Item No. 1 is the discussion on the forthcoming General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting. I welcome the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his officials. We realise the important issues that now face the Minister, this committee and the country concerning the forthcoming meeting in Luxembourg. I will now hand the floor to the Minister.
GAERC Meeting: Discussion with Minister for Foreign Affairs.
I thank the Chairman and members of the joint committee for their invitation to assess and review this month's agenda for the General Affairs and External Relations Council, which will be the last under the Czech Presidency.
Before embarking on a preview of the extensive agenda, I want to preface my statement with a summary of developments at the May Council. The principal item discussed during the General Affairs session of last month's meeting was the European Council agenda. At last month's GAERC it was not anticipated that the Lisbon treaty would be discussed. However, during initial remarks, member states availed of the opportunity to express their support for Ireland. The Presidency assured partners that they would do their utmost to reach a successful conclusion of the negotiations on our legal guarantees. Member states were supportive of the approach being taken, that is, to flesh out the substance of the guarantees promised to Ireland at the December European Council on taxation, defence, the provisions of the Constitution on the right to life, education and family, and the solemn declaration on workers' rights. This, of course, will be in addition to the agreement we reached in December, that each member state will retain a Commissioner in the event that the Treaty of Lisbon enters into force.
There were still a number of outstanding issues at that stage that remained to be negotiated in the intervening period. Detailed and intensive work is taking place in Brussels at official level and in recent weeks I have engaged with a number of colleagues on the matter.
Discussion on external relations issues focused on Sri Lanka, which was of particular interest to members of the committee last month. The Council reiterated its call on the Government of Sri Lanka to proceed urgently towards a comprehensive political process. We called on the government and the LTTE to take all necessary steps to prevent further loss of life. We also called for the alleged violations of international humanitarian law and human rights to be investigated through an independent inquiry. Looking ahead, there are three main priorities now that the conflict is over. First, we must ensure the safety and welfare of all displaced civilians and ensure that they have access to humanitarian support. Second, a post-conflict strategy must be put in place without delay. This will need to focus on reconstruction, economic and social development, and the restoration of basic services in the north. Third, an inclusive reconciliation and peace process must be initiated. I welcome the Sri Lankan president's stated intention to pursue a negotiated settlement with the Tamil community and I very much hope that this can begin at an early date.
The General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting in May also dealt with development co-operation matters. Ireland was represented by the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power. An important aspect of the current global financial and economic situation is its impact in developing countries. The Minister of State and his EU colleagues agreed on Council conclusions which will form the EU position for the upcoming high level UN conference on the crisis. The focus of the EU's response is on quick impact, short-term measures which will give special attention to the most vulnerable developing countries with limited resilience capacity. Ireland supports the EU's efforts to use all the sources and instruments available to leverage assistance aimed at stimulating growth, investment, trade and job creation in the developing world.
There was a discussion on transatlantic co-operation between the United States and Europe in the development field. The Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, informed our EU partners about recent bilateral contacts with the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, during which co-operation on food security was discussed.
Economic partnership agreements between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific countries were also discussed. At the meeting, the Trade Commissioner Catherine Ashton referred to the need for flexibility in the negotiations. This is an important point for Ireland and the Minister of State called for the different requirements of each ACP state to be respected. He also urged that full use should be made of all available WTO mechanisms for flexibility in the ongoing negotiations.
Turning to next week's GAERC meeting, the principal general affairs agenda item is preparation of the European Council. We do not anticipate that the meetings next Monday and Tuesday will engage in a lengthy discussion of the legal guarantees or the outcome of the European Council, as negotiations will be ongoing at both official and political level. Political sign off on the guarantees will take place at the European Council. Member states are being as helpful as possible to us, but at this stage it is about finding a balance between the legal guarantees that we require to meet the concerns of the Irish people and respecting the already-completed ratification procedures of other member states. With the exception of taxation, our guarantees will be Ireland-specific. We have to be careful that in getting what we want we do not upset procedures for others. We have made clear, however, that these guarantees will form a key part of any package that is put to the people in another referendum.
We are confident of a successful outcome at the June Council, which promotes both the interests of Ireland and of Europe. The results of the European elections have shown that Irish people want us to move forward and remain at the heart of Europe. Parties opposed to the treaty have no mandate to continue working against the best interests of this country. One year on, there is still no sign of their much heralded plan B. The "back to the future" slogans did not work. Our future is firmly at the heart of the European Union and we are working to secure this.
The Government has already secured the important concession of retaining one Commissioner per member state and is close to agreeing legal guarantees on the concerns raised last year. Reaching an agreement which matches the expectations of the people and fulfils the promise made in December is our immediate priority in these negotiations.
At its meeting on 18 May, Ministers held a preliminary discussion of the first draft of the annotated draft agenda of the June European Council, including the areas of economic, financial and social situation, climate change and sustainable development. The GAERC meeting next Monday is not expected to dwell in detail on these issues.
Finance Ministers agreed a number of dossiers at their ECOFIN meeting on 9 June, including strengthening European financial supervision, a report on the first six months of the European economic recovery plan, and on a report on bank support schemes in member states. These issues will be taken up by Heads of State and Government at the European Council.
On climate change, the key issue for the European Council will be to ensure that the Union continues to play a leading role in preparing for the Copenhagen conference on climate change, which takes place next December.
Turning to the external relations agenda at next week's meeting, there are two items of particular interest to Ireland, namely, the Middle East peace process and Cuba. Looking first at the Middle East peace process, the Council is scheduled to have a broad discussion of developments in the region, following the failure to have any discussion at the May GAERC. Substantive conclusions, the first since January, are due to be adopted, while the Council is also likely to consider and adopt conclusions following last Sunday's parliamentary elections in Lebanon. En marge of the GAERC, the annual EU-Israel Association Council is due to take place and this will provide the first opportunity for substantive exchanges with the new Israeli Government and its Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman. This month’s discussion will be extremely timely for a variety of reasons. The first and most obvious is the continuing deterioration in the overall situation on the ground. The humanitarian situation in Gaza remains very serious, with no end to the blockade in sight. The prospects for Palestinian reconciliation remain bleak, with renewed fighting and tensions between Hamas and Fatah-affiliated Palestinian security forces reported in recent days. Perhaps of most concern is the continuing expansion of settlements and evidence of forced evictions in the West Bank, which, apart from being contrary to international law and a serious obstacle to peace negotiations, carry the very real risk of inciting tensions and sparking renewed conflict throughout the Palestinian territories.
The dangers of the current situation are abundantly clear. As President Obama has remarked: "The current trajectory in the region is profoundly negative." If there is any cause for optimism at the moment, it comes from the clear leadership and commitment which President Obama and his Administration, including Secretary of State Clinton, are demonstrating in order to get the Middle East peace process back on track, and to have serious negotiations resumed between the Netanyahu government and the Palestinian Authority led by President Abbas.
President Obama's inspiring speech on US-Muslim relations in Cairo last Thursday has clearly set out what is required to be done if the current negative trends are to be reversed. The Netanyahu government must commit to the two-state solution and halt all expansion of settlements. The Palestinians must abandon all violence and develop their capacity to govern. What was also notable was President Obama's call upon Hamas to accept its responsibilities and play its role in fulfilling Palestinian national aspirations by ending violence, recognising past agreements and also Israel's right to exist.
The European Union needs to complement the clear and unambiguous messages delivered by President Obama in Cairo by transmitting some clear messages of its own at this time. In particular, with a view to the Association Council with Israel, we need to reinforce the call upon the Netanyahu government to give clear evidence of its commitment to honour previous agreements and actively pursue a negotiated two-state solution. Prime Minister Netanyahu is due to deliver a major policy address next Sunday, following an internal policy review within his office. I look forward to this providing evidence of a positive response to the many calls which have been made in recent weeks, not least by President Obama and his Administration, for a new approach by Israel, particularly on the vexed issue of settlements and the everyday unjust restrictions imposed on ordinary Palestinians.
I refer to the proposed upgrade of relations with Israel which the Council approved last December and which will be considered at the association Council meeting with Foreign Minister Lieberman. As Deputies will be aware, I have consistently argued that the upgrade can only realistically take place in the context of overall developments in the peace process. I believe that this view is now shared by a clear majority of my European Union counterparts and continues to be the only realistic approach, in light of all that has happened since December last. While discussions at official level are continuing in Brussels, I am reasonably confident that this is the line that will prevail and that the discussions with Foreign Minister Lieberman on Monday next will make clear that the basic political conditions do not exist on the ground at present for proceeding with the upgrade in political relations agreed at the December GAERC.
The Council is also due to adopt conclusions welcoming the peaceful outcome of the parliamentary elections in Lebanon on 7 June which saw the re-election of the outgoing 14 March coalition led by Prime Minister Siniora. These were crucial and historic elections for Lebanon and their successful conduct, confirmed by both the EU and other international observers, represents a triumph for Lebanese democracy and will hopefully contribute to overall stability and the pursuit of peace within the region.
Cuba is on the agenda as each year in June the Council undertakes a review of the Common Position on Cuba. Updated Council conclusions, which are currently under discussion, will be adopted. The Common Position was adopted in 1996 and remains the main context for the European Union's relationship with Cuba. It is intended to encourage a process of peaceful transition towards a pluralist democracy, promote human rights and improve the living conditions of the Cuban people. The EU seeks a constructive engagement with Cuba and a dialogue with both the authorities and civil society.
Ireland wishes to continue to improve relations with the Cuban Government, although we remain concerned about human rights violations in Cuba and strongly favour continued dialogue also with the political opposition and civil society. For the European Union to have influence during this transition period, it is important for us to remain engaged with Cuba and to develop dialogue, both with the authorities and with civil society.
That concludes my comments on the agenda for next week's General Affairs and External Relations Council. I thank colleagues for their attention and as ever, I would be delighted to hear the views of the committee on the agenda items of next week's important meeting for Ireland and for Europe.
There are a couple of issues I want to raise. Could the Minister indicate when the referendum on the Lisbon treaty will take place? Am I given to understand that at the end of the Council meeting next week the Minister expects to be in a position to outline or publish the guarantees that will be agreed?
The EU-Israel association agreement was mentioned by the Minister. Are negotiations on its upgrade still ongoing or are they on ice? Is the Minister saying that he is recommending that the agreement not be upgraded or that such will be the policy position adopted by the EU? He might clarify that.
In addition, this is the last meeting before the end of June at which the Minister will be present to compliment the Czech Republic on its Presidency of the EU and to wish the Swedes the best of luck in the six months ahead.
I thank the Minister for attending and giving us a review of what happened at the previous GAERC meeting. It is worthwhile to hear what issues were addressed and how they panned out.
Like Deputy Timmins, I also seek further clarification on the Lisbon treaty talks. The Minister stated that the summit will follow shortly after the GAERC meeting and that is where the major decisions will be taken, but can he give us a preview of what form the legal guarantees are taking? A report in a newspaper today indicates that some of the issues are running into a head wind from some of the European countries which express concerns about their detail, expression and general format. How is it proposed the guarantees will be implemented and what will be their status? Will they have the status of being lodged with the United Nations and then being appended to a future treaty? What is the thinking on these matters? Can the Minister bring us up to date on the current position?
There is the issue of a referendum date. Is the Government still seeking to hold the referendum in October? If so, what sort of procedure will be followed within the Oireachtas over the next month or so to put everything in place, both in terms of the guarantees that have been sought and the declaration of workers' rights, and, indeed, putting our own domestic house in order in terms of issues that might need to be addressed legislatively in addition to the referendum legislation?
I ask the Minister to elaborate on the financial regulation and supervision decisions likely to be taken. Essentially, are we likely to adopt the de Larosière report, into which this committee made a considerable input and which was broadly welcomed here? Will that be a function of the Council's work next week? Certainly, it would be valuable because the markets are still unstable. I would welcome the idea that the European Union would take a proactive role in ensuring that regulation and supervision would be a broader and more collective function than simply the domestic one, with the complexities of all of that.
On enlargement, is the Minister stating that it is likely that Croatia's accession to the European Union will be delayed? Are the two obstacles he mentioned likely to be serious matters? I would have thought that the access to the sea or coastline dispute was a matter that need not be resolved prior to the accession and could be easily resolved down the road in much the same way as the Cypriot accession.
It seems there is an impossible situation continuing in the Middle East, even worse than it had been. One would have thought there would have been some progress over the intervening period. It is nearly six months since the invasion of Gaza and none of the reconstruction plans have been implemented. Apparently, the Israeli blockade continues and the settlements continue. The picture seems bleak and the fighting between Hamas and Fatah continues. Are we operating in virtual reality, where there is overarching diplomacy going ahead in one direction and action on the ground going in a diametrically opposed direction? What is being said bears no relationship to what is happening. The situation in the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian territories is worse than it was and there is no sign of any progress being made, despite President Obama's welcome speech, which seemed to be received enthusiastically, in which there was something for everybody. Nevertheless, are we going backwards rather than forwards?
I very much welcome the progress made on Cuba and the worthwhile initiative the Minister himself has taken in that respect. Ireland should be to the fore among the member states in pushing for the development of diplomatic relationships on a broad range of areas from culture to education and health as quickly as we can manage to do it.
I thank the Minister for his presentation. It is obvious from what he said that the Lisbon treaty remains the most important issue on the EU agenda. Acceptance of the treaty is critical for Ireland and other member states. Whatever about a date for the holding of the next referendum, it is vital that the guarantees, etc., we are seeking should be agreed with and ratified by our partners in Europe in order that there will be no ambiguity about the future of either the treaty or the Union when we consult the people on the matter. The next four to six weeks are extremely important in the context of ensuring that a conclusion is reached with regard to the legal guarantees we are seeking in order that Ireland and the Union might proceed on an agreed basis.
As previous speakers stated, the EU-Israel situation is extremely important. President Obama's speech last week in Cairo was, from the point of view of the United States, one of the most important contributions in the area of external affairs. It is important that the European Union should provide a clear message at its meeting on Monday next, and at the meeting of the Heads of Council later next week, that it is working in conjunction with the United States to exert maximum pressure to ensure that there will be progress, common sense, dialogue and an acknowledgement of the rights of all of the parties involved in the conflict in the Middle East. It is time the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Mr. Javier Solana, was given clear instructions to indicate that the Union, with the support of the United States, will exert the pressure to which I refer. It is important that the pressure be exerted in a bilateral way in order to try to bring about a resolution to the conflict in that unfortunate region.
The Minister also referred to Sri Lanka. I hope equity can be achieved with regard to the situation in that country and that the Tamil people will be treated with respect. Ireland has a long history of links with the Tamils, many of whom continue to work in this country. They are fine, decent and honourable people who have rights. I hope that the sad situation in their country is finally reaching a conclusion. I hope the rights of the Tamils will be secured, copperfastened and protected in any agreement that is reached. I hope the Union can play its part in bringing about such an agreement.
I thank the Minister for his contribution and I wish him and his colleagues well. As already stated, the Lisbon treaty is vital and we must ensure that the Union moves towards a single objective of ratifying it as quickly as possible.
I welcome the Minister and his officials. I wish to focus on the Lisbon treaty. I am concerned with regard to how the treaty has been dealt with by the Minister and the Government in recent months. It is bizarre that neither the Minister nor the Taoiseach has at any stage referred to the work of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union, which was charged with examining the fallout from the referendum on the Lisbon treaty and considering ways in which we could create conditions whereby people might feel more comfortable with regard to Ireland's role in the EU and how we deal with legislation emanating from that source. The sub-committee put forward specific proposals in respect of bolstering European Union scrutiny and how we deal with EU legislation and also offered a series of other recommendations. However, its work appears to have fallen by the wayside. On a number of occasions during Question Time I have inquired with the Minister about the matter and to say that he has been evasive would probably be an understatement.
Some six months or more since the sub-committee reported, there does not appear to have been any firm action from the Government in respect of its recommendations. I am disappointed in that regard. I would like a debate or dialogue to take place between the Opposition and the Government in respect of the text of the treaty and the legal guarantees that have been sought. The Taoiseach provided a firm commitment to the effect that meaningful dialogue would take place with the Opposition but this has not been the case. The leader of the Fine Gael Party will certainly testify to that and I am sure Deputy Gilmore, the leader of the Labour Party, would do likewise. Dialogue has not taken place and it appears the door has again been closed. This is the same mistake the Government made on the previous occasion. It appears that this Administration has not learned from the mistakes of the recent past.
What is happening is absolutely bizarre. If this represents the start of the referendum campaign, I hope the Government will get its act together in the coming weeks and months. I understand the Taoiseach gave a commitment to hold the second referendum in October. However, he appears to have become evasive with regard to this matter in recent weeks. If the second referendum is to take place in the autumn, then the information campaign, the dialogue with the Opposition and the engagement with members of the public must all begin now. I understand that there is a need for comprehensive discussions, bilateral and otherwise, with other member states. However, there is also a need for such discussions to take place on the domestic front and this is not happening. I am extremely disappointed with what has happened and I am interested in hearing the Minister's response in that regard.
Like the Minister, I am extremely concerned with regard to the acceleration in settlement expansion and the forced evictions that are taking place in the West Bank. The European Council needs to send out a strong message next week to the effect that this is totally unacceptable. I witnessed at first hand the difficulties experienced by the Palestinian people. The position in Gaza remains serious and we must ensure that what Israel is doing remains high on the international agenda. The Obama Administration in the United States has become involved. As previous speakers indicated, President Obama's speech in Cairo last week was significant.
It is important that a strong message be sent to Israel next week that the acceleration of forced evictions, which is a violation of people's human rights, and the expansion of the settlements are completely unacceptable. If what is happening is allowed to continue, it will give rise to extreme turmoil in the region.
I accept that the situation in Sri Lanka is not on the agenda for next week's meeting. However, it is important that the political process should remain in place in that country. The Sri Lankan Government should continue to include the Tamil people in that process, otherwise a new generation of terrorists will be created.
I apologise that I was obliged to leave the meeting to attend a vote in the Seanad and, as a result, I may have missed some of what the Minister stated. My first point relates to the Lisbon treaty. There is a definite need for those promoting a "Yes" vote to speak with one voice. One of the reasons the previous referendum was lost was that the "Yes" campaign began much later than the "No" campaign. In addition, the "No" campaign was much more professional in nature.
My second point relates to enlargement, a matter to which the Minister may have referred. I am aware that he mentioned Croatia and Turkey. What is the position with regard to Iceland joining the European Union? From reports I have read, I understand it is quite likely that Iceland's application to join will be fast-tracked. I also understand that Iceland's previous difficulty with regard to joining the Union, namely, in the context of its fisheries policy, is now less of a factor. Will the Minister indicate if there is an agreement between Croatia and Slovenia with regard to the dispute in which they were involved?
My final point relates to North Korea, which may not be on the agenda for next week's meeting. We should speak with one voice in respect of this matter. If, as seems to be the case, North Korea has declared that the peace treaty of 1953 is no longer acceptable, is Europe prepared to make its views known in that regard?
I thank the Minister for his presentation. The committee has discussed the situation in the Middle East, both with him and in his absence, on many previous occasions. Unfortunately, Europe has not followed through on its commitments in respect of the Middle East or on its capacity to deal with the situation there. We are again playing second fiddle in that we are following the lead taken by President Obama.
That is one of the fundamental problems with the Union's approach to external relations. The Minister has been forthright in his desire that the Union take a much more active role in dealing with this issue. Unfortunately, that has not sunk in with other member states. The downgrading rather than the upgrading of relations should be under discussion, as well as sanctions. The Minister has been proactive in dealing with this issue and keeping it to the fore, but other member states have sought to sit back. The Union has allowed the United States to take a lead role on eastern European issues, as it has done many times in the past, and I am not sure that is in our best interests. I compliment the Minister on his continued efforts in this regard. I hope more members states will be as active in trying to resolve this difficult issue.
Item No. 497 on our correspondence list is a letter from the Minister, dated 12 May, in which he provides at the committee's request information on proposals in connection with the Lisbon treaty and the recommendations of the sub-committee. He states:
In the context of our ongoing work on the legal guarantees promised to Ireland by the December European Council, I have been giving further consideration to the Sub-Committee's recommendations. I look forward to engaging with the JCEA on these issues in the coming period.
In the meantime, I would make the following comments on the main recommendations of the Sub-Committee's report.
1. Ireland's Future in the EU: Issues and Options
I support the Committee's view that we must keep Ireland at the heart of Europe whilst respecting the democratic will of the Irish people by arranging for their concerns to be accommodated by the other Member States. We are committed to giving full effect to the Conclusions of the December 2008 European Council, including the legal guarantees in relation to the right to life, education and the family. As our work on the legal guarantees advances, the Government will, of course, be engaging with other parties in the Oireachtas, as well as the Joint Committee on European Affairs, so as to secure maximum levels of support for the package of guarantees which we hope will be agreed at the June European Council.
He then addresses issues under the heading, "Beyond Lisbon: Public Understanding of the EU and Ireland's Membership", and lists a number of actions taken as follows:
- Under the Communicating Europe Initiative, I have approved grants totalling €292,000 for 41 civil society projects to raise awareness about Ireland’s membership of the European Union and to celebrate Europe Day on May 9th.
- A new website will be launched next month as an authoritative reference point for the facts about Ireland’s membership of the European Union.
- A major public information campaign to inform and promote public awareness of Ireland’s membership of the European Union will be launched this Summer.
- Proposals to develop new materials for the Civil, Social and Political Education syllabus...
- Co-operation with the European Commission and the European Parliament on communications about Ireland’s EU membership has also intensified with the conclusion of a Memorandum of Understanding between these Institutions and my Department on communicating what the EU is doing across a whole range of areas such as the economy, the environment and the EU’s role in the world.
The Minister addressed these points in this letter, but we did not have the opportunity to deal with it until today.
A few other issues need to be borne in mind. It is important that the Minister secures the confidence of his EU colleagues in approving the accommodation sought by the Irish electorate following its rejection of the treaty. Unfortunately, we will have only one shot at this and if we do not get it right, we will have a serious problem. I do not attribute blame to anybody, but that is the position in which we find ourselves. This is the most important issue the country has had to deal with since accession to the European Union.
The Minister has mentioned the need for Ireland to remain at the centre of Europe and, in addressing the outstanding issues, it must be borne in mind that every opt-out brings us closer to the periphery. Other member states must bear in mind that pushing another member state to the outer rim of European institutions is not in the interests of the member state involved or the European Union as a whole. It could have a serious effect on the evolution of the Union. By virtue of its success in the past 50 years, the Union cannot afford a setback, particularly at this sensitive time.
The enlargement issue also needs to be addressed because a slowdown in enlargement would bring about a change of focus and a perception within the European Union that there was no great urgency and everything could be deferred indefinitely, which would not be a good idea.
Deputy Timmins referred to the position pertaining to timing and data relating to the Lisbon treaty. I met the Deputy earlier in his capacity as Opposition spokesperson on foreign affairs and took him through the issues and texts in detail. I also met him two weeks ago prior to the European elections and have met him on a regular basis in the past while. He has an understanding of the direction in which I am headed. I also met Deputy Costello a fortnight ago and a meeting is scheduled at 3 p.m. between Deputies Gilmore and Costello, the Taoiseach and me. Deputy Kenny was unable to meet the Taoiseach this morning through no fault of his own but these contacts will continue. People were anxious that the Lisbon treaty not become embroiled in the European election campaign. There was an understanding among political parties that this could lead to another cycle of manipulation and exploitation of issues.
A series of bilateral meetings takes place today and tomorrow. For the past month our officials have been involved in ongoing bilateral engagements with officials of the other 26 member states on the various issues relating to the guarantees. I hope most member states are au fait with the detail of our texts which the Presidency received yesterday, although officials would have had a fair knowledge of their content. However, when it comes to legal decisions and European diplomacy, we are into the discussions on language and so on in the four main areas. In the guarantee space, this involves the ethical questions, the security and defence issue and neutrality and taxation. The declaration involves workers’ rights and social progress.
I have had discussions with foreign Ministers. I was due to visit Germany on Tuesday and Sweden yesterday, where I would have met 17 other foreign Ministers, but I had to stay in Dublin because of the vote of confidence. However, I have been in telephone contact with a number of Ministers to clarify issues with them.
Deputy Timmins asked whether plans were on schedule. Last December we undertook that we would put this issue to the people upon agreement on the guarantees in advance of the formation of the next Commission. That is still the timeline. Therefore, it does not take a rocket scientist to work out the timeframe from this. I agree with the Opposition that it would have been wrong to force a rerun of the Lisbon treaty referendum campaign before the European elections. The Government will decide on the precise date of the referendum and communicate it to the Opposition. We will also take on board the views of Opposition Members. I have already got Deputy Timmins's view on what might be the optimal time line and I am happy to take other views on board also.
On the issues raised by Deputy Costello, different countries have different perspectives. One country might, for example, have issues about security defence in so far as it might affect that country, but others would have a different view. There is a wide spectrum of views on the issue and people are sensitive to how the guarantees for Ireland on certain issues will be perceived domestically in their political system. We must be sensitive to that.
Deputy Costello asked how the Lisbon treaty would be implemented. There are two aspects to it. When and if the Lisbon treaty is ratified, it will create new treaties. Our position is that the decision in the June Council is a legal decision and has significant legal strength and validity in its own right. President Sarkozy made it clear in the press conference afterwards that those legal guarantees would, at the earliest possible opportunity — the Croatian accession treaty was mentioned — be annexed to or attached to the new treaties created by virtue of the passage of the Lisbon treaty. There will be discussions on those important issues leading up to the European Council meeting next week.
Deputy Timmins asked for clarification on the Israel Council. We do not believe the basic political conditions exist currently to proceed with the upgrade in political relations agreed at the December GAERC. The speech to be made by Prime Minister Netanyahu on Sunday is critical, following the Israeli review of Israel's position on all of the issues. I agree with Deputy Costello. I quoted President Obama's description of the current position when he said the trajectory is one of profound negativity. I agree. That is all the more disappointing because the American Administration has clearly prioritised the issue. President Obama and US Secretary of State Clinton have demonstrated a clear, even-handed approach, as has the appointment of George Mitchell. What the Deputy calls the overarching diplomacy presents a wonderful opportunity, but the situation on the ground could not be worse in terms of the disunity within the Palestinians, the lack of clarity from the Israeli Government with regard to support of a two-state solution, the acceleration of forced evictions in east Jerusalem and the continuing expansion of settlements. This must stop. Everybody must desire to bring the peace process forward. They need to not only bring it on track, but to go for it. We must create conditions on the ground to enable people to move and enable things to happen.
On financial regulations, Ireland is broadly in favour of a European framework for the global situation and of the European supervisory framework which was prompted by the publication of the de Larosière report in February. We welcome that report and support the Commission's communication on it. Some countries have issues with it. Britain has an issue in terms of the scope and decision making powers of that new authority. It is natural to get that type of play and tug of war with regard to the remit. However, given what we have experienced, it is something we broadly support.
The accession of Croatia is bogged down due to the dispute with Slovenia and the maritime border issue, but Commissioner Olli Rehn has worked hard to try and propose a mediation mechanism to resolve the issue. There are also some issues with Croatia's engagement with the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia, ICTY, and some member states have particular concerns about that. Ireland broadly supports Croatian accession and would like to see a solution to the issues and to see the discussions on the various chapters continue, but genuine mediation mechanisms should be put in place to resolve the ongoing disputes.
I welcome Deputy Costello's support for our position on Cuba and my decision to visit it. The committee should consider parliamentary engagement with Cuban parliamentarians. Such engagement is important and President Obama has given a lead in that regard. The winds of change are blowing and Ireland needs to be involved. Countries like Canada and others are strongly engaged with Cuba. Change will follow dialogue and engagement and I expect we will see change in that arena.
I agree 100% with Deputy Treacy that the key issue with regard to the Lisbon treaty is that there is no ambiguity and that the legal guarantees are secured. He was correct to draw our attention to the inspirational address President Obama gave to the Muslim world. It was a significant and well received speech that opens up new horizons. His proactive engagement makes people in some states or countries uncomfortable, because the old securities are gone. Sometimes it is nice for a state to always have an enemy so that it can galvanise its forces and say "We must all work together against this great evil".
However, when this changes and this other state wants to be a friend, it can be uncomfortable. We can see that happening with some states. With regard to our perspective and international foreign policy, we are very positive about the manner in which President Obama has taken to the international stage, the thematic approach he has adopted and the way he reaches out to communities like the Muslim community. That is good for the world overall and dovetails with our historic position in the international arena on these issues.
I accept the Deputy's point with regard to Sri Lanka, that there is a humanitarian issue, the displacement of so many civilians. Without question, there is an imperative for a post-conflict strategic approach. We take some comfort from the fact that the Government of Sri Lanka is committing itself to reaching an accommodation with the Tamil community. This cannot be solved by a military victory. Therefore, there must be genuine substantive engagement with a view to creating a political template that facilitates, respects and provides for parity of esteem for the Tamil community and that will remove all that has given rise to conflict in the past.
Deputy Creighton raised an issue relating to the Lisbon treaty. Perhaps she was not aware of the contact I had with Deputy Timmins about the text and ——
It is important to clarify the matter. Deputy Enda Kenny raised this on the Order of Business yesterday or the previous day. The Minister is well aware that his contact was in the past week or so, but we have heard nothing for six months.
I will let Deputy Creighton in again when the Minister has finished.
It is important to clarify that.
The Minister, without interruption.
I have been in regular contact with Deputy Timmins. Prior to the European Parliament elections, I was in contact with a number of Opposition spokespeople and the view was that I was doing the correct thing by not embroiling the issues and the text in the European Parliament elections. I have had detailed discussion and have shared the text with Deputy Timmins and he has looked at them. We will continue to work on it. The election is over ——
Just a clarification, this morning, ——
I know, just a short while ago, I said that.
There will be an opportunity to ask questions and raise issues again. The Minister, without interruptions, please.
I wish to put that on the record to avoid any ambiguity about it.
This morning.
There were discussions before this morning. There is no——
I wish to clarify that the other member states only received the text within the past few days also.
We have been engaged with the member states for the past number of weeks but the detailed text would have been with the President.
To conclude——
(Interruptions).
Deputy Breen's mediating role is appreciated.
The Clare men were always good at that.
The other point I wish to make——
(Interruptions).
Order, please.
The Chairman very helpfully pointed out that we have communicated to the committee on the report of the sub-committee and he outlined the correspondence I engaged in with the committee. I have also made it clear on a number of occasions here that I support the idea of scrutiny which of course is a matter for a domestic decision and not a matter for the European member states to decide or arbitrate upon. It is matter for us as an Oireachtas to decide on the precise scrutiny measures we should undertake.
My view is that we should have a scrutiny measure in the Oireachtas. Ideally we should have this type of exercise with all Ministers and this is not the case at the moment. This would mean that prior to every ministerial Council meeting, Ministers would come before the respective committees, be it an enterprise committee or whatever. I find this a very good exercise since I became Minister for Foreign Affairs. It is a modification of what the committee has recommended but I will be proposing it and have said so on a number of occasions in public. I agree with the idea of a European office located within Leinster House which was an idea from the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny chaired by Deputy Perry. He has been very proactive in advocating this office as he has seen it elsewhere in Europe where it works well. I am not being evasive about dates and the time line is very clear. The elections are over now and I echo what the Chairman said. The issue is whether Ireland wants to be at the heart of Europe. For those who are for Europe and want us to be at the heart of Europe, now is the time to return the swords to the scabbards and engage on a collective unified approach to making it happen. I do not wish to engage in ongoing petty wrangling about who is doing what——
Hear, hear.
—— and who is saying what. I say let us move on from here on a unified footing. The big picture is that Ireland remains at the heart of Europe for its social and economic development. This is my response to the issues raised. Over the next number of months we should work on that basis collaboratively for the good of the country and for future generations. As the Chairman said, this is one of the most fundamental issues to come before the country. I agree with him when he said this is our one chance. We have listened to the people, we have taken their concerns on board, we are now working with our colleagues in Europe to have those concerns accommodated. We have already had the issue of the Commissioner being retained by every member state agreed to by our colleagues in Europe and this is a very significant concession by our European partners. The European Council will bring this to a conclusion next week and from that date, it will be all systems go.
I have dealt with the issue raised by Deputy Pat Breen and I agree with him about the issue of settlements in the West Bank, the need for both such settlements and the acceleration of forced evictions to be discontinued. I welcome the Deputy's visit to the area which was very productive and constructive. I believe our embassy and consular officials facilitated the visit. I support his views about Sri Lanka which have also been articulated by other members.
Deputy Dooley asked questions about the situation in the Middle East. I hope I have dealt with the issues. On the point he made about Europe following the lead shown by President Obama and his observation that Europe too often follows the lead, I would like to think at this stage there is far more co-ordination between Europe and the United States. At the Sharm-el-Sheik donor conference for Gaza, Secretary of State Clinton not only addressed the conference but also conferred with many European Ministers. The Prague meeting saw a joint meeting between Secretary of State Clinton and all the European Foreign Ministers. Along with other Ministers, I led with the question of the Middle East. The idea is to synergise the approach. The American engagement with the Middle East is critical. When the European Union Foreign Ministers were developing their strategic document for the transatlantic relationship prior to the presidential election, the focus was on the key priorities on which to engage the new American Administration. The unanimous view from that discussion was that we wanted the new American Administration to prioritise the Middle East question. There was a sense that this question was not dealt with by previous US Administrations until about year three or four. The meeting wanted immediate engagement from the new US Administration and that has happened in the form of the appointment of the envoy, Mr. George Mitchell and also the high-level engagement of President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton, notwithstanding the difficult scenarios we have discussed earlier. Europe is a significant donor but it also has a long historic engagement with the Middle East. I think we are in the optimal position. Hopefully it is not a case of one leading the other but rather a genuine engagement between Europe and the US for the betterment of the Middle East and also for the Arab world and the Arab peace initiative which is not dead and which has a lot of merit. I refer also to the Government of Israel. All the various actors in that theatre can make a contribution towards moving the peace process forward.
Deputy Quinn raised the issue of North Korea and I agree with his opinion. We welcome the progress made at the Security Council and we expect a resolution extending sanctions to be adopted this week. This will be a clear signal from the world powers to the regime in North Korea. It will extend the scope of the arms embargo and will introduce cargo and vessel inspections. The resolution also strongly condemns the nuclear test of 25 May. What is happening in that country continues to be a matter of grave concern. The situation in Burma may also be raised at the meeting next week. A number of member states are looking at what additional sanctions, if any, can be imposed on the Burmese regime, in particular with regard to the issue of political prisoners and we would support such sanctions. If certain proposals are put to the meeting, we have a very strong position which we will continue to articulate.
Deputy Quinn also asked about Iceland. I have dealt with the Lisbon part of his question. We have a time line which we agreed last December. The Deputy is correct in that there is potential for a fast-tracked application from Iceland. We have indicated our broadly supportive approach although we have put down a marker that there must be discussions about fisheries and other issues. There has been a tremendous sea change in public opinion in Iceland regarding the European Union and the country's potential membership. Quite a lot has happened and continues to happen on this matter. We have remained actively engaged with the authorities in Iceland. They have contacted some of our officials in order to have an understanding of what Ireland's position will be and also Ireland's experience as a small country, island nation member state of the European Union. It is clear that the world economic collapse and its impact on Iceland has had a significant influence on its attitude towards belonging to a group which will offer a particular protection and security which is invaluable. There is every potential for momentum but there are still challenges and there will be domestic issues in Iceland, notwithstanding the sea changes to which I have referred.
I thank the Minister. Does anybody wish to raise any other points? Is everybody satisfied?
Satisfied is a bit strong.
I thank the Minister and his delegation for the courtesy of this visit. I thank him for being available on all occasions. Some of his colleagues might take a leaf from his book because not all Ministers make themselves as available as they should.
The joint committee went into private session at 1 p.m. and adjourned at 1.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 23 June 2009.