JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 21 Jan 2004

Business of Joint Committee.

Chairman

The first item of correspondence concerns the rules and procedures of the Euromed meeting. This is simply for noting as the meeting has taken place. Item No. 2 is the invitation to Cyprus which we have accepted. Item No. 3 is an acknowledgement of a meeting with IBEC, to be noted. Item No. 4 is a proposal to refer to the Sub-Committee on Scrutiny of EU Affairs. Item No. 5 refers to a meeting which has already taken place, to be noted. Item No. 6 is from Mr. Jimmy Hood, MP, to be noted. Items Nos. 7, 8 and 9 are to be noted. Are these matters agreed? Agreed.

The minutes of the last meeting have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed. In the second part of today's meeting we will hear from our special adviser.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

May I raise one minor issue in the context of the minutes, without delaying the proceedings?

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

It concerns some of the schools in my constituency in west Cork arising from the successful gathering we held down there. They want to know when they will receive the video of the event.

Chairman

We will make a note of that for the next meeting.

General Affairs and External Relations Council: Ministerial Presentations.

Chairman

I welcome Deputy Dick Roche, Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs at the Department of Foreign Affairs. The subject of this meeting is to discuss the General Affairs and External Relations Council business with the Minister of State, who will make the opening comments. We will follow this with two rounds of questions, on external relations and general affairs.

Minister for State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Mr. Roche)

Iapologise for the delay in sending the documents dealing with the common position on conflict prevention to the committee. They were delivered to the Chairman's office this morning. I had hoped that the committee would receive them last week but there are extenuating circumstances to explain this delay.

I am very pleased to appear again before the committee and to review the agenda for the forthcoming General Affairs and External Relations Council. It is the first such council of the Irish Presidency of the EU and will be chaired by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen. I will lead the national delegation. I propose to comment first on the Intergovernmental Council then move to the session on general affairs, followed by external relations issues. I am happy as always to take any questions or observations from committee members on these issues. I may be a little less forthcoming or opinionated on some issues because I am conscious that Ireland holds the EU Presidency and we must be perhaps more guarded in our language than we might otherwise be.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

That is a major restraint on the Minister of State.

Deputy Roche

It had been hoped to conclude negotiations on the Intergovernmental Conference at last December's European Council meeting. We were very disappointed that notwithstanding the considerable and commendable efforts of the Italian Presidency it was not possible to conclude the discussions on the conference and ultimately on the new constitutional treaty. The European Council asked the Irish Presidency to engage in a period of reflection and consultation with partners and to submit a report to the spring European Council meeting on the prospects for future progress on the constitutional treaty. We are involved in intensive consultations and assessment and will prepare a report.

Next week's Council meeting provides a very useful opportunity for the Minister to set out our Presidency approach and for foreign ministers to have an initial discussion and exchange of views on IGC matters. This will not be a formal meeting of the Intergovernmental Conference. The discussion will take place over lunch and is expected to last no more than an hour. It is not expected that there will be any detailed discussion of substantive issues and no conclusions will be drawn or issued from this part of the meeting. Representatives of the applicant states and the European Parliament are invited to attend that session.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs wrote to his counterparts on 8 January setting out the Presidency's plans for consultations with partners. I have copied this letter to the committee. It indicated that the Taoiseach, the Minister and I would engage in, or be available to conduct, an intensive series of consultations with our counterparts and that our officials would be available to consult with theirs. Consultations have been very detailed and wide-ranging. The intensive process of bilateral consultation with partners is also under way. The Taoiseach in particular has had several meetings and telephone conversations with his counterparts in the past fortnight and further such meetings are planned over the coming weeks.

Ireland's Presidency is strongly committed to making progress on the IGC if progress can be achieved. The Taoiseach has attached the highest personal priority to this issue, making clear his view that agreement on the constitutional treaty is in the interests of the Union and its member states, old and new, large and small. We will spare no effort to build consensus and facilitate agreement so that the citizens of Europe will have a constitutional treaty that responds to their needs and expectations.

At the General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting of 26 January, there will be a public debate on the annual operating programme of the Council for 2004. The programme is entitled Seizing the Opportunities of the Enlarged Union which was the result of excellent co-operation between the Irish and Dutch Presidencies. It reflects the strategic objective of ensuring that the Council continues to function effectively, while successfully integrating the ten new member states on 1 May 2004.

In introducing the debate, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, will focus on implementation of the European security strategy, agreed last December and to be implemented under the Irish Presidency, and also on conflict prevention with an emphasis on African issues. As committee members are aware, both are important aspects of the Presidency programme and reflect the importance which the Government attaches to developing the EU's capabilities in support of peace and stability on the international stage. The Minister will also refer to the historical importance of enlargement. This will be followed by an open discussion among partners with the focus on these specific issues.

One issue that has arisen in recent weeks is the statute for MEPs. The European Parliament on 17 December voted in favour of a resolution amending the draft statute for MEPs. The draft statute envisages a common European system of remuneration and taxation for MEPs covering conditions of employment, including pensionable age. Reimbursement of expenses is also an element. The European Parliament's move is seen as a positive one. There is a widespread belief among member states and in the Parliament that this is the best opportunity to put in place a more balanced salary, pension and expenses system for MEPs.

Chairman

If any committee member has a future vested interest in this matter, should they make a declaration now?

Deputy Roche

I think so. I am awaiting the Chairman's démarche in that regard.

As holders of the Presidency, this is informing our approach to the dossier. We are aware that some concerns remain on the resolution passed by the European Parliament in December 2003 and we are listening to these. This is the first realistic chance in many years to finalise this difficult issue. Such a chance may not come again and, therefore, we will continue to work to find a solution. As parliamentarians, all members will understand how important it is that a solution be found.

The EU Foreign Ministers decided at their informal meeting at Evian, in July 2000, that the Council should hold an annual debate on the external action of the EU. This month's Council debate, lasting for one hour, will be the fourth in this series. The uniqueness of this debate is that it deals with issues both in the Community-based first pillar and the inter-governmental second pillar of the Union's external action. In this way, the debate is aimed at increasing the coherence of the EU's external policies.

With a view to achieving a focused and operational outcome to the orientation debate, a Presidency paper, entitled Effectiveness of EU Aid: Orientation for a New Era in EU External Relations, has been prepared with three main goals. The first is to ensure that EU development assistance forms part of a coherent external relations policy, underpinned by effective multilateralism. The second goal is to ensure that the reform of European Council external assistance continues. The third goal is to push for further progress towards meeting the millennium development goals. Ministers are being invited to consider how the enlarged EU can provide more leadership in progressing development issues multilaterally. Ministers are also asked to consider if the EU is ready to extend the use of standard resource allocation criteria based on need and performance - as currently applied to European Development Fund programming - to all European Council external assistance programmes. Finally, Ministers are asked to consider what further steps the EU could collectively take to achieve the millennium development goals and how individual member states are proposing to contribute to this common effort so as to ensure the goals are met.

Commissioners Patten and Nielson, who will be in attendance at the Council for the orientation debate, have already made a contribution with their joint letter to Ministers of 13 January 2004, together with a report on commitments and payments in 2003, entitled Management of EU External Assistance Progress Report as of December 2003. From the debates in the Dáil on 20 January 2004, I understand that this is a matter of considerable concern to Members.

Following last week's thorough discussion at the committee of permanent representatives on the Presidency paper and the letter from the two Commissioners, the focus of the next committee meeting will be on the Presidency draft conclusions for consideration by Ministers at the Council. These draft conclusions address the action points contained in the Presidency paper as well as the comments already made during previous committee of permanent representatives discussions.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, will represent the European Union in Tbilisi, Georgia, on 25 January at the inauguration of newly-elected president, Mikhail Saakashvili. He will be accompanied by EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus, Mr. Heikki Talvitie. He will brief the General Affairs and External Relations Council on 26 January on the results of his visit. It is intended that Council conclusions on the Georgian situation will set out ways in which the EU can support the new administration in its efforts towards reform, democratisation and economic development. Co-ordinated international action is needed to help Georgia overcome its current difficulties, and as holders of the Presidency Ireland is working to focus EU efforts in support of Georgia in co-operation with other international actors. Members of the committee will be aware that the presidential elections are only one part of a series of elections in Georgia, with parliamentary elections in March.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs will brief his colleagues on his recent visit to Israel and Egypt and the political contacts he had there. Other Ministers will also brief the meeting on their recent contacts in the region and the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Mr. Solana, will outline his thinking on the situation. During his visit to Israel, the Minister for Foreign Affairs met the Prime Minister, Mr. Sharon, the Foreign Minister, Mr. Shalom, and the Opposition Leader, Mr. Shimon Peres. He also paid a courtesy call on the President, Mr. Katsav. All the meetings were conducted in a cordial atmosphere. The Minister outlined our views and our intention as holders of the Presidency to do everything possible to advance the peace process and revive the road map.

While there was not a meeting of minds on every issue, there was a recognition that the status quo cannot continue and that progress must be made. The Minister for Foreign Affairs suggested that small, concrete and visible steps by both sides could serve to renew confidence and pave the way for high-level negotiations.

In Egypt, the Minister for Foreign Affairs met the President, Mr. Mubarak, the Foreign Minister, Mr. Maher, and the Secretary General of the Arab League, Mr. Moussa. The meetings were extremely cordial and the Egyptian leadership shares our analysis of the situation and the need for progress. At the forthcoming Council, Ministers will consider how best the European Union can assist the parties in bringing forward the peace process.

The Council requested the High Representative, Javier Solana, to visit Tehran early in 2004 to discuss how to advance the EU dialogue with Iran in all areas. The visit took place on 12 and 13 January 2004. Following frank and constructive discussions, it was agreed to continue talks on how to take forward the EU dialogue with Iran through further meetings. Mr. Solana will brief the Council of Ministers on his visit.

The EU supported the resolution on Iran adopted by the International Atomic Energy Agency last November. It also welcomed the steps taken by Iran in recent weeks to address the concerns about its nuclear programme by presenting a declaration to the IAEA and by signing an additional protocol. We have called on Iran to continue to co-operate fully with the IAEA and to provide the necessary transparency and openness to resolve all outstanding concerns in relation to its nuclear programme. The Council will keep these issues under review. The IAEA director general, Mr. El-Baradei, will also report in February to the IAEA board so there is significant movement in this area.

We are very concerned with the decision of the Guardian Council in Iran to deem a large number of candidates, including more than 80 of the current 290 MPs, unsuitable to stand in the parliamentary elections scheduled for 20 February. We will continue to monitor developments, in particular with regard to the appeals process. We hope it will provide a positive outcome.

The European Commission has allocated an initial assistance package of €2.3 million to address the most urgent humanitarian needs of the victims of the Bam earthquake. I am pleased it has indicated that additional funds will be mobilised as necessary in response to further requests and needs identified. I am particularly proud of the speed of the response to the crisis by member states.

The Irish Government responded rapidly to the crisis with the announcement of €l million in assistance for the victims of the earthquake. An initial package of Irish assistance has been disbursed with €500,000 going to the International Federation of the Red Cross and a further €500,000 going to the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Both of these international organisations were immediately present in response to the crisis and have been providing essential humanitarian support since then on the ground.

The western Balkans will remain an important priority for the European Union during our Presidency. We have assured our partners and the countries of the region that Ireland will work to maintain the progress made in 2003 under the Greek and Italian Presidencies. We will work to implement the shared commitments made at the EU western Balkans summit last June in Thessaloniki. We have been looking at every possible way to encourage and involve the western Balkans in our activities. In one of the major initiatives we are taking on communicating in Europe, we have issued their representatives an invitation to attend in April. There has been a very positive response.

This month, discussions at the Council will focus on the situation in Serbia and Montenegro following the general elections in Serbia on 28 December last. The Council is likely to call on the democratic parties to work together to ensure the early formation of a government committed to continued reform and to further progress towards the EU. I have met the President of Montenegro and we have had other contacts in that country. As for Macedonia, the Council will affirm its support for the Ohrid agreement of 2001 which dealt with the ending of the conflict in FYRM.

Afghanistan will also feature on the agenda. Ministers will consider the recent developments there, in particular the adoption of the new constitution. The EU stands ready to work with all interested partners to further the peace and stabilisation process in Afghanistan. Javier Solana has incidentally made a very positive report on the position there in advance of the meeting.

The European Council decided in December 2003 that the embargo on the sale of arms to China, which has been in place since 1989, should be re-examined. It is likely that the Council will have some preliminary discussion on this complex issue, after which it will ask expert level groups to further consider the matter and report back to the foreign ministers.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, will report to the Council on his planned meeting with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan on Wednesday, January 28. The meeting will present a valuable opportunity for the Minister, as President of the Council, to report to Secretary-General Annan on Ireland's Presidency plans in respect of EU-UN relations, as well as the Presidency's intention to galvanise EU support for the reform process of the UN and for effective multilateralism. We discussed that previously at this committee, and members are aware that this is one of the highest priorities on the external relations side of our Presidency programme. In this regard, the Presidency will, inter alia, brief the Secretary General on its plans for an EU input into the work of Kofi Annan’s high-level panel on threats, challenges and changes. Pressing regional issues such as the Middle East peace process and Iraq will also be discussed.

It is a pleasure to address this committee and I will take any questions that committee member may table.

Chairman

Thank you. We will consider the general affairs section first, and then the external relations section.

Deputy Roche

Thank you for that. I did not mention initially that I am accompanied by Peter Smith, Paul Kavanagh and Bobby McDonagh. The latter is greatly engaged on the IGC side and I am anxious that he should leave as soon as questions on that section are taken.

Chairman

The meeting with the UN Secretary General is not mentioned in the brief. At what part of the meeting will that take place?

Deputy Roche

That is not part of the Council. The Minister will brief the Council on the meeting which will take place on Wednesday, 28 January.

Chairman

Will he do the briefing later?

Deputy Roche

He is apprising the meeting as the issue will be discussed on the following Wednesday and he will then return with the report in the following week.

Chairman

Regarding the General Affairs Council, we will take a round of questions.

Members will be aware that the approval of the list of A items comes late to the committee. A items are issues which are agreed without discussion. We asked the staff of the committee to look through the December A items to see if there are issues that need to be raised. There are two items arising from those A items which I wish to raise with the Minister for State.

Reference is made to the Colombia conclusions. The Minister of State might outline what those conclusions were. Regarding the United States, there have recently been media reports concerning a proposed tax amnesty for US corporations holding assets and capital abroad. The reports say that if adopted by the US, the proposal could result in a massive repatriation of US capital from abroad and create a million jobs in the United States. The main losers would be those countries which most depend on US foreign investment, such as Ireland and the UK. This proposal is said to have strong support among US multinationals such as Intel and Hewlett Packard. Was that not considered by the Council of Ministers, and if so, what is the view of the Minister of State?

Regarding the statute on MEPs, will that pass now or will it be deferred to a further meeting? The Minister of State might give the committee some indication as to whether he feels the IGC might conclude during Ireland's EU Presidency.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

This is the first opportunity I have had to address remarks to the Minister of State following Ireland's assumption of the EU Presidency. It is a little while now since, during a Presidency of the then European Community, I occupied the same position as Deputy Roche when I was Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is a heavy schedule and I wish him the best of luck.

Having attended the Dáil yesterday I heard a good part of the statements on the European Council summit. One report on the debate said it was mind-numbingly boring. I fully agree. It seems to me that the kind of format we adopt here, where there is a statement made and questions taken, might be replicated regarding debates on summits.

There are just two questions that I raised. The Chairman referred to the position of the United States. I see in today's newspapers that there is some suggestion of the European Union having a different approach regarding representation in the United States, having a political figure as its representative in Washington rather than an official. I invite the Minister to comment and bring us up to date on that position. It would be helpful if we knew exactly what the Irish Presidency's view on that was.

The second point concerns the IGC. I would very much like to see progress made on the draft constitutional treaty. It would be great if a conclusion could be reached during the Irish Presidency. Everyone knows about the problem with the Spaniards and the Poles on voting. Is it possible for the Minister to tell us what the Irish Presidency sees as the main sticking points? There are four or five simple matters which are the main sticking points in the way of a resolution to the issue of the draft constitutional treaty.

Deputy Harkin

I welcome the Minister and his officials. My question is similar to Deputy O'Keeffe's final comments, also concerning the IGC. It is stated that the Taoiseach has made it clear agreement on a constitutional treaty is profoundly in the interests of the Union. I suppose that it is now essentially down to one sticking point - the balance of power. The Minister might comment on that.

Poland is being asked almost before the ink is dry on the Nice treaty to make changes and put that to its people in a referendum. We had a delegation here from Denmark on Monday. The issue was also raised at that meeting. They did not have a referendum on Nice, something I found interesting. They had a legal opinion which said that Nice did not change anything. In this country, the very opposite was true, but that was interesting to see. The delegation from Denmark said they felt that a referendum on the new treaty would pose a great deal of difficulty for them. We can expect the same here. I wonder what the Government's views are.

There is a sense that we need to get the business completed, but surely the type of business that we complete is important. While it would certainly be a coup for the Irish Presidency to ensure that the treaty was accepted, might there not be a danger that we might win a battle but in the long run lose the war?

Deputy Quinn

I would like to be associated with the good wishes to the Irish team and particularly the Minister. It is an onerous task. I reiterate the questions that have already been asked and would like to add one more.

It seems to me that we have a very short window of opportunity to achieve a resolution regarding the position on Cyprus. Before 1 May, pressure of a tactical, philosophical and emotional kind can be brought on Turkey to do business. Once the deadline of 1 May passes, that pressure point will disappear. If Turkey has aspirations to join the Union, it should declare those aspirations and make them manifest by putting considerable pressure on the recalcitrant and obstinate position of Mr. Denktash. The outcome of the local elections in the Turkish part of Cyprus represents a major shift in public opinion.

Having our historical empathy with the island of Cyprus over the question of partition, I would like to hear the point of view of the Government and what precise pressure the Irish intend to bring on Ankara during the course of our Presidency to move in turn. It seems quite evident that the new Prime Minister in Turkey wishes to move but that the military is preventing that for reasons that are no longer apparent with reference to geopolitical stability or security.

Deputy Mulcahy

I also thank the Minister for attending. I have two points to take up from where Deputy Quinn left off. I absolutely agree with him. No one would like any country joining on 1 May as a divided state. It behoves us to assist in any way possible.

It was interesting to read the Italian Presidency document a few months ago. There was no mention of the Cyprus issue in it. However, I am glad to see that, in the Irish Presidency programme, specific mention is made that it will do its best to solve the problem by 1 May. That date itself will be one of the highlights of the Presidency, and it will be remembered for that.

After the failure in Brussels in December, there was a feeling that things would cool off for a while and that there would be a considerable period of reflection and consultation. That was the tone very early in January. However, that seems to have changed a little in the meantime, and there seems to be a great deal of activity. I understand that the original timetable was that a report would be made by the Presidency to the March meeting. Is it now anticipated that there might be a little more progress to announce at that meeting, or is the Presidency simply expected to report back on consultations?

I agree absolutely with what Deputy Harkin said. It is more important that we get it right for the long term than that we get it right within the six months. Everyone would like to have the Irish Presidency dealing with and solving this problem. However, it is very important that we obtain a solution that can find acceptance in all the new member states, as well as in the original 15, and that will work for the future. We should not underestimate the kinds of problems that certain countries have, historically and otherwise, in moving forward. As I said yesterday in the Dáil, I sympathise with those countries which have signed up to a treaty on one set of terms, and, before the ink is dry, are asked to change those rules before they have even become members. We must tread very carefully and warily, and I am sure that the Presidency will do so. However, I would be interested to know, like the Chairman, what timetable is envisaged.

Deputy Roche

The Chairman made specific reference to the conclusions on Colombia and the points arising from December. The conclusions on Colombia reiterated the European Union's support for the efforts of President Uribe to build a state that fully respects human rights and the rule of law in all parts of the country. As we know, that country has had a very turbulent recent history. The Council will continue to strike a balance between supporting genuine and legitimate efforts to counter violence, illegal drug trafficking and so forth, while at the same time encouraging continued work to build a functioning democratic state in all parts of the country which respects human rights, the rule of law, and fundamental freedoms. The Colombian people will need continued economic and political support from the European Union, and that point was made in the report.

On the issue of the US tax amnesty, this is a presidential election year in the United States, and there is quite a feverish atmosphere. I am not sure where that proposition is. I will have to make some inquiries, and there is no point in my attempting an answer that insults the intelligence of the questioner. I will send the committee a note on it.

Deputies Quinn, O'Keeffe, Harkin and Mulcahy all raised the IGC. There is no change in the tempo. We made it very clear at the end of the European Council meeting precisely what it had tasked us to do. The level of consultation has been absolutely intense. We have avoided doing it in public to avoid grandstanding.

Deputy Quinn spoke very strongly on this during his contribution in the Dáil yesterday, during a debate which was far from being "mind-numbingly boring". Anybody who sat through the debate, as I did, would have experienced an incisive and focused debate covering an extraordinary range of issues. It is a pity that journalists who did not have the time to stay and listen characterised the debate as "mind-numbingly boring". That type of comment is disingenuous because it does not speak to the debate.

The tempo of the process was always the one we envisaged. I want to be careful in speaking of the Intergovernmental Conference as I do not want to create a false hope, but there has been a remarkably positive response to the approach that we adopted, which is low key but focused. It is low key in that we will respect the views that we receive from members and we will not speculate on where people stand and what the bottom line issues are. It is not a fact that there is only one issue outstanding in this matter. In negotiations of this significance, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. There is no single issue delaying matters. The issue that was propelled into public debate was that of the voting system and whether the Nice arrangement would remain or the more sane double majority model would be used. There are different views passionately held on both sides of that argument which we must respect.

It is simply not true to suggest that people are being expected to sign up to a treaty before the ink is dry on the previous treaty. A number of people have suggested that today in this committee and yesterday in the Dáil. One of the extraordinary features of the Convention on the Future of Europe is that all the applicant countries were fully and absolutely engaged. In Ireland we made a particular effort, which is widely recognised in the two books which have been published on the matter, not only to be friends to the accession countries but to fully engage them. They were the most active members of the group that became known as the "friends of the community method". It is simply not true to suggest that a delegation is being expected to sign something that they were not party to. The ten applicant countries were fully active and were among the most incisive contributors to the debate. That is not to diminish their concerns in any way, which were real and fully understood.

They are not arguing that something was being foisted upon them. They raised genuine debating points during the course of the convention. The issues of voting and membership of the Commission were not resolved by the Convention, nor was the other institutional issue on the size of representation in the Parliament for the smaller states. It was always envisaged that these issues would be a matter of key debate at this time.

With regard to the speed of the process I disagree with the views expressed. The Chairman made the point yesterday that speed is of the essence because if the IGC drags on to the end of 2004 there are such a large number of matters that will change that it is probable efforts will be made to unpick elements of the constitutional treaty, although it may not necessarily happen. I urge anybody who has any doubts about the constitutional treaty to pick it up and read it. It is a lucid and well presented document which has a great deal to commend it and represents rapid progress on what went before. It is infinitely better than Nice which was always an interim solution and never final. It was an interim arrangement that was put in place to facilitate the membership of the ten accession countries. It would not have been possible to progress the Union with the pre-existing arrangements.

The document is excellent and was a marvellous starting point, which the Taoiseach has said from the very beginning. After Naples, some further changes were made which produced a coherent document and were the starting point of the Irish Presidency. That is not to diminish anything that has been done since Naples.

We are involved in intensive consultation and in assessment, which ensures our making a report to the Council meeting in March. Nobody was forced to do something that they were not party to. We were all parties to this excellent draft treaty which, when it is concluded, most democrats in Ireland will commend to the Irish people in the strongest possible terms as it is such an improvement.

We are aware of the size of the challenge. I do not want to convey a false view as the challenge is significant. It is not simply the issue that has been headlined that is critical; there are also other issues that fall into that category.

Time is crucial in this matter. It would be gratifying to achieve a settlement during the Irish Presidency, but we want to advance the matter as far as we can. We must be focused on this while being ambitious to achieve an outcome. It would worry me if the process goes beyond the end of this year as that would ensure that it gets entangled with many other issues. In the second half of this year some of the key players in the process will be changed. We will have a new European Parliament and Commission. There will be two general elections in March.

Deputy Quinn has made an assessment that is correct in that the window of opportunity is quite small. The consequences of Europe not reaching agreement on the new constitutional treaty are quite dramatic. We want to make as much progress as we can while respecting the scale of the task and the different views that exist.

There are other issues, including three names circulated in press commentary in Washington.

Chairman

The Garryowen.

Deputy Roche

I am not sure it was the Garryowen, but a few were suggested in Washington and there was press speculation. It is interesting that the speculation has focused primarily on Ireland. In fact all of the names circulated in press commentary were Irish.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

If the Minister of State wants to detail all the names he will add to the speculation.

Deputy Roche

I will not mention the three names. There was one other question.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

What are the main stumbling blocks to a successful IGC negotiation?

Deputy Roche

The Deputy wanted to know what issue would resolve it. The essential ingredient is political will and, despite the good work done by the Italian Presidency, that will was not there in December. What we have to do now is listen, assess, encourage and report.

Deputy Quinn mentioned Cyprus. That issue is not on the Council agenda next week but it is an issue that the Presidency is concerned about. The Presidency will continue to encourage all sides to demonstrate the necessary political will on the proposals forwarded by UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, to enable the resolution of this issue. Obviously we want it to be resolved by 1 May to enable a united Cyprus to accede to the Union then.

As for Turkey, the European Council will deal with the progress of the matter. The issue was mentioned at previous European Council meetings. The Taoiseach has had meetings and our views and concerns are well known and have been highlighted in respect of this matter. It is a common view in the House that a united Cyprus should accede to the Union on 1 May if that is possible. It is a view particularly prevalent in Bray as the residents of that town will be hosting the event for Cyprus. I will not diminish this as it is a major concern and is one of the issues on which the Minister for Foreign Affairs will be conferring with Mr. Annan. We are very anxious to see it resolved.

Senator Dardis

I thank the Minister for his presentation and explanation. I do not disagree with his comments on the IGC, or that the issue of the voting balance is dominant. It is dominant but by no means the only issue, and I agree with him in that respect. When accession takes place on 1 May, is one to assume that voting will be on the basis of the Nice formula rather than on the basis of what might emerge, or what is already in the IGC? It will become even more difficult when people become used to the Nice formula if subsequently they are to change to the formula that will emerge from the IGC. The Minister did make a comment as to the urgency of reaching an agreement and suggested the end of the year, with which I agree. When the members become used to a voting system and that voting system requires changing under the constitutional treaty, this will make matters even more difficult.

Deputy Gormley

My question relates to the Commission. A strong effective Commission is absolutely vital if we are to protect the interests of the smaller state. We had the Nice arrangement followed by the Convention, where we had a new arrangement which comprised 15 Commissioners with votes and 15 without votes. Negotiations may take place where we would revert to the larger states having two Commissioners and each member state having one. Which of these options would the Minister favour?

Chairman

That question concludes the general affairs section and we will proceed on to external relations after this.

Deputy Roche

I thank the members. I have to fly to Vienna shortly after 2 p.m. and must leave here before 12.30 p.m. if that is acceptable.

As and from 1 May and right up to the time that any new treaty takes place the Nice arrangements will be the arrangements that apply. On the issue of voting, the attraction of the double majority is that everyone can understand it, 50% plus one of the member states representing 60% of the people. It is easily understood. Try explaining the Nice formula and the eyes of all, including those who explain it, glaze over. I had the experience of explaining the Nice formula on virtually every local radio station in Ireland. It is not easy. The double majority is easier to comprehend and this point was made in the debate in the Dáil yesterday. It is automatic and it will continue forever. Until such time as any new arrangement comes into effect, the Nice arrangements will apply.

On Deputy Gormley's specific question on the Commission, the bottom line of the Irish Government and the major parties has always been equality. As Deputy Gormley pointed out, the Nice arrangement was that member states up to a certain point had equality and at that stage a lesser number of Commissioners were planned. The good point in Nice is that for the very first time it stated there is equality in the member states.

As Deputy Gormley rightly points out, subsequently we had different arrangements and views coming forward in the Convention, in particular the idea that there should be 15 Commissioners with votes and 15 without. Deputy Gormley is fully aware of my personal views on this. I represented the view that we wanted equality at the Convention, not something that was different. My views on that are identical to those of Deputy Gormley. Equality is the issue and that is the position that we take and will carry.

I do not think that the issue of two Commissioners for large member states is a serious runner.

Chairman

We will move on to external relations.

Deputy Andrews

I wish Deputy Roche and his team the best of luck over the coming months. My question is brief and is about the orientation debate on external action. This committee expressed the view that development would be an important goal of the Irish Presidency and I am pleased to note that there will be a one hour debate on this issue. One hour is a very short period and I do not know whether the debate will be serious.

My question concerns the issue of coherence. What challenges does the Minister see to the possibility of achieving a coherent external relations policy given the findings of the Begg committee's report which said that coherence is not a practical possibility given our trade policy? Would the Minister agree that after 30 years of membership of the EU, aid has done nothing for the Third World, above all Africa? A revolutionary change in the attitude to aid is required for there are crises across Africa and the AIDS pandemic has worsened.

My own experience of countries in Africa is that matters have worsened considerably and it is strongly held that aid causes as many problems as it solves. That may sound counter-intuitive but this view is held by many people. Perhaps the Minister could reassure the committee of his commitment to a sea change in attitude to aid and external coherence.

Senator Ormonde

I also wish the Minister well in this consultation process. If we do not complete this process during our Presidency, is there a fear that sides will become so entrenched that it may never happen?

Deputy Quinn

In the external relations on section 4, there is reference to the resolution of the General Assembly of the UN about the wall between Palestine and Israel. Why is it impossible for the European Union to submit a common position to the International Court of Justice for legal reasons? Is this a self-imposed restriction or is it because we do not have a legal personality?

Senator Dardis

I also wondered about the question just asked by Deputy Quinn and ask how this will change when we adopt the new European treaty or constitution. My question also relates to the Middle East peace process and I compliment the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, on the work he has done in the recent past.

In the priorities for the Presidency, it is stated that the road map would be the template for progress. I agree. My question concerns the status of the road map vis-à-vis the Geneva initiative and the degree to which the road map is the only show in town.

My other query is about support for the Palestinian Authority. I note from the briefing that it has severe financial difficulties and I ask how the authority can be sustained. Whatever difficulties - and they are considerable - are there now would be markedly magnified if the authority were to fall. What are the specific proposals for funding the authority and to what degree can the EU assist?

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

I intended raising the Cyprus issue but under the external relations heading rather than general affairs. That is the major outstanding issue before a totally successful accession arrangement can occur on 1 May. The message has to be made clear that Turkey has a key role in ensuring there is a solution to the Cyprus problem. If there is no solution, we will have a divided Cyprus entering the EU. Undoubtedly, that will undermine the prospects for Turkey's accession and consequently destabilise the entire region. This needs to be made clear and is the only way of ensuring that minds are focused and that the UN proposal is realistically dealt with to enable a solution to be reached. The issue is before the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe next week and I am satisfied that will be the forum for the ultimate resolution. I hope that the EU will follow up and press the issue. Time is very short.

In respect of Iran and the way the Guardian Council of clerics, or mullahs, are trying to spancil the reformers, the EU voice is being raised in regard to the fact that a quarter of the candidates are being disqualified, nearly all of them from the side of the reformists, and that President Khatami has protested very strongly. The Minister mentioned that the EU will monitor the situation. Can the EU do any more than that? Is there any cutting edge that can be applied? It is in the interests of democracy and stability in the area to have proper elections. It should be made quite clear that these elections are phoney if genuine candidates are not allowed to stand.

What is the position of the EU in respect of early elections in Afghanistan? There is quite a lot of turmoil in that country on this issue. Has the EU established a position on early rather than late elections?

Chairman

I am glad Deputy Andrews raised his question, as I had intended to raise the same issue. I am glad the orientation debate on the effectiveness of external actions is beginning with this discussion, which is the first one of our Presidency, on development aid. I would like to think that this committee has an input into that and that the Begg committee that we established and which we asked the Government to prioritise has fed through, and that the entire question of Parliament having an input into the EU agenda is working.

One of the matters that jumped out at me from a number of issues covered in the Begg report to this committee is the unspent money which it estimates at €10 billion of the EDS fund. Some €10 billion has never been called up by member states and the Commission has given an undertaking to member states to spend the remaining balance by 2007. That seems to be an extraordinarily long way off and a very difficult thing to understand or defend when we see certain sights daily on television. I urge the Minister to continue to make this a priority in the interests of all the areas in which we have credibility.

I note that the Minister for Foreign Affairs will be attending the inauguration of President Saakashvili in Georgia, but that there are parliamentary elections due in that country on 28 March. Will the European Union monitor those elections or is the Council of Ministers satisfied that the elections will take place in a free and open way?

The Middle East peace process has been mentioned. Has the issue been raised of the Guardian Council in Iran seeking to declare 80 of 290 MPs unsuitable for re-election? Are the ongoing humanitarian needs of Iran after the earthquake being considered? I note that Doctor El Baradei is to submit a report to the board of the IAEA in March on the nuclear issue in respect of Iran. What role will the EU take when that report is received?

Will the Minister tell the committee if China is likely to be one of the more sensitive issues on the agenda? The lifting of the EU embargo on arms sales to China is a very big issue, particularly when there are serious human rights issues and the whereabouts of the anointed successor to the Dalai Lama are unknown. There is a monk who is awaiting execution and organised religion is controlled and banned by the state. If there is to be a lifting of this embargo, will the human rights issue be attached to that move and what consideration has there been in that respect?

Deputy Roche

That is certainly a comprehensive set of questions.

The point raised initially by Deputy Andrews and echoed by the Chairman should be addressed by saying that the dialogue that is commencing is very focused for the first time. Deputy Andrews and the Chairman made the point that one of the anxieties of the Irish Presidency is to elevate the position of Africa on the EU agenda. We believe that the situation in Africa cannot be ignored any longer by the civilised world. Africa has the right to expect that the European Union will play a major role in overcoming the many crises it has. There is the HIV-AIDS pandemic and the issue of wars and civil wars in various parts of Africa. Europe does not just have self interest in this respect but has a moral responsibility.

The Chairman made the point about the unspent funds. There is a capacity problem in absorbing and drawing funds. It is mystifying and both the Chairman and Deputy Andrews are correct about this. When one sees the graphic horrors the people of Africa have to suffer on a daily basis on television it is mystifying why that should be the case.

With regard to the action points for the orientation debate, we want to create a sense of coherence in a Union based approach. The discussions in COREPER will determine how far it is possible to push this issue of coherence. It will be a major achievement for our Presidency if we do push this issue. The action points for the consultation are that, first, reform must include efforts to ensure that the UN economic and social council fulfils effectively the co-ordinated follow-up approaches to implementation of the decisions of global conferences. Second, we wish to see the World Bank and the IMF carrying out their mandates more effectively. In the major conferences ahead and in the UNCTAD eleven conference in Brazil in June, the EU must play a very strong role. Following the breakdown of the Cancun conference the EU has a role to play.

It is not just a question of how one spends the money on aid, it is also a question of how one supports it with an infrastructure for the support of Africa. If Europe and the world community do not deal with the problems of Africa, they will become worse, as they will spill over from other crises.

Yesterday we had a truncated period in which to respond to the debate in the Dáil. We only had ten minutes and I agree with Deputy O'Keeffe on that. It was very disappointing as I wanted to respond to every Deputy who raised the issue.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

That is absolutely true.

Deputy Roche

This committee can take a considerable amount of the credit for the fact that this issue - the Begg committee's report - is factored into the Presidency's programme. The issue of producing coherence and focus arises directly from the work that this committee has done. Those cynics who say that committees do nothing except talk to themselves should know that the good work this committee has done may well inform a change of direction in the European Union. The rewards will be a decent living standard for people in Africa who are currently denied that. I do not understand how any civilised human being can consider that debate boring or "mind-numbing". There is nothing more important in the work that we do than trying to reach out to assist people who have never had the opportunity of living a civilised life that we all take so much for granted.

A number of members, including the Chairman and Deputy Quinn, touched on the issue of the wall between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The draft resolution for the referral of the legality of the security fence, as it is called, was put to the General Assembly last December. The European Union adopted a common position of abstention on the issue. However, no position was taken on making a submission to the court, as consensus among the European member states does not exist. That is the harsh reality. Our views on the issue of the wall and the likely short, medium and long term implications are well known. We have established the Middle East as a very high priority on the external side. In the original document on the Presidency programme we elevated Africa, while the Middle East peace process was very high on that agenda. An important aspect of our work is that Ireland now, with Mr. Solana, represents the EU on the quartet. We will press for such progress as can be made for it is a very intractable problem. Senator Dardis made the point that the road map is the only game in town. He is absolutely correct. It is the only way forward and that should be realised.

Iran was raised by Deputy O'Keeffe——

Senator Dardis

I raised the matter of the funding of the Palestinian Authority.

Deputy Roche

The European Union has been a very significant supporter of the Palestinian Authority. Unfortunately, much of the good work that was invested has now been destroyed. The EU is still and intends to remain the main funding organisation. It is a tragedy so much of the funding from the taxpayers of Europe that has gone into supporting the authority has been destroyed. It is a difficult task because the authority has to be supported if it is to deliver its side of the deal.

On Iran, Deputy O'Keeffe mentioned the Guardian Council and specifically raised its ruling out of about a quarter of the candidates. We are very concerned at the decision of the Guardian Council to disqualify a large number of candidates, including 80 of the current 290 MPs. We will continue to monitor developments.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

It would be a handy way of changing the Government.

Deputy Roche

I can see the attractions of it from the Deputy's point of view. From a democratic viewpoint, it has very little to commend it. We urge the Governing Council to seriously consider its decision. There is an ongoing EU-Iran human rights dialogue and it will be part of that dialogue.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

Is there a cutting edge to that dialogue? Do they take any notice of the views of the EU?

Deputy Roche

To be fair, I think they do. It is a personal view. From my own contacts with Iranians, they are conscious and are particularly aware of the views of the European Union. There has been a significant amount of change on the Iranian side on the nuclear issue, for example. The fact that El Baradei is going there, that they have signed up, that they are agreeing to allow the IAEA in - these are all significant concessions.

The work that has been done by the Iranians in that area should not be dismissed lightly. We should try to see matters from the other's viewpoint. If one tries to understand the Iranian viewpoint, that is big progress. This other matter is a step backwards and in the wrong direction, as the Deputy has said. It is simply not acceptable to rule out a very significant proportion of members from contesting elections.

Senator Ormonde touched on the issue of the IGC and the time horizon. The Senator is correct. Returning to the point made by Deputy Quinn, the window of opportunity is narrow. Europe is not a static place, governments change, the new Commission will take office, the new Parliament will be elected, all the major actors will change. We are now facing the debate on the next round of financial perspectives. We must resolve the issues. If a will is present, the way will be found.

Finally, there were the issues of Turkey and Afghanistan.

Chairman

And China.

Deputy Roche

China, too. My apologies, Chairman. The arms embargo issue was raised by the Chairman and is the last issue left over from Tiananmen Square. There are different viewpoints taken on the embargo. As holders of the EU Presidency, we will try to take forward the review in line with the decision of the December Council. This will be an expert review and it is likely that the General Affairs Council of 26 January will refer the matter to an expert group. It is a sensitive issue and one where there are differences. I am afraid that I cannot go any further.

On Turkey, in high-level bilateral contact our anxiety has been made clear that the issue of Cyprus should be resolved. It has also been made clear that the Cyprus issue should not be seen as an automatic ticket. The review of the Turkish application has to come forward later in the year and the requirements will the criteria set out in Copenhagen. The two matters should not be confused. If the issue in Cyprus is to be resolved, it can only be resolved with the help and assistance of Turkey. It is equally clear that if is not resolved, that will reflect on the view that member states will take towards Turkey later in the year. I do not wish to go further on that.

We have already indicated a strong support for the new constitution of Afghanistan. It represents a fundamental step in the peace process which was established in the Bonn agreement that parliamentary and presidential elections should take place. Deputy O'Keeffe asked specifically whether we would monitor the elections.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

Is there pressure to have them sooner rather than later? I got the feeling that the Americans wanted elections later but there is pressure to have them earlier. Has the EU taken a stand?

Deputy Roche

We supported the holding of the presidential elections and the putting in place of the security and the organisational conditions for the parliamentary elections. I am sorry - I am confusing these elections with another set of parliamentary elections. Parliamentary elections are never far from my mind. The Deputy is quite right. There has not been a final date. We wish that maximum progress should be made.

Georgia's new leaders have the chance of a fresh start in a country which has been in difficulties and the European Union wants to play a full part in that. We want to help them build on the work of the Commission in recent weeks in the area of immediate needs and also to achieve as much reform as they can on a very large reform agenda. Deputy O'Keeffe will be aware that the issues are very large. We also see the preparation for parliamentary elections in March as very important. The Deputy asked whether we would monitor those elections.

Chairman

I asked that.

Deputy Roche

My apologies, the Chairman asked whether they will be monitored. There were observers from the EU at the January presidential election. I am not sure whether a decision has been formally made on that but I assume that there will be monitors.

I am conscious of the time.

Chairman

We have concluded that business. Before we let the Minister go, I wish to add something. Yesterday in the Dáil the Taoiseach paid strong compliments to this committee. As it was a scripted comment, it was clearly intended to be said. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, has also done so and this morning the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, did so. I express the appreciation of the committee for that. Collectively, we work long hours. Sometimes, we wonder whether anybody knows that we are here and we have made the effort over the last 18 months. It is appreciated that those comments are made. I thank the Minister again for his comments this morning.

Deputy Roche

Thank you for that, Chairman. I add that I met with the Danish and UK counterparts of this committee earlier this week. The Danish model was one that we always held up and was always discussed. In Ireland, we have a dreadful inclination to downplay anything we do which is positive. It is possibly a post-colonial hang-up. It is a tragedy that the good work of this committee is not better covered than it is. I await with interest the occasion when RTE will cover the work of this committee verbatim. Ireland is playing a very significant role, which is informed by the hard work of this committee. The points made by the Taoiseach yesterday in his scripted remarks were well deserved praise, not simply politesse or diplomacy. The reality is that a functioning committee on European Affairs is critically important in keeping a Government on its toes - that is part of democracy - and in keeping the public informed. It is a pity that people dismiss such work as boring. People with short attention spans will never focus for a sufficiently long time to understand the good work of the committee. A monument to that work is the manner in which the work of the Begg committee has fed through to the Irish Presidency which is now focusing on development issues in Africa, which are of concern to every Irish citizen and every civilised person world-wide. The role of this committee is not insignificant and has changed dramatically in the past few years.

Let me pay a personal tribute to the Chairman and the members of the committee. It is critically important that the work of the committee is recognised. It has informed Government policy and that is as it should be.

Chairman

When Ireland previously held the EU Presidency, Deputy Quinn was a Minister and Deputy J. O'Keeffe and I at different times were Ministers of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for European affairs. We, therefore, appreciate the pressures under which Deputy Roche labours and wish him well during the coming months.

We have an important matter to deal with in private session.

The joint committee went into private session at 12.22 p.m. and adjourned at 12.40 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 22 January 2004.