancellor Merkel is likely to be re-elected; she will, therefore, continue to be the dominant force in European policy making. At the same time, Russia continues to be a destabilising influence on Europe's eastern borders. I understand the Taoiseach will engage in bilateral meetings with the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, in advance of the meeting. When he was elected, President Tusk wrote to him, highlighting the challenges the island faces because of Brexit. While the Taoiseach's predecessor was criticised for many things, he really did ensure the European Union and all of its member states were very well briefed on the impact of Brexit on this island. When the Taoiseach meets President Tusk, I hope he will raise with him the future approach of the European Union to the Paris agreement and the decision of US President Donald Trump to withdraw his country from the agreement. There is an urgent need, therefore, for the European Union to step up and show global leadership on the issue of climate change. This will be particularly important in the absence of the United States from the agreement. I hope Ireland will be an exemplar in driving that agenda.

The dominant interest for us, of course, at the Council will be Brexit. In advance of the Article 50 meetings on Thursday, the Council will exchange views with the President of the European Parliament and I hope the Taoiseach will use the opportunity to build a relationship with Antonio Tajani who will have a crucial role to play in the approval of any final deal. It is critical that a deep understanding of Ireland's concerns and unique position be communicated to all Members of the European Parliament who, in effect, will have a veto, unlike the Members of national parliaments, on the final decision to be made.

Formal Brexit negotiations have begun. It is welcome that when the Taoiseach met her on Monday the British Prime Minister committed again to the goal of what she describes - I suppose there are myriad phrases for it - as a frictionless border. However, as we know, Britain's intention, restated again on Monday, to withdraw from the Single Market and the customs union makes that statement impossible to achieve. I am gravely concerned by the approach taken by Britain thus far. It does not bode well that at the first formal meeting with Mr. Barnier the Secretary of State for Brexit, Mr. David Davis, came with no prepared negotiating papers, we are informed, and instead was simply armed with the White Paper and the Prime Minister's Lancaster House speech. We have little time as it is and the British Government squandered some time in holding an unnecessary general election, out of which it has come without a mandate or a majority for a clear expression among the elected members of the new Parliament in Britain of what they want from Brexit. It is very difficult to negotiate when people do not actually have a clear agenda. I am in very close contact with my Labour Party colleagues in Britain and Keir Starmer is migrating to a very acceptable position for us, which may well mean Britain staying in the customs union. These are things we need to deepen and address because the British position is quite flexible, or certainly in a state of flux. We have no detail on what the British Government wants, apart from an unrealistic desire for all the benefits of European membership that it keeps stating it wants but without any of the costs. At some point in the coming months it will have to make a choice and we should see if we can influence that choice through bilateral discussions with all of the political parties in the United Kingdom.

I hope the intense negotiations with Mr. Barnier, when they begin on 10 July, will see a detailed position being set out by the United Kingdom. In saying that, it is welcome that the British have agreed to the Euorpean Union's proposals for a phasing of the discussions. However, the strand of the negotiations dealing with Ireland, as others have said, will now be subject, we understand, to slower dialogue, which is truly disappointing. I hope the Taoiseach will raise with Mr. Barnier this issue when he briefs the European Council 27. We cannot rest on our laurels, having secured the commitments in the negotiating mandate that we sought. They will be fluid and dynamic negotiations and making the right start is important, but certainly it will only be a start. The acceptance of the United Kingdom of the European Union's proposals for phasing means that discussions on a free trade agreement will not occur until after other details have been decided, including the bill for exit and the issues facing Ireland. I listened again during the week to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in Britain entirely dismiss the moneys expected to be placed on the table as the legitimate cost to be met by the United Kingdom.

We have very little time available to us, less than two years, before we reach the Article 50 deadline. A comprehensive free trade agreement, as sought by the United Kingdom, will certainly not be achieved within that timeline. It is imperative that a transitional arrangement be put in place, for which we in the Labour Party have argued for some time. This will ensure Irish companies will have time to adjust and grandfather the changes ultimately agreed to. The impact of Brexit will fundamentally alter the island. In particular, if it is not handled extremely carefully, it will destroy many thousands of jobs.

I raised with the Taoiseach's predecessor the need for domestic policy action and do so again today with the Taoiseach. There is a need to secure funding and policy changes in Europe to meet our unique circumstances. As the Taoiseach knows, the Labour Party published its document on Brexit last March. While much has changed since, the 20 specific actions we set out in the document are still very important and germane.

Since the first civil dialogue on Brexit in Dublin Castle I have highlighted the need for an early warning system between employers and trade unions and, critically, the need to seek to change the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to support workers and employers impacted on by market changes due to Brexit or currency changes in advance of Brexit. One of our ambitions concerns the need to waiver state aid rules and establish a Brexit trade adjustment fund of €250 million to support companies in transition. Three of the proposals we set out in our March document have been embraced by IBEC, which is an interesting development. There is growing consensus on what Ireland must do to support people, jobs and the economy. We have made the specific proposals and now want to see those which can be acted on immediately being acted on immediately.

As others have referenced, on Friday the Council will also discuss the issue of migration and the crisis in the Mediterranean. I hope the Taoiseach will deliver on the commitments we made when we were in government together to accept refugees into the State. We have committed to accepting more than 2,600 by September this year. The Taoiseach has given the number who have entered the State to date and I hope the others will arrive and be welcomed in communities throughout the country. I support the view of others that we need to ensure every member of the European Union will accept the responsibility to take in refugees.

The Council will address the jobs, growth and competitiveness strategy. I call on the Taoiseach to seek changes to the EU fiscal rules. I have already had these discussions. If the door is not open, it is certainly ajar. This is something on which we need to follow up and the clock is ticking. We need to ensure the vital interests of Ireland are actioned and not simply talked about.

I note that the Taoiseach spoke about the European Union standing firm against hatred and violent extremism and mentioned that he would fight the spread of radicalism. That is very much in tune with some of the very interesting rhetoric coming from him and the Minister, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, in particular.

There appears to be a move from the pragmatic approach which veiled any obvious ideological prejudice under the former Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny - not that it did not exist but it was veiled - to a much more gung-ho, ideological leadership for Fine Gael in the form of this Taoiseach and the Minister, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, with all the talk of attacking the populists as against the sensible, moderate people whom apparently they represent and associate with in Europe. It is good that they are framing things in that way. At least, it is a political debate. However, it is completely topsy-turvy in terms of who are the extremists and who are the reasonable people.

The left believes in human beings, internationalism, solidarity across borders and compassion for human beings. That is not an extremist position, but a moderate, sensible, human one. I contrast that with the position of some of the Taoiseach's mates in Europe. Robert Fico, the Prime Minister of Slovakia, who is one of the Taoiseach's colleagues on the European Council, has said that Islam has no place in Slovakia and that it is a necessity to monitor every Muslim. The Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán, is a member of the European People's Party, of which Fine Gael is a part. He thinks migrants are "poison", every migrant is a terror risk and every refugee policy is a Trojan Horse of terrorism. He is already responsible for building a fence against migrants and he wants to build another, just like Mr. Donald Trump. What does the Taoiseach have to say about an association in the European People's Party with people who have those types of extremist views? The Bulgarian Prime Minister, Boyko Borisov, warns about the Muslim threat to the Christian demographic balance of Europe. This is foul, extremist, racist hate-mongering and I wish to hear denunciations and serious challenge to such hate-mongering from the Taoiseach and the Government.

I also seek some criticism of the European Union's fortress Europe policy. This has resulted in 16,000 deaths in the Mediterranean since 2014, a miserable 3,000 Syrian refugees taken in by the European Union, as opposed to the 2.8 million who have fled that country and are now held up in Turkey, and the deal the European Union did with the Turkish regime, which is an extremist regime, to keep migrants out of Europe. It also did deals with Libya and Afghanistan, extremist regimes by any definition. The European Union is lining up with them at the expense of human compassion and decency when it comes to people fleeing from the most desperate circumstances.

I will conclude with a comment on the austerity extremism of the European Union. I read an article today in which a Greek woman named Dimitra says that she never imagined a life of being reduced to food handouts, "some rice, two packs of pasta, a packet of chickpeas, some dates and a tin of milk for the month". That is against a background of deprivation in Greece that has now shot up to 22%. There were 2,500 people in receipt of food aid in Athens in 2012. It is now 26,000. This is because Europe will not give Greece a break on its debt. Could we have some criticism of that type of economic and racist extremism emanating from the so-called moderate centre of Europe?

There have been a number of significant general elections since the last European Council meeting. I will comment on the results of the elections in the UK and France. In some ways the election in the UK was the more significant of the two. It had a strange result where the winner was the loser and the loser was the winner. At the start of the campaign, Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party was way behind. According to one poll the gap was 46% to 23%, or two to one.

The turning point in the campaign was the launch of the Labour Party's manifesto. It was rightly described as the most left wing manifesto presented by a main party in a general election in the UK in a generation. The manifesto's policies included an increase in the minimum wage to £10 per hour, the banning of zero-hour contracts, the building of 500,000 council houses, the abolition of tuition fees, the introduction of a wealth tax to pay for the policies and, importantly, it put back on the agenda the nationalisation of rail, mail, energy and water. That was not a full socialist programme. We would go further in terms of nationalising the commanding heights of the economy. The leader of the Labour Party here was right when he told the Irish Independent that Mr. Corbyn's policies were far closer to the policies of Solidarity-People Before Profit than to the policies of the Irish Labour Party.

Those policies proved to be tremendously attractive to young people, in particular. This is the first generation since the Second World War that has a decisively lower standard of living than their parents. They are fed a diet of precarious work and face a mountain of debt as a result of tuition fees. They flocked to those policies. That experience was not unique to the UK. There was a similar experience with so-called millennials attending the Bernie Sanders rallies in the United States and rallying to the banner of Jean-Luc Mélenchon and the radical left in France. That was a decisive push in that election-----

You are going to link this to the European Council.

Of course I am. The Taoiseach will be sitting across from the people who participated in that election campaign. There could be another election in the UK before the end of the year.

The election saw the biggest gains by the Labour Party in the UK during an election campaign since 1945, narrowing the gap from 23% to 2.5% during the campaign. Since then, there has been the horror of what happened at Grenfell Tower, the tomb in the sky. Everybody knows that was a man-made disaster due to deregulation, cheap cladding, the failure to install sprinklers, slashing the number of inspectors and so forth. It is a monument to the failure of neoliberal capitalism. If it had happened the week before the election rather than the week after, there probably would have been a very different election result. The fact that it happened afterwards shows that the election is not the end of the matter. There is the start of a social movement against not just the Tories, but also the capitalism they represent.

In terms of the French election, there were two spectacular victories for Mr. Mélenchon. The turnout, particularly last Sunday, was woeful. It was down to 43%. Election fatigue and the weather are blamed, but Mr. Mélenchon was far closer to the mark when he said that it was a civic general strike. The centre left and the centre right have collapsed into the Macron movement, but there is no great enthusiasm among the mass of people. Confrontation is looming. Emmanuel Macron is talking about reforming the so-called labour laws by the summer, implementing a ceiling on damages for unfair dismissal and changing sectoral agreements to company by company agreements. That will open the door to driving down the living standards of workers in France. Attempts to go down this road resulted in mass protests against Mr. Sarkozy and Mr. Hollande and we will see the same against the policies of Mr. Macron. The challenge to him will come from the syndicats, the unions and the radical left.

There is an important lesson here, and I will conclude on this because I am aware that the Taoiseach is an admirer of the ideas of Mr. Macron. The agenda of the so-called new European centre in reality serves the interests of the establishment and the traditional right. It will be challenged on these policies by the working class movement and the radical left.

I am sharing time with Deputy Broughan.

I regret that the new Taoiseach is following in the footsteps of the old Taoiseach by departing the scene before the smaller parties or Independents have their say.

I am sure he would not like to be called "the old Taoiseach".

I am sorry. What would he like to be called?

"Former Taoiseach" might be better.

Former. I take back "old". It was not an ageist thing, trust me. I am nearly as old as him myself. Perhaps the new Taoiseach feels the esteemed leaders of the established parties talk more wisdom than us poor mortals. So be it.

I understand that the European Council meeting is mostly about migration and defence, or refugees and war, whichever way one looks at it. It would be good if the Taoiseach brought a new dimension to the European Council meetings. It is time that Ireland took a new position. We talk a lot about refugees and migrants. We probably do not ask enough as to where they come from. One of the best ways of creating refugees is dropping bombs on their homes. Sadly, we still allow Shannon Airport to be used as a US military base. US military proceed from there to cause serious havoc in many predominantly Muslim countries, from which the majority of the refugees and migrants are coming at the moment. It would be good if we took a step back and reasoned why we have so many problems in this area.

Interpreting the refugee crisis as a defence and security issue will not make the problem go away. We are throwing money at people in Libya, people who leave a lot to be desired, to stop refugees coming across. This Government cheered when the country was being bombed to bits by the USA, UK and France. We were happy enough to see the place destroyed. Now it is in anarchy and there are unbelievable problems.

We seem okay about and pretty silent on the fact that refugees and migrants are being created every minute of every hour in Yemen at present. We have no problem in trading with the likes of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which, with the support of the USA, France and Germany, are bombing the place back into the stone age. There are many millions of people suffering on account of it.

I listened to the debate on Leaders' Questions today during which the new Taoiseach was challenged on not inviting Mr. Trump. Given that the Government is okay with the likes of Mr. Obama coming here, I do not really see a problem with Mr. Trump coming here, even though he is a lot worse. Mr. Obama holds the record for the US President longest at war in American history. He deported more undocumented migrants than any other US President in history and he signed off on the death warrants, without trial, of more people than all the US Presidents before him put together. While I agree that Mr. Trump is even worse, I do not know why the Irish Government has a problem trading with Russia when it is prepared to deal with the USA and the Saudis. We should not get into a selection process. I believe one should talk to everybody on the same terms. We should reopen our embassy in Iran. The notion that Iran might be a bigger threat to world security than the likes of the Saudis or the USA is frightening. It is about time we rethought the position on the Iranian embassy. Iran has 80 million people. As the House knows, Deputy Clare Daly and I were there a few months ago speaking at a conference. It is an amazing country.

I missed the Taoiseach's opening speech but I believe he mentioned John F. Kennedy. I do not know whether he was referring to the fact that John F. Kennedy was the one who started chemical warfare and the fact that there are children being born malformed in Vietnam today because of chemicals he dropped on that poor country many years ago. I am not sure whether the Taoiseach brought that up; perhaps he was raising some other issue regarding it. I ask him to reconsider allowing Shannon Airport to be used to help the American military to drop bombs on people's homes, thereby creating refugees and migrants who then become the source of a problem for the European Union.

I echo the comments made by my colleague, Deputy Wallace, on defence matters. It is heartening to know that in his speech earlier the Taoiseach committed fully to the Paris climate change agreement and said that the 27 member states would stand together very firmly on that. I acknowledge his comments on migration and digital Europe. They are welcome but he needs to indicate clearly whether Ireland is living up to its commitments on migration.

One of the issues mentioned by the Taoiseach on which I have concerns is the European semester, particularly in regard to fiscal policy. Almost all the discussions we had at meetings of the budgetary oversight committee have revolved around the fiscal rules and looking back at those. As I mentioned a number of times at meetings of the committee, we have still amassed a huge national debt, largely imposed on us by the European Commission and the major European powers, especially Germany. This makes it so difficult for us to begin to rebuild our infrastructure, which has been allowed to fall into decay so badly over recent years. We expect the Taoiseach and the new Minister to put up a strong fight for fiscal leeway for Ireland in terms of current spending in certain areas, such as disability, as I mentioned during Leaders' Questions this morning, and also in general terms to give us the kind of elbow room we need, particularly given that we are the people most affected by Brexit.

From the time of the result of the UK Brexit referendum, I have been calling for a Brexit Minister. That the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has effectively become the Brexit Department is welcome. However, I was disappointed yesterday to note that the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Coveney, said there was no question but that Ireland was a priority on the first day of the talks with Mr. Michel Barnier and the British delegation. I am looking at a picture of the Minister with Michel Barnier in which he is being congratulated. The Minister stressed that Ireland wants to see a future relationship that is as close as possible between the EU and the UK but the account of the first day of talks in many of our newspapers today is very disheartening and disappointing. The Guardian, for example, reports that the hopes we all had for swift progress on addressing any possibility of a border being brought back in this country are dashed already. Mr. Barnier and the UK Secretary of State, Mr. Davis, MP, reported afterwards that Ireland would no longer be in the first wave of the working groups so we do not seem to be a priority in the negotiations themselves. We are to be subject to a separate, slower dialogue. The reason for this, given by Mr. Davis, is that resolving the common travel area and the Irish Border issue is such a difficult issue. However, many people feel, on considering the cases of Norway, Sweden and Switzerland, with its various borders, that there does not seem to have been the same level of difficulty in respect of them. Some people were categorising the negotiations yesterday as a 3:0 result, with the European Union being 3 and the UK being 0 in that the latter lost all its main negotiating demands. In fact, we seem to have had a 1:0 result against us. It is good that we have a Brexit Department at long last and that the Minister of State is present but we need to refocus to ensure we are a high priority from the outset.

I wish the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, well in her new role. We are sorry to lose her from her last Ministry because she had a lot of input into the fair deal scheme that we are trying to get for the farming community. She understood it well. We only hope that the new Minister of State will be as conversant with it as she was. We wish her all the very best for the future.

We are elected to this House by the people who vote for us to represent them. There are small businesses in Castleisland, Killarney, Tralee and Killorglin in Kerry which are very worried about the reduction in the value of sterling. Already, their incomes and products are netting 10% or 12% less than they were before the Brexit vote. I am sorry our new Taoiseach has left the Chamber. I only hope that he did not leave because only the smaller groups or parties are here now and that when he had dealt with the larger ones, he decided to go. That would be wrong. He should recognise that we are elected also by the people who vote for us and who need their complaints and problems listened to.

These small businesses are very worried that if the value of sterling persists at this low rate for a long time, and it is predicted that it could last for 20 years, it would have a savage adverse effect on the Twenty-six Counties. Those businesses are making no apology for saying it. Much of the talk in this House over the last number of months has been about making a special case for Northern Ireland. We are elected here to make a case for the Republic of Ireland, the Twenty-six Counties. In that regard, it is said that much traffic will go across the Border for cheaper goods. Down as far as a straight line from Galway to Dublin, and even down further than that, it will have a very negative impact and all the traffic will be inclined to go up to the North of Ireland. The counties in the South will suffer an awful lot. Those businesses are asking how that is going to be addressed. I mentioned this last night. They even suggested that Northern Ireland should have to join the euro. After all, if the Border is going to be at the ports, we will not have a level playing field with the sterling being so low in the Six Counties. We would lose much of our custom. Counties and people would suffer accordingly.

With regard to the farming community, around the time of the election, the price for cattle dropped €100 per head. It is so volatile now that it dropped €100 per head when there was uncertainty and when Ms May lost so much of her vote in the setting up of a new government. We need to address those issues. I hope the Minister, Deputy Coveney, will do his best as Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. The Government's team and our new Taoiseach will have to address all these issues. When one goes out the gate this evening, everything looks grand and rosy. There are tower cranes all over the place. However, the farther one goes towards the Atlantic the worse things are getting. Young people are coming to the greater Dublin area to work and are leaving rural Ireland behind. Let us take the Leader programme for example. There are 18 different stages of approval. Rural Ireland is being forgotten about and it is getting worse. As much as we have talked in this Chamber, it is deteriorating by the day. On those matters, such as the Leader funding, not a penny has been spent yet.

I have gone into Deputy McGrath's time. More emphasis needs to be placed on rural Ireland when we are talking to the EU in the coming days.

I too wish the Minister of State very well in her new position. I am disappointed to lose her from the position she was in because we had been working very hard on the fair deal scheme. Hopefully, the good work there will continue and the Minister of State will ask the new incumbent to do what she herself intended to do. I also wish the Minister, Deputy Coveney, well. I hope he makes a better job of this than he made of the housing crisis, because there was not a house built in Tipperary last year. I appealed to him several times to call in the county managers and insist that something be done. Nothing has happened. The talks and reports would build mountains and castles for us with all that is going on there, but there has been nothing. We are aware that one of the central issues to be discussed at the EU Council will be the future direction of Europe and what vision will guide the creation of that future. To that end, the European Commission published a White Paper on 1 March that sets out possible paths for the future of Europe. The Commission acknowledged that we face a great many challenges, such as globalisation, the impact of new technologies on society and jobs, and security concerns, and that we must ensure we are not overwhelmed but rather that we seize the opportunities that these trends present.

The White Paper offers five scenarios for the European Union’s evolution, depending on the choices we will make. As the Commission has further noted, the White Paper marks the start, not the end, of this debate. Work will continue in earnest so that we have a plan, a vision and a way forward to present to the people by the time we hold European Parliament elections in June 2019.

While I acknowledge the work of the European Commission, it is very hard to take what it says very seriously. After all, it seems to have had a very late conversion to citizen-centred democracy. It now speaks endlessly about the rise of so-called populism and the need to consult the people of the various member states. It has had a very late conversion to that. Where was all this when the drift away from true public consultation was occurring over the past ten years? Where was it when this State rejected various treaties, only to be told to think again, but this time with an economic gun to our head? Where was it then?

The Commission’s White Paper presents one scenario of "Doing Much More Together". That would involve member states deciding to do much more together across all policy areas. While this sounds grand and noble, it also reflects the kind of drive toward ever-closer political union that leads many to fear for the sovereignty of their states. That is a huge worry for many people in Ireland. We have seen how international bodies like the United Nations already display breathtaking indifference and disregard for the Constitution of this State with its all too frequent and all too biased interventions of our laws, especially around family and life. Europe and those at the helm of the European project have also demonstrated this kind of arrogance for too long and too often.

I agree that it is vital that we have a strong Europe, a Europe of genuine partnership and collaboration. It is vital that it should not come at the expense of disregarding the views of those who fear that the European project has become derailed or overly powerful and centrist. The European Union must serve the people and not vice versa. That is what has happened with democracy, including our own one. We are not serving the people. We must serve the people rather than fatcat officials. The Commissioners we sent over failed politicians here. The European project must serve the people. The Taoiseach quoted John F. Kennedy today during Leaders' Questions. Indeed, he was waxing lyrical here again during questions to the Taoiseach with Deputy Coppinger and others. I have another quote for him that he might like to take to the EU Council, which John F. Kennedy said in 1962: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

I hope he takes that with him as well.

I am not sure whether the Taoiseach has taken on only a part-time speechwriter. If so, he should take him or her on full time and make sure he or she has a good lesson in history and understands the recent history of Europe and the way Europe has led to people being disengaged, has down-played the rights and sovereignty of people in this country, put a gun to our head during the banking crisis and told us we had to do this and the other. Europe is now telling us that we cannot have the housing Bill introduced in the Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach. We cannot have a Bill that would save the people and keep them in their homes. We can have legislation to deal with the big people but nothing for the small people. It is time the EU reflected on the small people. It is time our MEPs told it so. I suppose I am wishing against the wind that Commissioner Hogan might say something for Ireland but he is too interested in playing golf and making sure all the fellows he put into Irish Water are still there getting their salaries.

I wish to raise a point about which many other speakers have spoken in the past. In respect of statements, which I am sure will be a subject for discussion in our reform committee, there is a difference between those who come first and those who come last because the Taoiseach is never here and one has less opportunity to get one's point across. It is worth noting and I will raise it in the Dáil reform committee.

I welcome the Minister of State and wish her the best of luck in her job. I am sure she will be very capable and have a key role so I am very glad she is here to hear my short contribution. It is difficult for the Taoiseach as he is going into his first European Council. I presume the Minister of State will be joining him at that event. The Taoiseach is going in at a difficult time. It is a bit like going into the Business Committee when one represents a small party. One has the two big beasts in Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael - the equivalent of France and Germany. I will not say which is which. One needs to hold one's ground sometimes and fight one's corner.

I have been a supporter of the EU for a long time but with the UK exiting, something in me fears for our position as a small country on the periphery in terms of how we can exert an influence if it is a return to the Franco-German engine of development in Europe. That would be a very different Union to the one we have been in for the past 40 plus years. We need to be very careful, stand up for ourselves and be resolute. I will give a few examples reflecting what the Taoiseach said was coming up on the agenda.

The Taoiseach said that one of the items for discussion is defence co-operation, particularly in response to the terrorist threat and other threats. We have absolute solidarity and sympathy with our Belgian, French and British colleagues in terms of the terrorist incidents that have occurred recently. However, I fear that this might be used by the French or German Presidencies, particularly the French, to push for a strong move towards defence co-operation. I do not believe that would be right for us. We bring more to the Union when we maintain our historic neutrality. Deputy Wallace might say that this neutrality has been undermined through the use of Shannon Airport or other factors but it is still a real strength that we bring to the Union in terms of maintaining an independence and not buying in to some elements of the military-industry complex. I know it is a clichéd term but it exists in France, the UK and Germany. We need to be different in that regard. When we are discussing European security and co-operation in the European Council, the Taoiseach should be upfront in saying that Ireland is different. I remember having a discussion with T.K. Whitaker about the negotiations around our entry. At that time, the German finance ministry stood up for our right to be independent in that way within the Union. We still need to do that.

The second is a related issue. I note that a section of the Council is due to discuss digital Single Market strategies and so on. The Taoiseach said that one of the items for discussion is how we will fight the spread of radicalisation online and thwart its financing. We must combat terrorism in whatever way we can but I have a real concern about some of the measures we are seeing. In example, in the Queen's Speech today, the UK Government is introducing a range of draconian measures that are quite repressive in terms of people's online digital rights. As a country that has become a centre for much digital industry and software companies, including our own start-up culture, we must be very careful about the nature of online surveillance that is permitted, the protection of privacy and support for content creators on the Internet. We must do so in a way that is truly based on an ethical and citizens' rights-led approach rather than a judicial, security angle. While that is important, I do not believe having really draconian measures to crack down on certain freedoms on the Internet will create a more secure environment. In fact, many of the recent terrorist incidents we have seen have shown that this will not work. We have a better approach in terms of our response to some of those terrorist threats than some of the other security responses we are seeing across Europe and we should stand up for our approach.

Even though we are distant from the most immediate points of migration such as Libya and other parts of the Middle East like Syria as well as Turkey, we have a slightly different relationship with some of those parts of the world. We should use that in any further discussions and deliberations regarding how we manage migration, for example, how we see Turkey. Deputy Boyd Barrett mentioned what is happening in Slovakia or Austria. There is a huge problem in a certain part of Europe regarding relationships with Turkey. There is a historic concern going back 500, 600 or 800 years about people coming from Turkey and being on the border of Europe. We have the chance to have a different relationship with Turkey and Iran. I agree with what Deputy Wallace said. We have the chance to play a neutral role and not just neutral in a "do nothing" sense. We can be neutral in a positive and constructive connection with the Arab world, Turkey and Iran. We should avail of that opportunity because we can bring a slightly different relationship to it compared to some other European countries. We add to the Union when we act in that regard.

The next issue is significant but it is the Minister of State's job to think big in European Council meetings. I believe we should be taking a much stronger position in response to the Chinese Government's new Silk Road initiative in terms of trying to develop co-operation and links between China and other parts of the world. I am not an expert in the exact provisions and what they offer with the possible exception of electricity grid connections where I have had some connections and involvement outside this House. It seems that the work the Chinese Government is doing in this area is hugely progressive and innovative and something where we should use our good relationship with China to think big in that way and to see ourselves as part of a big global co-operative approach rather than just locking ourselves within the EU.

The next issue might be outside the remit of the immediate Council, although it may come up because I believe one of the items for discussion is the situation following the US withdrawal from the Paris climate change agreement and how Europe responds to that. We should be strong in our response. We should hit the US where it hurts in the diplomatic area instead of getting into a trade war with the US that would damage our country as much as any other. We should be asking questions about the future role of the OECD and the International Energy Agency which typify institutions that were led by US diplomacy and US Governments. At this stage, the US is completely outside the pale and is a rogue state. We should be proposing some change in the International Energy Association or the OECD. How can we can deal with the US when it has put itself outside any proper diplomatic context of co-operation?

I am scared by what is happening with Brexit because as others have said, the British Government has entered into negotiations and is three-nil down with about 30 seconds to go. It is incredible. Only a few weeks ago, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis, MP, was saying that the row of the summer would be around sequencing and that the full Irish trade talks would need to begin at the very start. He went into the negotiations on Monday and walked out half an hour later having agreed to all the sequencing and having demoted the issue of Ireland's trade and Border issues. It seems that the British do not have a negotiating position.

They do not have any cards to play and are heading towards a hard, over-the-cliff exit, and we have to try to stop them from doing that. That is a wider political debate. I wish the Minister of State the best of luck in her role, as well as the Taoiseach as he walks into what I think is a very difficult first Council meeting.

I call the Minister of State, Deputy Helen McEntee, to respond. I join with others in congratulating her on her appointment to this vitally important portfolio for European affairs.

The Taoiseach has already indicated that I will provide some additional detail about the external relations issues for discussion at the European Council meeting tomorrow. I am honoured to do this in my new role as Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, which I very much look forward to fulfilling with energy and a huge commitment. I thank Members for their well wishes.

The discussions on external relations are likely to include the Paris Agreement on climate change and updates on recent international summits, such as the EU meetings with the US and Turkey on 25 May, with Japan on 26 May and with China on 1 and 2 June. In their capacity as members of the Normandy group, President Emmanuel Macron and Chancellor Angela Merkel will also provide an update on ongoing efforts to resolve tensions between Russia and Ukraine. It can be expected that much of the discussion will focus on EU relations with the US. Transatlantic co-operation is fundamental for stability, security and prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic. The US remains the EU's key strategic partner. The EU and its member states, including Ireland, have proactively engaged with the new administration in Washington DC to reaffirm commitment to this relationship. As part of this, President Donald Trump visited Brussels on 25 May and met with President Tusk and President Juncker. Although President Trump has been sceptical about the EU, the administration as a whole has projected a largely traditional and positive attitude towards the EU, starting with Vice President Pence's visit to Brussels in February of this year. While there are differences, in particular on climate change, there is also much common ground - for example, in areas of economic co-operation. Ireland's links with the US run very deep and span many centuries, as we saw recently with the St. Patrick's Day festivities in March. These links previously transcended any one point of difference. This close relationship should continue, and similarly, we will work to maintain the close relationships between the US and the EU.

EU-Turkey relations have been under considerable strain, in particular since the attempted coup last July and, more recently, political developments in Turkey. The European Council is likely to discuss the meeting with President Erdoan last month, at which the EU highlighted the key issue of human rights. Turkey remains an important partner, including in managing migration, and the EU will continue to work with Turkey on all aspects of our relationship. Ireland fully supports the EU approach and agrees that it is critically important to keep the lines of communication open.

It has to be acknowledged that the EU relationship with Russia remains under particular strain. The illegal annexation of Crimea, the conflict in eastern Ukraine and the support of the Assad regime in Syria are among the most divisive issues. In the long term, a constructive and predictable relationship between the EU and Russia is desirable as a strategic goal. Ireland remains open to exploring engagement with Moscow in areas where dialogue would clearly be in the EU's interest. However, Russia does not appear to be interested in fostering a more constructive relationship at this time. In 2014, the EU imposed targeted economic sanctions against Russia in response to its actions on Ukraine. In the following year, EU leaders linked the duration of these to the full implementation of the Minsk accords. The lack of progress in implementing the security and political provisions of the Minsk accords and Russia's failure to play a constructive role have led the Council to roll over the restrictive measures to the 31 July 2017 deadline. Ireland strongly believes that any relaxation of the EU sanctions can only be considered where there is clear evidence of the concrete progress we all wish to see on the ground in eastern Ukraine.

EU leaders are likely to discuss, as has been discussed here already, the Paris Agreement on climate change, which entered into force last November and which puts in place the framework for countries to take action to limit global warming to well below 2° Celsius above pre-industrial levels, and also to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5° Celsius. The Paris Agreement has been signed by 195 parties, representing 194 states and the European Union. As of 13 June, it has been ratified by 148 of those parties. Together with our fellow member states of the EU and most other countries, we sincerely regret President Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. We strongly believe that the agreement is fit for purpose and is not open for renegotiation. We will continue to work closely with our EU and international partners to ensure that the agreement becomes fully operational as soon as possible. The role of the EU as a global ambition leader will be to re-emphasise the agreement, through ambitious climate policies and through continued support for developing and climate-vulnerable countries.

Barr
Roinn