No. 9 is the forthcoming General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting. We are joined by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin, who must leave by 11.15 a.m. for the Order of Business in the Dáil. The committee members will also be anxious to leave for the Order of Business, although if they wish to stay here I will not mind. I welcome the Minister. This is his first time to meet and greet the committee members since the victory in the Lisbon treaty referendum. I congratulate him and his ministerial colleagues on their efforts and the co-ordinated work done along with the work of this committee and of the Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas. It was a successful and well co-ordinated campaign that turned out well from the point of view of the people.
General Affairs and External Relations Council: Discussion with Minister for Foreign Affairs.
Thank you, Chairman. I also thank the Chairman and the members of the committee for their very constructive role in facilitating debate, providing information and hearing the views from a wide range of parties, both in civic society and in the Houses, on the Lisbon treaty referendum. The committee played an effective and useful role in the democratic process, particularly in terms of giving people a greater appreciation of what was involved in the Lisbon treaty and the European Union. The sub-committee that met last autumn was particularly effective in reassessing and facilitating a more macro perspective on Ireland and the European Union and that relationship in years to come.
I welcome this opportunity to meet the committee to review the agenda for next week's General Affairs and External Relations Council. I propose to give the committee a brief outline of the items discussed at the September meeting before turning to the items on the agenda for this month's meeting. Ministers held a preliminary discussion on the conclusions for the October European Council. The Presidency's outline agenda for the meeting was broadly welcomed. Ministers reviewed developments in Iran, including the prospects for engagement on the nuclear issue, the possibility of sanctions, human rights concerns and the ongoing situation regarding British and French embassy staff. They also considered the latest developments in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Ministers discussed the implementation of the eastern partnership with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia and plans to negotiate new partnership and co-operation agreements with them.
I turn now to next week's Council meeting. That meeting will hold a more thorough discussion on the conclusions for the October European Council, which will take place on 29 and 30 October. The draft conclusions have just been circulated and are being examined in preparation for the GAERC. The key topics of discussion for the European Council are institutional issues, climate change, the economic and financial situation, the Baltic Sea strategy and illegal immigration.
Institutional issues are coming to the fore following our recent referendum. On Friday, 2 October, the Irish people issued an emphatic confirmation of Ireland's European vocation. No other European treaty has ever received as many votes in favour in an Irish referendum. I acknowledge that the referendum success was the result of a collective effort involving almost all Members of these Houses, trade unions, employers, farming organisations and a wide cross-section of civil society representing all generations. We intend to lodge the instrument of ratification before the European Council on 29 October. In June the European Council reaffirmed its wish to see the treaty enter into force by the end of 2009. We hope that the European Council can bring clarity to the situation of ratification by the Czech Republic in order to ensure the treaty enters into force by the end of the year.
On institutional issues, the Swedish Presidency will present a report to the European Council on work done so far on implementation of the Lisbon treaty, along with a specific report on preparatory discussions on the European external action service. There has also been extensive discussion at official level in Brussels on rules of procedure for Council meetings, European Council meetings and on the chairing of preparatory bodies in Brussels. Once there is clarity on the situation of ratification of the treaty, consultations will begin between EU member states on the major appointments foreseen under the Lisbon treaty, namely, the President of the European Council and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
On climate change, Ministers will hear an oral report from Foreign Ministers Bildt and Miliband on the outcome of their démarches on the Copenhagen conference in third countries. Ministers may also review the EU’s internal negotiations to agree a common line for Copenhagen. The key aspects of discussion at the European Council on the economic and financial situation will include a discussion on fiscal exit strategies and the EU’s new framework for financial supervision, as set out in the June European Council conclusions.
On illegal immigration, the Heads of State and Government are expected to take stock of ongoing implementation of the June European Council conclusions that centred on illegal migration in the Mediterranean. The GAERC is also expected to approve the Baltic Sea strategy with a view to its adoption by the European Council, although substantive discussion on the issue is not expected. Over dinner, Ministers will discuss Albania's application for membership of the European Union submitted in April. The next step in the process is for the Council to refer the application to the Commission for opinion on Albania's level of preparedness to become a candidate country and begin accession negotiations.
The Council will return next week to the linked issues of Afghanistan and Pakistan. We will focus on a paper prepared by the European Commission and Council secretariat on the strengthening of EU action in these two countries. I expect that Council conclusions will endorse the action set out in that paper and some modalities regarding its implementation and internal EU co-ordination. The action proposed represents a sound and realistic basis for EU support to the two countries and to the region more generally.
The security situation in Afghanistan is quite precarious. Evidence of widespread fraud in the August elections is also a matter of serious concern. Although President Karzai declared himself the outright winner of the Presidential election on the basis of preliminary results, he has now conceded that there must be a run-off on 7 November between him and the closest rival, former Foreign Minister, Abdullah Abdullah. Following the investigation of the fraud allegations and a recount of a substantial number of votes by the electoral complaints commission, there is widespread recognition of the need for a more responsible and accountable Government in Kabul. At the same time, there is broad international consensus on the need for a continuing international role.
The paper that Ministers will consider at the GAERC has been drawn up in the context of the broader debate on the Afghanistan strategy, which is under way at present in the US and elsewhere. The paper suggests that the formidable challenges facing Afghanistan and Pakistan can only be overcome through concerted national, regional and international action. It stresses the importance of the international community negotiating a new agenda and compact with the incoming Afghan Government. While recognising the differences between the two countries, it makes clear that a solution in Afghanistan will also require a regional approach involving Pakistan.
The current situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina will be another focus of discussion at the GAERC. Meetings which the EU Presidency, the Commission and the US held in Sarajevo recently with the leaders of the three main communities have sought to achieve progress on outstanding issues in advance of a meeting of the steering board of the Peace Implementation Council scheduled for 18 and 19 November. A decision will be taken on whether sufficient progress has been made to allow for the closure of the Office of the High Representative and the transition to a reinforced EU special representative. Ireland supports the efforts to encourage the political leadership in Bosnia-Herzegovina to achieve progress on the outstanding issues. We believe that conditionality must be fulfilled before transition from the Office of the High Representative to a reinforced EU special representative can occur.
The meeting next week will review developments in the Middle East peace process in light of the current US led efforts to bring about a resumption of direct peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. It is not anticipated that any formal conclusions on this issue will be adopted. I made clear my strong support for the current US efforts when I met with Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, during her recent visit to Dublin. Full EU support for what the Obama Administration is doing is crucial. A settlement freeze in some form remains very much under discussion in further meetings which Senator Mitchell is hosting in Washington this week. This is all the more urgent given the growing tensions throughout the Palestinian Territories at present. I remain extremely concerned at the pace of developments on the ground. This stands in ever greater contrast with the original optimism engendered earlier this year by the renewed US engagement in the search for peace. The people of Gaza remain subject to a completely unacceptable blockade. Settlement expansion continues while aggressive settler tactics are fomenting serious unrest in east Jerusalem and throughout the West Bank. Tensions have been heightened further by continuing fall-out from consideration of the Goldstone report into the Gaza conflict.
All this contributes to a situation that could easily escalate out of hand and result in renewed violence. In these circumstances we must continue to support the US and other members of the Quartet. Pressure to engage must be applied to both sides but particularly the Israelis. The Quartet should press Israel more to address the situation in Gaza through facilitating reconstruction plans that the UN has drawn up and presented some months ago. Palestinian reconciliation remains essential and all Palestinian groups should seriously consider and respond positively to the latest Egyptian proposals. Time is not on our side in the Middle East and ultimately the international community may need to consider stepping up the pressure on both sides. Some have suggested that an indicative timeframe be set for the conduct of negotiations aimed at achieving a comprehensive settlement.
Iran is also due to be discussed at the GAERC meeting over dinner on 26 October. We will take stock following the Geneva meeting on 1 October between Iran and members of the E3+3. No conclusions are planned. We must build now on the relatively limited measure of agreement reached in Geneva. It is for Iran to demonstrate that it is serious about allaying the major concerns that exist internationally regarding its nuclear programme. Ultimately, this means an agreement on uranium enrichment, full Iranian co-operation with the IAEA and full Iranian compliance with all relevant Security Council resolutions. A further meeting between Iran and the E3+3 is due to take place in early November and this will provide a better yardstick as to whether Iran is really serious about achieving progress on its nuclear programme by the end of this year.
The human rights situation in Iran remains of great concern and will be discussed by Ministers. Ireland has been consistent in emphasising that human rights issues must remain at the forefront of our relations with Iran and must not be overlooked on account of the desire and the clear urgent need to make progress on the nuclear question.
We will also discuss Sri Lanka. Above all, the situation of the internally displaced persons in the camps in the north of the country must be fully addressed. I expect we will make this point in our Council conclusions. The Government of Sri Lanka must act now to fulfil the pledges made to the UN and the international community to release all internally displaced persons back to their homes by the end of January. We will discuss EU support to alleviate the plight of the internally displaced people and how best to assess the process of returning them to their homes. We will also discuss prospects for reconciliation in Sri Lanka in the longer term, the role which the EU might play in the post-conflict reconstruction period and how we can best engage the Government of Sri Lanka in a meaningful dialogue with a view to promoting a genuinely inclusive process of political reconciliation with the Tamil community.
That concludes my comments on the agenda for the General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting next week and I am grateful to have had this opportunity to set them out to the Oireachtas. I will be very pleased to hear the comments of the committee as I finalise our preparations for the Council in the coming days and I will be very happy to clarify any questions that members may have.
I thank the Minister. I should have extended our hearty congratulations to him on the successful release of the two GOAL workers, namely, Sharon Commins and her colleague. It was a great result and all credit is due to all concerned.
I thank the Chairman.
I join the Chairman in congratulating the Minister and his officials for the work they did silently over the past three months with respect to securing the release of Sharon Commins and her Ugandan colleague. Will the Minister bring in the directors of the Irish aid agencies and examine what security they have in place for their workers? This is extremely important. Luckily there was a successful outcome in the case of Sharon Commins and her Ugandan colleague but the Minister realises the sensitivities in this area. We have troops serving in Chad and there could have been a knock-on impact if something went wrong. I am not aware of what security aid agencies have in place; I know they have some but in this case it was not adequate for whatever reason. It is important that they are brought in to examine the measures to be put in place to ensure their workers have adequate protection, particularly in very difficult and sensitive areas.
The result of the referendum on the Lisbon treaty is very welcome. However, Fine Gael raised issues such as an EU citizens' officer and re-examining directives. These issues should not be parked. I do not envisage that we will have a referendum on Europe at any stage in the near future but it is important that we are not happy to park the event, state we got over it and move on because we will run into the same difficulties. We can never take the people for granted. There is a limited amount of knowledge out there about how Ireland operates in the EU. There is a general belief that it is good for us and that is correct. However, aside from that there is limited information and this needs to be addressed.
The Government should nominate a Commissioner as soon as possible because the longer it goes on the more difficult it will be for us to secure a position. Many names are being mentioned and one does not want to be partisan but the former Taoiseach and leader of Fine Gael, John Bruton, has done an excellent job as EU Ambassador to the United States. He would make an excellent Commissioner and his nomination would almost certainly ensure that we obtained a very meaningful Commissionership. I do not know how the 27 Commissionerships will be broken down in the final outcome but some might not be as important as others.
In his submission, the Minister mentioned EU strength and its action in Afghanistan and Pakistan. What involvement has Ireland in either of these areas at present? How can we strengthen our involvement? I know we had election monitors there and I welcome the fact that President Karzai has agreed to a re-run of the election. In the votes counted there was a big gap between him and the former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Abdullah Abdullah. It would appear that there was much electoral fraud so a re-run is welcome. What tangible assistance can the EU give?
Will the Minister tell the committee what is the view of the EU on enlargement, the membership applications from Iceland and Croatia and the position as regards Turkey? Attempts were made to use Turkish membership as a tool of fear during the campaign. What is the mood of the EU? Is it to promote enlargement or to hold steady for a while and see how things operate before anyone else is taken on board? Will an exception be made for Iceland?
What has happened in Gaza and the West Bank is outrageous. The Swedish Presidency is not showing the tolerance that has been shown in the past. Does the Minister have a view on whether the EU has been too tolerant of the situation there? Is the mood in the EU changing with respect to the Middle East situation? Perhaps for too long it has been tolerant of the suppression of the Palestinian people, notwithstanding that there are aspects which Palestine must get in order, particularly with regard to dealing with terrorist groups internally.
I also welcome the Minister and his officials. I compliment the Minister on the good work he has done on the release of Sharon Commins and her GOAL colleague. I agree with what Deputy Timmins stated about the desirability of examining what type of security is operated by the aid organisations. There are certain sensitivities in many of the areas in which the aid organisations operate.
I also compliment the Minister on fronting the Government campaign on the Lisbon treaty, along with the Minister of State, Deputy Roche. The Minister was to the fore in all of the debates and he did a very good job in putting forward the case. I also acknowledge all of the work done by the Opposition parties, the trade union movement and the non-governmental organisations and the degree to which civic society got involved on this occasion. That should be the lesson for us for the future because we cannot expect to get two bites of the cherry every time there is a referendum, as happened with the Nice and Lisbon treaties. Will we do the same thing whereby after a referendum on a treaty is lost we express our concerns, expect to get some concessions and re-assurances and are good Europeans the second time around? We must ensure that we deal with a referendum properly and fully in the first instance. With 27 member states it is only a matter of time before every country states that as Ireland is seeking concessions and certain assurances, it will come forward in the same fashion to seek certain guarantees, as the President of the Czech Republic is doing at present. The entire European project would be undermined. We must get our act together for the future.
The Minister referred to institutional issues and the fact that next week, we will lodge our ratification instruments with the EU Council. A number of positions must be filled; the Commissioners, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the President of the European Council. Much discussion is taking place and a number of member states have announced their Commissioner nominations. I am not sure to what extent we have made progress on this matter. I also do not know who we will support for the Presidency of the European Council. It would be desirable that an internal role be given to the Houses of the Oireachtas, particularly given that the Lisbon treaty further emphasises the role of both Houses in the institutional operation of the European Union. This is a new development. However, the Government will decide and the Taoiseach will look into his heart and decide who he will appoint.
Yesterday, in a discussion in the European Parliament, there was a considerable body of opinion that there was great gender inequality in the membership of the Commission and in all of the institutions. We must remember that among the highlights of the Lisbon treaty are the degree to which there was a restatement of the underlying human rights principles and that the Charter of Fundamental Rights will govern all future actions of the European Union. As equality is foremost among these rights, it would be desirable to have some discussion on who might be appointed to positions to which the Government is entitled to make appointments. We should consider it in the context of human rights and gender balance. I would like to see some movement by the Government in this respect prior to the appointments being made. I thought the Minister would refer to Iceland's application for membership because that seems to be the most pressing one. Will the Minister say what is happening in that regard?
Afghanistan and Pakistan are among the most crucial areas. It is almost unprecedented that there has been an admission that the previous election in Afghanistan was so flawed that there will be a new Presidential election on 7 November. That is a serious matter given the intensity of the war there and the proposal to send 40,000 additional troops. As the Taliban moves into certain areas of Pakistan and Pakistani troops are getting involved, there is a danger that the conflict could escalate and Pakistan could get sucked into it.
Last summer we received a report from the Oireachtas Joint Committees on European Affairs and Foreign Affairs of their visit to Gaza, the West Bank and the Israeli Parliament. That is a very sobering account of what members of this and the other committee experienced. It seems that in many ways the European Union has more credibility than the United States in that area and I am not happy to hear the Minister say that we must continue to support the United States and other members of the Quartet. I do not think we should support the United States. While it is positive that President Obama has again appointed George Mitchell to the talks, we must have a more robust role in dealing with these issues because the United States has been given a lead position in dealing with them since they arose. That, coupled with its being partisan, makes it difficult to find a fair solution. Tony Blair was taunted as we saw on television yesterday. He is not the most suitable envoy for the European Union because he was directly involved in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These issues must be considered when we decide on a suitable President of the European Council.
I note Deputy Costello's consistency with David Cameron on that matter.
David Cameron had a good track record in the Good Friday Agreement but in the Middle East, which is a different ball game, his track record is not good.
I remind members that we have only 20 minutes left.
The seasons merge and winter becomes the summer.
These matters have to be articulated and must be taken into consideration.
Yes, I appreciate that.
I also endorse my colleagues' remarks and warmly congratulate the Minister and his team, along with Minister of State, Deputy Roche, on the great success of the referendum on the Lisbon treaty. I hope that we have made a strong macro-statement about the future of Ireland within the Union and that no matter what the channels are in the future, issues that come before us will have a logical conclusion.
Will the Minister expand on the proposed discussions at the European Council on the economic and financial situation vis-à-vis fiscal exit strategies and financial supervision? In Afghanistan up to 25% of the votes at the last election were in doubt which is very serious. The European Union, the United Nations and the Interparliamentary Union are responsible for ensuring that there is very strong supervision on 7 November and that democracy prevails.
I endorse what the Minister has said about the official situation and Ireland's attitude to the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I hope that we can manage that carefully.
In his contribution, the Minister said twice that he hopes that next week's meeting of the European Council can "bring clarity to the situation of ratification by the Czech Republic". Could the Minister please clarify what that means? It is a very important point because during the referendum campaign the point was emphasised that we were the main country that had not consented to the ratification of the continuation of the Lisbon process. What does that statement mean? What discussions, if any, are taking place about this issue in the Czech Republic and elsewhere?
The Minister also said that the key aspects of discussion at the European Council on the economic and fiscal situation will include the discussion of fiscal exit strategies. Does that mean that area will be discussed at the forthcoming meeting? If so, will the Minister tell us more about that discussion because that will probably have more effect on this country than anything else mentioned in the Minister's contribution?
I have little doubt that one of the contributory factors to the outcome of the referendum on the Lisbon treaty was the significant increase in people's understanding of our relationship with the European Union and the content of the Lisbon treaty. What steps will be taken to ensure that level of understanding is maintained? Having it in place is crucial to maintaining the support we need for all that the European Union does and our relationship with it?
I welcome the Minister and his delegation. I concur with other speakers in recognising the efforts of the Minister and his officials in securing the release of Sharon Commins. The Minister has been very gracious in recognising the involvement of the Garda, the army and officials overseas in her release.
I commend the Minister for his strong language about how he has identified the greatest concerns in the Middle East peace process. He says that time is not on our side and that it is necessary to step up the pressure on both sides. Does he believe that sanctions should be on the agenda to ensure that the Israelis step up to the plate and recognise their role in this conflict? Does he agree that it is necessary to again review the neighbourhood agreement? The European consensus is that we would not progress to the next level of the neighbourhood agreement which had been under discussion or review. Does the Minister believe that it is time to review that agreement?
I would like to be associated with my colleagues' remarks about the Minister's involvement in the Sharon Commins case. Will the Minister update us on the Father Sinnott case in the Philippines? Is there any news of what the Department is doing about his plight?
Why does the Minister think it has been so difficult to re-start the Middle East peace process given that the new American President has just received the Nobel peace prize and there are two great negotiators, George Mitchell and Tony Blair, involved, as well as Hillary Clinton playing an important role? Is it because of the Israeli Government? Perhaps he might elaborate.
With regard to Bosnia-Herzegovina, what is the future for Camp Althea where 44 Irish troops are stationed? What role does the Minister envisage them having in that area in the future?
Regarding EU enlargement, is there any movement on Croatia's position? Is the divisive situation in Cyprus still on the agenda? Has progress been made in respect of the Turkish-Cypriot settlement? Concerning Afghanistan, how effective was the monitoring of the last elections? It is a big area to cover and some parts are very remote. Will the UN, the EU and the OAC place additional people as monitors on the next occasion?
I welcome the Minister and his officials and I commend him on the role he and the Department played in the release of the GOAL workers, Sharon Commins and her colleague. This is the first meeting the committee has had with the Minister since the positive result of the Lisbon referendum about which our fellow member states are very happy. However, it seems one of the very strong reasons the Irish people voted "Yes" in such numbers was that they see their economic future and Ireland's economic recovery as very much tied up with membership of the European Union. Employment will be a big issue in coming years, with the role the EU can play in stimulating greater levels of employment in this country.
I mentioned the green new deal which is being promoted by my colleagues in the European Green Party in the European Parliament. Has the Minister had an opportunity to raise this issue at European Council meetings to see whether other member states are willing to consider an EU-wide stimulus package that would have benefits in infrastructural projects, training and accreditation programmes for green collar professions across the EU? In the service directive to be rolled out and fully implemented in December, there is great opportunity for delivering environmental services and for Irish companies to undertake such services across the EU. To provide the framework for these kinds of activities, an EU-wide approach must be taken, which would prioritise the creation of employment. Has there been any positive response to this proposal from the Minister's colleagues on the Council of Ministers?
Others have mentioned the issue of a Commissioner and whom we might propose for the position.
One conversation only, please.
I suggest we should look for a Commissioner who has very strong European credentials. The wobble recently experienced in this country in the perception of our commitment to the European project would suggest that the person we nominate as Commissioner next time round should have such credentials and should be able to communicate with the people regarding his or her portfolio and the European Union generally. It is important that we keep those considerations in mind when we come to select our future Commissioner. The portfolio is also very important. There are a number of new Commission portfolios being talked about, for example, climate change and innovation. Research and development will feature more strongly, especially when the Lisbon treaty is fully implemented. We should look positively towards these new portfolios to see if we can secure one for an Irish Commissioner.
The Presidency of the European Council is another role being discussed. It appears there are differences of opinion between those who feel the Presidency should be a strong role for somebody who would represent the EU at international level and those who do not wish to see the office becoming dominated by a person who might have a very strong international presence. What are the Minister's views on this? Is a consensus emerging in the Council of Ministers or among the heads of state about whether that role should be low key and concerned with chairing the European Council, or one that has a higher international profile to be occupied by somebody with a similar profile?
Concerning the ongoing talks on the Copenhagen summit, because the EU has taken a leadership position on an emissions trading scheme — it set up the first emissions trading scheme in the world — one of the commitments we should look for in any international climate agreement should be the eventual establishment of a global carbon market. The experience of the EU in implementing its emissions trading scheme will allow it to inform the discussion and offer very useful advice on the establishment of a global carbon market. Issues concerning mitigation, adaptation and so on can be dealt with much more effectively in the context of a global carbon market and I suggest we promote that idea at the forthcoming GAERC meeting.
Ba mhaith liom tosnú le comhghairdeas a ghabháil don Aire as teacht slán oibrithe Goal, Sharon Commins agus a comhleacaí. Is léir gur oibrigh an Aire agus a fhoireann go tréan agus go dúthrachtach agus tréaslaím leo. I congratulate the Minister on the blinder he and all involved played in securing the release of Sharon Commins and her colleague. People appreciated the attention paid to the family as being particularly indicative of how well all officials worked on the matter. I share Deputy Breen's interest in learning what can be and is being done in respect of Father Sinnott in the Philippines.
I agree with some of the comments raised concerning the Lisbon treaty. Like many during the debate, I began to worry for our political culture and, on occasions, was afraid the referendum process would be brought into dispute. It cannot be denied that on occasions the arguments became excessively shrill. On both sides, there were some particularly egregious examples of arguments that were blatantly false. While we all know that free speech is of particular importance regarding political and philosophical matters, there must be concern about how we can develop a political culture in which we will have searching clear analysis based on fact as distinct from propaganda, as occasionally happens in referendum debates. I say that without in any way wishing to single out one side or the other. That is not my point.
The hard work done by the Government leading to the second Lisbon referendum reminds us of the importance of thorough negotiation before treaties are worked through and the importance of dialogue with different concerns inside and outside parliamentary life about issues that are likely to be painful when questions are put to people in a referendum. Lessons can be drawn from the good, hard work done in the inter-referendum period which will guide future developments.
I note and agree with what Deputy Costello said regarding gender balance and the desirability of same. One of the plaques on the wall in my old secondary school stated words to the effect that the best man for a job was often a woman. However, while gender balance and proficiency in the Irish language are desirable traits, we must never forget that the core requirement of a new Commissioner is that he or she will be very familiar with the European brief, have the capacity to impress on Ireland's behalf and about Ireland and have the warm and engaging personality that is so effective and has served us so well in our negotiations at European level. However, we must never forget that the core requirement of a new Commissioner is that he or she will be very familiar with the European brief, have the capacity to impress on Ireland's behalf and about Ireland and have the warm and engaging personality that is so effective and has served us so well in our negotiations at European level. In these challenging times, I have no doubt that the Government will pay close attention to the importance of nominating a top-flight Commission nominee.
I wish to ask about Iran. The Minister stated that no conclusions are planned to be reached at the dinner discussion of the GAERC. Does he trust Iran to comply with Security Council resolutions? Will he enlighten the committee regarding E3+3, a group with which many people probably are not familiar? The UK, France and Germany are teaming up with the US, Russia and China. Will this group speak on behalf of the EU and should we look to those meetings primarily? Will the Minister share with the committee some of the background, particularly of why those three countries are involved in putting pressure on Iran?
I thank the Minister and apologise for arriving late. I have been given my punishment because most of the points that I wanted to make have already been made. I will be brief.
In the post-Lisbon treaty period in Ireland, not yet in the case of the Czech Republic, what does the Minister expect will be the dynamic between the EU's various leaders? It is important that there is a Government position on the dynamic between the President of the Commission, the President of the European Council and the High Commissioner for Foreign Affairs. It is unfortunate that the President of the European Parliament seems to have been left out of the consideration of who the EU's figurehead and voice in the wider world will be. The European Parliament is the only democratically directly elected body within the EU. Jockeying for the position of High Commissioner is already under way in that the socialist group in the Parliament is staking its claim. Does this imply that the High Commissioner will be an even more important position figurehead than the President of the European Council?
On a matter mentioned by Deputy Costello, who would be desirable candidates for the High Representative and President of the European Council positions? I have grave personal reservations about the potential nomination of Tony Blair and the Government's support for it.
I agree with Senator de Búrca it is essential that we achieve an important portfolio in the enlarged Commission, given that our 2008 "No" vote on the Lisbon treaty damaged Ireland's reputation. We will need to nominate someone of substance, significance and high calibre. We have all heard the rumour that President Barroso desires a female nominee to ensure gender balance. Ireland has never had a female Commissioner, but a party hack should not be appointed. We need someone who can command an important portfolio and if the Minister's heart is set on appointing a woman, there are many women in Ireland who could fulfil that role. It should not be used as an excuse to appoint someone who is not up to the job.
Has the Minister considered appointing a sub-group of the Cabinet or the Houses to examine the implementation of the Lisbon treaty so that Ireland can begin setting the agenda? I refer to simple matters such as the citizen's initiative in the Lisbon treaty or national parliaments' enhanced role. We should decide how we want such matters to apply as we could then advance a clear agenda at the level of the European Council, the Commission and the European Parliament. We must start this work now. The European Parliament has already started work in this regard and it is important that we, as representatives of the Oireachtas, the Government and the people, start preparing the ground work.
I remind members that we are rapidly running out of time.
I apologise for being late, but I have read the Minister's speech. He noted the country's success in the Lisbon referendum. Will he ensure a strong line on Iran now that the UK, France, Germany, the US, Russia and China, the major international players, support it? Given the strength of this group, the message is that the intensification of the arms race in the Middle East is a problem for us all and that necessary sanctions should be taken to ensure no further nuclear proliferation.
Regarding the potential president of the EU, I strongly favour Tony Blair, who has proven a good friend of Ireland and was instrumental in the peace process. Like many leaders, including those of us who are peace-loving, he was caught up in the belief that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. This wrong intelligence led many people astray and caused significant problems.
To ascribe the phrase "female political hack" to our Commissioner before that person has even been appointed is not acceptable and should not have been——
It was a word of caution.
——ascribed to the appointee at this committee.
That appears to conclude members' submissions. There is little time remaining and, as the Minister knows, the Middle East issue occupied the committee's attention previously. Members will have received correspondence from members of the public who are concerned about the situation in Iran, where academics have recently been imprisoned. They are not allowed visitors or fair treatment under international agreements.
As I stated at the outset, all political parties can take equal credit for the significant Lisbon II victory, which would not have occurred were it not for the fact that everyone saw the objective and worked towards it. There was a great sense of co-operation.
Whoever our European Commissioner will be, he or she must be politically substantial and have knowledge of the European institutions. Nothing less will suffice. We must remember that the Commissioner should not be seen as representing a country, rather he or she must represent the entire EU. If the situation degenerates and each Commissioner represents the opinions of his or her member state alone, this serious problem would be detrimental to the European institutions and the interests of the smaller countries.
I hand over to the Minister, but we do not have much time.
I thank the Chairman and other members for their wide-ranging comments on a number of issues. I thank Deputies Timmins, Costello and others for their comments on the release of Sharon Commins in the Sudan. I take this opportunity to thank Deputy Timmins in particular, as foreign affairs spokesman for Fine Gael, and Deputy Michael D. Higgins, as foreign affairs spokesman for the Labour Party, for creating space for me and my Department to work on that issue over a three-month period. That type of facilitation and co-ordination in the common good has always been a feature of our relationship, which I deeply appreciate. I would not understate its importance. I will take on board what they and others said about the need to review the security situation concerning humanitarian aid workers overseas. Aid workers are special people who do extraordinary work on behalf of the most defenceless and vulnerable people in the world and we always have a duty of care to them. Aid workers bring great pride to our country. I was talking to Sharon Commins the other evening at Baldonnel, and even in Sudan the reception she received was notable. Hospital workers came up to her to apologise and articulate how scandalised they were that two women aid workers were kidnapped. She was struck by that and the fact that many ordinary Sudanese people were crying in apology for what they felt was shame brought upon their people and their nation.
It is important to review the security situation concerning humanitarian aid workers overseas. However, it is also a factor that many aid organisations jealously guard their independence. In some cases they shun the official security that may be offered in the particular areas in which they are operating because they fear it may compromise their independence in the field. Nonetheless, Irish Aid will discuss this issue with all the organisations concerned. It will also be discussed at EU level because it is an ongoing issue. Events like this threaten the wider humanitarian endeavour and undermine the basis for attracting more volunteer workers into humanitarian activities. We are conscious that the security aspect is the key to sustaining a comprehensive global humanitarian aid endeavour.
A number of members raised the postscript to Lisbon. I will bring proposals to Government and to the committee for a strategic approach to EU matters. As a country, we will develop a more strategic engagement with the EU in the months and years ahead, which I will lead as Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Taoiseach is keen that we should do so. That will involve an intensification of engagement with our EU partners on a range of issues. As we discussed during the Lisbon debate, there are substantive items on the agenda such as climate change, energy security and the global economy. Many of these, which affect us all, involve the EU negotiating on our behalf with other significant regions and countries across the world. The recommendations of this committee will be involved also, which must be a priority for the Oireachtas. I do not want to prescribe or dictate a particular approach as to how the Oireachtas engages with the EU from here onwards. We have enough proposals now so on an all-party basis, including Independents, we should work towards the new parliamentary mechanisms or vehicles for scrutiny as well as the transposition and review of directives. Deputy Timmins proposed such a review prior to Lisbon. In addition, every Department and Minister should regularly go through what we do at this committee. We present our case to Members of the Houses prior to attending EU meetings. In my view, every Minister should be doing that. It is something I have recommended to the Government and it has been accepted. That means there will be a far greater engagement with European issues. It will also put detailed EU issues on the agenda more regularly.
As regards citizens' awareness of European affairs, we have established eumatters.ie, which is a comprehensive information website for the EU. The communicating Europe agenda continues in my Department and will not end with the Lisbon treaty. By working on communications with the outgoing Commissioner, Margot Wallström, we can bring something to the table at EU level concerning the importance of professional, modern communications. We can thus communicate what Europe does for the citizen in a much better way than Europe has done in the past. I am trying to get out of the habit of calling them GAERC meetings. I wanted to talk about roaming charges for mobile phones as an example of the benefits that Europe brings to its citizens on an ongoing basis. It is something we must do. If one talked to the citizens outside and said the Minister briefed the Joint Committee on European Affairs on the GAERC meeting, they would look askance and ask “What in the name of God is GAERC?”. GAERC is what we call our meetings of Foreign Ministers, so we have a lot more to do on the communications agenda.
There was much discussion on the nomination of the new Irish Commissioner. I do not have the authority to nominate a Commissioner or even share with members of the joint committee what may happen in that regard. No names have yet come forward in terms of the President of the Council but I will come back to that.
The Commission President, José Manuel Barroso, wrote to us formally on the equality and gender issues. That is a matter of record and I would not dismiss it. Yesterday, we noted that warm tributes were paid to the late Nuala Fennell who made an outstanding contribution to women's rights and the advancement of equality. From his perspective, President Barroso is obviously anxious to get a reasonable gender balance on the commission. Up to 11 outgoing Commissioners are seeking reappointment. We have received communications from members of other parties. I take on board what Deputy Timmins said. Last week, I met Ambassador John Bruton at the European Institute in Washington where we discussed the Lisbon result and Ireland's engagement with Europe. Others have also put their names into the ring. The key issue was summed up by the Chairman, namely, that it should be a person of substance, who has knowledge of EU institutions and the capacity to secure a good portfolio in the new Commission.
As regards the President of the European Council, someone asked whether we want a charismatic leader or a business manager-type of person. Perhaps it is not fair to juxtapose a charismatic leader with an efficient business manager of the European Council's agenda. I think the role should be somewhere in between the two. In essence, we want somebody of substance who can negotiate on behalf of Europe and deliver the European agenda in negotiations with the United States, China, India, Russia, the Middle East and other third countries. That is important. No names have yet been brought forward. From time to time, we have been asked "What if Tony Blair's name came forward?", and our consistent reply is that Ireland has always had a good relationship with Tony Blair. I hope we are not debarred from saying that in the future, judging by some of the comments today.
What happened to Deputy Bertie Ahern?
He was always a dark horse.
He fell.
He spent a lot of time at the races.
I ask the Minister to continue.
Where was I?
We were talking about the President of the European Council.
Tony Blair was a great friend of Ireland, and the Northern peace process is a testimony to his innovation and abilities. It is, however, a decision of the 27 member states. We will wait to see what emerges and will enter into consultation with other member states on the likely candidates for the position but nothing has happened in that regard yet.
I was asked about the relative importance of the high commissioner for foreign affairs and the President. Both have different roles and the representative in the area of foreign affairs will deal on a regular, almost daily, basis with the relationship between the European Union and third countries. There will also be some work on fleshing out the idea of the EU external action service. The situation with the Czech Republic is developing and Senator Donohoe asked if I could bring clarity to the matter. There are indications of movement but I have been loth to interfere in the deliberations of the Czech Republic as a country that asked Europe to keep its opinions to itself when we had our own issues with the Lisbon treaty. It is clear the Czech Parliament is very anxious to bring it to a conclusion. I have noted some of the comments of President Klaus in the past week or two and they will be discussed at next week's meeting. I hope it can be brought to a conclusion.
I was also asked about the EU strengthening its action in Afghanistan. Since 2005 Ireland has allocated approximately €21 million and in 2008-09 we made a pledge of €9 million. This is to focus on humanitarian and development needs and it will continue. We have also doubled our aid to the Afghan reconstruction fund, bringing our contribution to €2 million this year. We met a delegation from the Afghan Parliament, whose members were anxious to learn from our experiences in the North. Ireland's greatest strengths, where we can offer most support, are in the area of aid, agriculture and crop production and we want to see if we can bring expertise in that regard. It is accepted, from the US review, that a military solution alone cannot resolve the issues in Afghanistan.
We were very concerned about the amount of fraud in the Afghanistan election and I am glad there is to be a rerun. It is critical that governance capacity is improved and that there is better training of police. The EU is anxious to beef up its effort in enhancing the training of the police and security forces there. Political stability is a key objective but it is a long journey and it will require a regional perspective. I accept Deputy Costello's point that no one wants to drag Pakistan into the situation but there is a clear regional connection and the emerging strategies take that on board. Reconciliation with significant elements of the Taliban in Afghanistan is part of the picture as, in all conflicts, people get involved in various scenarios. Proactive policies have to be developed to bring communities into the mainstream of political life and such policies are on the agenda, as is crop production as an alternative to drugs.
On enlargement, Albania will be discussed and assessed. We deliberated on Iceland during our last meeting in September so I did not mention it on this occasion. We are awaiting an opinion but there is a very high level of approximation to EU laws and regulations in Iceland so the process could be fairly rapid. A lot will depend on public opinion in Iceland but Ireland remains supportive and there will be negotiations on specific items. We are supportive of Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia and a more accelerated EU perspective will help to stabilise that region and facilitate more positive and progressive forces to emerge and embed in the political systems there. Some member states are keen on conditionality attaching to the applications but I am of the view that we need to adopt a flexible mindset and look at the big picture of what we want to achieve. The fundamental objective is political stability and developing a genuine EU perspective and engagement, which is where the EU has been particularly effective in the past decade as a force for peace, democracy and value systems.
I was asked about Gaza and the wider Middle East. I am very unhappy at what is happening within Gaza and the blockade is unacceptable. When President Obama was elected he moved quickly to appoint Senator George Mitchell, who is held in the highest esteem in this country. President Obama made some fundamentals very clear to the Israeli Government, such as the need for a free settlement, a two-state solution and the need for a comprehensive talks momentum. We support the US position, which in many ways is now coming into alignment with the EU position on the fundamental principles underlying a solution to the Middle Eastern problem. The US position, as adopted by President Obama, is a new position and can have a positive impact on the broader issue, though the response has not been what I anticipated. We would have preferred a faster response from Israel but the talks are ongoing and everyone at EU level is anxious to create the space that will facilitate momentum. There are times when one has to articulate a position strongly but there are others when one has to allow space to facilitate engagement, allowing all the parties the room to move forward. It is a judgment call one has to make from time to time but the EU has made it clear that the situation in Gaza cannot be suspended pending developments in the peace negotiations.
Our feedback from UNRWA is still very worrying as it points to a collective punishment of a people. The blockades must end and we will raise the issue next week. There has been a consistent line from members of the committee on this issue and that strengthens our position and our resolve going into the meeting.
Deputy Treacy asked about fiscal issues, as did Senator Donohoe. ECOFIN has met and its conclusions will feed into the European Council meetings. The discussion will centre on preparing plans and co-ordinating potential exit strategies that emerge across Europe. The time is not yet right for an exit from fiscal stimulus policies which have been put in place by countries to deal with the current crisis. This raises questions about how sustainable in the long term are such fiscal positions, when does one begin to consolidate the fiscal position of various member states and how soon, if at all, should one begin to exit. The discussions will centre on such issues. At this stage the Commission and ECOFIN are anxious that people at least start planning and make preparation for facilitating the co-ordination of a broader EU-wide approach to fiscal strategy and we have time to do that now. That is what will be discussed.
I refer to Senator de Búrca's question. The EU has engaged in a substantive fiscal stimulus programme, much of which has been focused on green technologies and renewables. We are very much supportive of that and we have been an early beneficiary of that through the interconnector between Ireland and the UK.
Deputy Dooley raised the issue of the neighbourhood agreement. There is no movement on a new agreement. We are conscious of creating space to allow the talks under way to gain momentum.
Members raised the Fr. Sinnott case in the Philippines. We are working on that and our ambassador sends daily reports to us. I have been in touch with the Columban Fathers, who are held in high esteem. I spoke to the foreign Minister who has had ties to the Columban Fathers. They are well loved for what they have done over the years. There is a huge public outpouring of understanding for them and also a desire to secure Fr. Sinnott's release. There has been engagement with the leaders of the rebel groups to intercede with the kidnappers and with groups that may have influence over them to release him. We will continue through our ambassador and other officials to work with the Government there to effect a release. We will keep the issue at the top of our priorities. We are in touch with Fr. Sinnott's family and they understand where we are. Every case is different. This is different from the Sudan case and one must understand the political situation on the ground in a particular area, the underlying causes and reasons for these kidnaps, what people may be looking for and so on. I urge all those with influence to release Fr. Sinnott and we will keep people informed in this regard.
Deputy Breen mentioned Bosnia. There are political challenges but we are anxious to move on and make progress. We will maintain a presence there for the foreseeable future but that is a Government decision and the Minister for Defence has concerns about that.
With regard to the climate change agenda, the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, wrote to me and he is anxious that at next Monday's meeting we give high priority and renewed impetus to the preparations regarding the EU's position on the Copenhagen agreement, particularly in terms of financial compensation for developing countries. This issue will probably go the entire way to the Council because some countries have issues about that.
Senator Mullen raised a number of issues. We are concerned about human rights in Iran and we are not at all happy. I met the Iranian Minister for Foreign Affairs more than 12 months ago and I made strong points to him about human rights. I subsequently wrote in the strongest terms about what we believe are unacceptable breaches of human rights in Iran, particularly following the election. That is of equal importance to the nuclear issue and it deserves to be on the agenda with it. People do not have great confidence regarding the momentum on the nuclear question but, on the other hand, progress was made in Geneva. Much will depend on the quality of November's meeting.
The Senator also referred to the E3+3 group. These countries have strategic interests but have potential leverage, which can be used for the benefit of all concerned to achieve a peaceful resolution to the nuclear question. It is a serious issue, given the wider ramifications not only for the region but throughout the world and, therefore, it needs careful and sensitive handling and firm diplomacy to move it on. The E3+3 is co-ordinating closely with the EU and we are in a relatively good position to influence the thinking of the group.
We must go to the House to vote. I thank the Minister and his officials for attending and for the frank exchange of views with the committee. I also thank the members for attending at this early hour.