We have received apologies from Senator Phil Prendergast and Deputy Thomas Byrne.
We have a long agenda. Item No. 1 concerns the forthcoming General Affairs and Foreign Affairs Council meetings. I welcome the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin. In accordance with the usual format, I now call on him to address the meeting.
I thank the Chairman and other members of the joint committee. I am pleased to have this opportunity of looking forward with the committee to the agendas for next Monday's General Affairs and Foreign Affairs Councils, and to review briefly the outcome of last month's Council meetings. Unfortunately, I could not attend the January Council meetings because of my involvement in the Northern Ireland talks at Hillsborough Castle. The Government was represented at those meetings by the Ministers of State, Deputies Dick Roche and Peter Power.
The General Affairs Council was briefed on the Spanish Presidency programme and its four priorities: the full implementation of the Lisbon treaty, how best to secure economic recovery and job creation, strengthening the EU's foreign and security policy, and fostering citizens' rights and freedom.
There was an opportunity to address the new institutional arrangements which will focus on the General Affairs Council's role in preparing European Council agendas, as well as to address horizontal issues. There was also a paper circulated by Greece on developing an EU volunteer corps.
For this first full meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council, the High Representative, Ms Catherine Ashton, was in the chair. On the Haiti crisis, ministers agreed on two priorities: first, to build camps for more than 250,000 people displaced by the earthquake; and, second, to help rebuild the Haitian Government's operational capacity. They also agreed to establish a co-ordination cell in Brussels to optimise European responses to UN requests for assistance.
In addition, Ministers adopted Council conclusions on Somalia and agreed on the importance of establishing capacity-building measures which will lead to the creation of proper governance institutions there.
They discussed Operation Althea in Bosnia and Herzegovina, recognising that this operation should provide stability and security over the coming year as greater effort is focused on training programmes.
There was also a discussion of the preparations for the London conference on Afghanistan. I was unable to attend that conference, owing to my involvement in the Northern Ireland negotiations, but I had an opportunity to discuss its outcome in detail with the British Foreign Secretary, Mr. David Miliband, when we had bilateral discussions in London the following week.
I will now turn to next Monday's Council meetings at which I will represent the Government. At the General Affairs Council, the European strategy for growth and jobs — known as "Europe 2020" — will be touched upon in a discussion of the agenda for the March European Council. We would like to see next month's European Council make considerable progress towards agreeing a new strategy. There is wide agreement that work on this should be finalised under the Spanish Presidency.
The General Affairs Council will also have a dinner meeting with President Herman van Rompuy, which will focus on follow-up to the recent informal European Council. We will have an opportunity to engage with the President on his plans for taking forward the new strategy.
The General Affairs Council will hold a discussion on climate change. The main issues will be to review the outcome of the disappointing Copenhagen meeting last December and to assess how in future the Union can best contribute to the international negotiations. In terms of looking back at the Copenhagen conference, members will know that the substantive outcome was the Copenhagen Accord. While the accord falls short of the ambitious goals of Ireland and the EU generally, nevertheless we now have an agreement in which the countries responsible for 80% of the world's pollution are involved. That is an important step forward.
About 70 countries have now made emission-reduction pledges in line with the Copenhagen Accord, while another 30 or so have associated themselves with the document. Key countries that have made pledges include the United States, China, Brazil, India, South Africa, the Russian Federation, Japan and the European Union. The EU's pledge is a restating of the European Council conclusions — an offer to cut emissions by 20% over 1990 levels by 2020, with a conditional offer to increase the pledge to a 30% reduction provided other developed countries commit themselves to comparable emission reductions and that developing countries contribute adequately according to their responsibilities and respective capabilities.
Ireland, like many others including the EU, had hoped for a comprehensive agreement to reduce global emissions. While this was not realised, our commitment to securing a comprehensive agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol remains. Ireland and the EU also remain firmly committed to reducing carbon emissions and to providing financial support to climate change mitigation and adaptation actions in developing countries.
On where we go from here, the next major meeting in the process will be at Bonn this summer, kindly hosted by our German colleagues. It will provide an opportunity for negotiators to get on with the job of negotiating an agreement. We look forward to that meeting. Ireland will continue to play its part in the important search for a legally binding agreement.
Rebuilding trust in the negotiating system and between partners will be the major challenge for the coming months. The EU will continue our leadership role by engaging with key players from the developed economies, major emerging economies, and developing and small island states in order to rebuild that confidence.
The General Affairs Council will also consider an annotated agenda for the March European Council. In addition to the new strategy for growth and jobs, items for discussion at the European Council will include follow-up to the Copenhagen conference on climate change.
Progress on Croatian accession is currently included as a possible item for discussion at the General Affairs Council, if efforts to remove obstacles arising from the maritime border dispute with Slovenia are not resolved this week.
At next Monday's meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council, there will be a further discussion of the Haiti crisis — the third such discussion by the Council since the earthquake of 12 January. The humanitarian situation in Haiti remains very serious, with approximately 1.2 million people living in temporary settlements in and around Port-au-Prince. With the rainy season now imminent, it is critical that displaced persons have adequate shelter, clean water and sanitation facilities.
The EU's response has been substantial and comprehensive, with a financial commitment to date of more than €500 million and hundreds of expert personnel being deployed in support of the humanitarian effort. At its last meeting on 25 January, the Council agreed to provide a collective contribution of at least 300 police personnel to support the UN stabilisation mission. Many of these police reinforcements are now on the ground, with others preparing to deploy in the near future. The Council also established a special cell to co-ordinate contributions by member states of military and security assets.
Next Monday, the Council will review the ongoing EU approach and will consider the medium to longer-term outlook. A post-disaster needs assessment, jointly conducted by the EU with the Government of Haiti, UN, World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank, will begin next week. The findings of this assessment will provide a framework for the international donors' meeting, which is due to take place in New York in April. A strong statement and generous pledge by the EU at the April donors' conference will demonstrate in the clearest terms the EU's commitment to Haiti's recovery and rehabilitation.
Ireland is playing an important role as part of the overall EU response. Our total contribution to the relief effort amounts so far to more than €3 million. This has involved our largest ever humanitarian airlift of relief supplies, along with the deployment of, to date, four members of Ireland's rapid response corps in support of our humanitarian partners.
At present, we are considering our contribution to Haiti's medium and long-term recovery. Once we have reviewed the findings of the post-disaster needs assessment, we will make a significant multi-annual pledge at the April conference.
Ministers will also discuss the situation in Iran, with particular focus on the nuclear issue. No conclusions are planned at this stage, following the strongly worded declaration issued by the European Council in December and a number of recent statements from the High Representative Ms Catherine Ashton, which expressed the Union's serious concern at ongoing violation of human rights in Iran.
Recent pronouncements by President Ahmadinejad and the Iranian authorities — in particular, the announcement that Iran now intends to enrich uranium to a higher level, and the indications that it plans to proceed with construction of new enrichment plants — have left little room for doubt that Iran is intent on pursuing its nuclear ambitions and does not intend to engage seriously with the international community on this issue. This has inevitably increased the prospects of new sanctions being imposed against Iran. Discussions are now under way in New York on a new Security Council resolution. It is likely to be some weeks before any draft text comes before the Security Council for adoption. Ireland wants to see a diplomatic resolution to this crisis. We very much support the twin track approach on incentives and penalties pursued by the E3+3. Iran has left the international community with little option but to pursue the track of further sanctions, with its continued unwillingness to engage seriously.
It is important that the focus of efforts at the moment should remain on the Security Council, as a new resolution would best serve to make clear the united will of the international community on this issue. This view is shared generally within the European Union, although it is also recognised that the EU may have to adopt further unilateral measures of its own, depending on the course of developments in the Security Council. While discussion at the council will centre primarily on the prospects for a new resolution, it will also be important to review the internal situation within Iran and the continuing serious violations of human rights there.
While the recent national day of celebrations in Iran appears to have passed off without major incidents, this was in large part attributable to a severe clampdown imposed by the authorities, including major restrictions on media and private communications. As indicated, High Representative Ashton has spelt out in a number of recent statements — including one issued on 11 February — the European Union's major concerns at ongoing human rights violations, including violence against, and intimidation of opposition supporters and the suppression of ordinary Iranians' basic right to freedom of expression and assembly. The United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva is currently conducting a major examination of the human rights situation in Iran as part of its universal review procedures. Ireland is engaging actively in this process. Earlier this week our permanent representative in Geneva addressed a number of direct questions to the Iranian authorities on such serious concerns as the use of the death penalty against minors, the use of torture and the serious gender equality deficiencies under current Iranian law.
Ukraine will be discussed by the Foreign Affairs Council in the context of the recent presidential election. In the second round run-off on 7 February, former Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych defeated the current Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko by 48.95% to 45.47%. Turnout for the second round was just over 69%. The international election observation mission, led by the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights issued a positive assessment of the conduct of the election, which the European Union welcomed. Ireland contributed two long-term and 15 short-term observers to the OSCE mission for the first round, and two long-term and nine short-term observers for the second round. We welcome the positive assessment of the conduct of the presidential election in Ukraine. I have congratulated Mr. Yanukovych on his victory. The high turn-out represents a clear demonstration of the Ukrainian people's commitment to the democratic process. The European Union should engage quickly with the new president to assist Ukraine with its reform agenda and in negotiations on a new EU-Ukraine association agreement.
An additional item, which has just been added to the Council's agenda for next Monday is Libya. This has been done at the request of Malta, which is seeking a discussion of the situation arising for European citizens travelling to Libya following the decision of the Libyan authorities earlier this week to impose visa restrictions on persons travelling from the Schengen zone. Ireland is not a member of the Schengen zone, which comprises 22 of the EU member states along with Norway, Iceland and Switzerland.
The background on restrictions being imposed on persons travelling from Schengen zone countries essentially relates to a bilateral dispute between Libya and Switzerland. The European Union Presidency and missions in Libya are making intensive efforts to resolve the dispute. Our ambassador in Rome has been liaising closely with EU colleagues and the Libyan authorities in Tripoli to ensure that Irish citizens travelling to Libya are not affected by the restrictions. While there was some confusion when the restrictions were initially imposed earlier this week, the ambassador has now received assurances from the Libyan authorities to the effect that Irish citizens will not be affected by the current suspension of visas to Schengen zone countries.
I will welcome the comments and questions of the committee members.
I thank the Minister. We have a long list of speakers, Deputies Billy Timmins, Joe Costello and Timmy Dooley, Senators Feargal Quinn and John Hanafin, Ms Nessa Childers, MEP, Senator Terry Leyden and Deputies Noel Treacy and Pat Breen.
I thank the Minister for his opening statement. On the aid effort in Haiti, was there a request for the deployment of the EU battle group there? I gather from what the Minister said that some 300 police were going there, some of whom have already been deployed. Was consideration given to moving the EU battle group there and was there any request from the UN for such a force?
The Minister mentioned the UN resolution on sanctions on Iran. Have we any idea what those additional sanctions might be? He referred to Malta and the situation as regards travel and visas to Libya being added to the agenda. If he can, at this late stage, the Minister should seek to have the issue of the involvement of European passports in the assassination of an individual in Dubai last month, discussed. It would appear that the passports of a number of European countries, that is Britain, France and Ireland might have been used in this. Perhaps the Minister might be able to clarify the situation for the committee.
I would hesitate to jump to conclusions. However, I will not interrupt the Deputy.
In light of that I shall refrain from adding anything else, but if falsified Irish passports were used by a democratic state, this is a very serious development. The Minister should establish the facts in so far as he can and inform the committee on the situation. The Minister seems to have a certain hesitancy, and while I understand that it may be difficult to ascertain all the facts in such a short period, it is important that the committee is informed.
I welcome the Minister and thank him for his contribution on the previous meeting and the one that is forthcoming. To start on Deputy Timmins's point, it sounds alarming that three Irish passports were found in the possession of people who were reported to be part of an assassination squad connected to an intelligence group in another county. The Minister should make a statement here on this. It is important whether these are regarded as forgeries, and what information the Minister and the Government has. I understand the 50 stolen passports that were found, some years ago with Colonel Oliver North were never recovered. They could have come into the hands of certain groups operating in a clandestine fashion. That is a matter on which we need clarification, so I agree entirely with Deputy Timmins. We are not jumping to conclusions, but everybody will jump to conclusions unless there is some clarification.
I do not want to cut across members of the committee on that passport question. My only hesitancy is in jumping to conclusions. We need to be careful. There have been reports, but that is all. We should not use language at this stage to the effect that three Irish passports were used.
There have been reports all over the media.
I am just making the point that it should not be used even in terms of its being reported. For the benefit of the House, those mentioned in the reports do not appear on our records as people to whom Irish passports have been issued.
It is important that the Minister should clarify whether false Irish passports were involved.
The numbers are inconsistent with those used in our system. This is very preliminary, but all of us should be careful in jumping to conclusions. I will share everything I have with the committee, however.
Could the Minister say whether the passports were forged in such a manner as to create the impression that they were Irish passports?
There is no comprehensive detail on that yet. However, I can give the Deputy what we have to date in terms of the names that have emerged.
We will come back to the Minister on this again, anyway.
It is important that the Minister puts on the public record what information he has, because there is a considerable amount of other information in the media, and it is being spread not just in Ireland, but all over the world. This may not go down well internationally. They may well be forged but there should be a timely response by the Government to that effect if that is the case rather than the impression being created abroad that an intelligence agency might have access to Irish passports, which could be used for criminal activities.
We issued a statement yesterday. The Deputy's language is adding to speculation and to that impression.
That is what is in the media. There is no sense in charging us with the problem.
The point has been made and members should continue to contribute before the Minister responds. Members recognise the speculation and rumour and that can be cleared up in his reply.
I assure the Chairman I will share any information we have on this with the committee.
That was not the point I was making. I do not want to get in camera information from the Minister. All the information should be put in the public arena as soon as possible to ensure Ireland’s good name is protected.
I did not say I would share this in camera.
The Minister said he would not share it with members.
We will share this with the public and with the Deputy.
We are not in camera now. Could we please proceed?
With regard to the Middle East, the Minister did not go into detail about Israel and the Palestinians, which is a live issue for the committee. It is also a live issue for the Minister in that he has been refused access to Gaza. Are all European Foreign Ministers being refused access or is it specific to our Minister? If so, that is highly discriminatory. The EU should make it clear that such a refusal is not appropriate.
Has there been further progress in the Mitchell proximity talks and proposals on Gaza? He arrived in the Middle East in January. Has any movement taken place? Has access been provided for reconstruction materials to reach Gaza?
I am glad the major thrust of discussions at the Council will be on the Union's 2020 strategy for jobs growth and the response to that will be interesting.
This committee and the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny have discussed the regulatory structure of the Union. Hints have been made that some financial institutions and the Union are not as enthusiastic about implementing the proposed micro and macro monitoring and supervisory mechanisms by de Larosière by the end of the year. Perhaps the Minister might seek clarification on what progress has been made on them.
As the Minister said, the report from the Copenhagen climate change conference was disappointing across the board. Both the developing countries and developed countries did not put their shoulder to the wheel. The developing countries were unhappy with what developed countries proposed, which was vague, and they did not come up with hard targets. Is there a proposal for a similar attempt to be made? Will the Union under the Spanish Presidency make progress to bring these blocs together again or to meet separately among themselves to extract more meaningful commitments?
The Minister suggested the door may be open for the accession of Croatia by the end of this year if the Slovenian maritime agreements with Croatia are ironed out. There has been progress in this regard. Will Croatia be brought into the Union next year? Where stands Iceland in this regard?
There was a great deal of criticism about the manner in which foreign aid was distributed in Haiti. We had the strange spectacle of the former President of the United States, Bill Clinton, apologising to the Haitian people about the inadequacy of distribution and the lack of co-ordination. We expected with the new High Representative that the Union would have a greater focus on natural disasters of this nature but, sadly, that has not happened. It would be worth clarifying this. I acknowledge Ireland's contribution has been extensive. Do we have a lead NGO in this regard or have all the NGOs agreed to come under the umbrella of Irish Aid in order that we also have a proper, co-ordinated approach to the distribution of our aid?
I welcome the Minister and his officials and I thank him for his presentation. I would like to acknowledge his input into the unblocking of the deadlock in the Northern Ireland talks and his forbearance in that regard and I welcome the outcome of the talks.
The Minister referred to the need to move the Lisbon strategy on in the context of job growth and greater focus on innovation, research and development and competitiveness. That is timely and it is positive that our Commissioner has a brief that can be of assistance in this regard and I hope this will assist us in our efforts to generate employment and recover economically in line with the Government's strategy. Hopefully, there will be movement on that.
With regard to Haiti, has the EU conducted analysis of its response or of its capability to address other disasters of a similar proportion? The scale of this disaster provides an opportunity for all developed countries to reassess their capability and I hope the Union will analyse what happened and will examine its potential to respond in future to a similar disaster within the Union or externally. Will there be ongoing debate about improving the Union's capability to provide support in disaster zones?
The Minister's position on the Middle East is strong and well founded on facts. He is well aware that there has not been much of an increase in the volume of goods allowed in to Gaza compared with the volumes accessing the area prior to the conflict in December 2008. The shipments are fixed at basic subsistence levels. It is not possible to provide anything other than basic necessities and, therefore, the goods necessary for restoration and reconstruction of normal commercial life cannot be provided, which is unacceptable. I acknowledge the effort the Minister has made but is there continuing resistance at EU level to deal with this issue effectively to force Israel's hand in this regard? I refer to previous discussions by the committee. At what point will the Union force Israel's hand through sanctions or much more affirmative action to allow the people of Gaza to have some quality of life, or at least that potential? If the blockades are retained at their existing level, it is clear there will not be resumption to normal life within the Gaza Strip, bad and all as that was. I urge the Minister to continue taking on the aggressive approach by Israel and to bring to bear the Union's efforts to resolve it.
I do not want to get into the fact that Libya is on the agenda because the Minister addressed it well, but what is Ireland's approach to the development of diplomatic links with that country? Many Irish companies have recently seen very significant commercial opportunities in the development of infrastructure in Libya and across the entire region. We have developed skill sets in the area of road building and large construction projects, and there are opportunities down there. Based on discussions I have had with others, there is a belief that there should be a greater level of diplomatic co-operation and participation between Ireland and Libya.
A decision has been taken by the Swedish Government to remove its embassy from Ireland. What views has the Minister on that? We have had strong representation from Sweden for many years and its current ambassador has been very co-operative with this committee. I recognise that it is a matter for the Swedish Government, but if there is anything the Department could do to support the retention of that embassy here, it would be welcome.
I welcome the Minister and his team. Public relations means a great deal in business. Sometimes it is even as important as the actual fact.
We have discovered that in recent days.
It seems that is not recognised very well at European level. We now have a high representative of the Union for foreign affairs, Ms Catherine Ashton, we have given more money in Europe to the problem in Haiti, and yet almost all the thanks and the recognition has been handed over to the Americans. At a time when Europe needs to be recognised for its strengths, especially when there are speculators out there targeting us, Ms Ashton does not appear to have done anything like the Americans have done on that basis. I do not know how she can be made to do that, but it must be done. I was disappointed to learn that President Obama has announced that he will not attend the meeting in Madrid next May. He had planned to attend it, but now he will not go. I mention this because the strength and importance of Europe needs to be recognised, particularly at economic level, but on many other levels as well.
The Minister mentioned that Switzerland was part of the Schengen area, and this tiff between Libya and Switzerland is a reminder of that. Have we given any attention to joining the Schengen area? We are in the EU and Switzerland is not, yet we do not have that benefit. I know there is a problem between North and South and between Britain and Ireland on this issue, but since we are able to get together and find solutions to so many other problems, it is a shame if we cannot do something about this issue.
We in Ireland should welcome the entry of Croatia into the European Union. Croatia and Ireland are of a similar size and we have much in common, and its entry is something we should encourage. I know the problem between Slovenia and Croatia has presented difficulties, but I understand this may be close to resolution. We should urge that some of Croatia's other problems are resolved so that we can welcome the country into the Union at an early stage.
There has been a clear sequence of events in respect of sanctions on Iran. Each event has been preceded by a threat from the Iranians, and they are adamant that if there are further sanctions, they are intent on closing the Strait of Hormuz. If these straits are closed, it means all the oil from Iraq, Iran, Kuwait and large parts of Saudi Arabia will be blocked. There will be an immediate spike in the price of oil. I do not suggest for a minute that there should not be sanctions where there is a clear violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. That would be a case of not taking necessary action and then paying a huge price later on. The last thing the Middle East needs is another nuclear power. With that in mind, I call on the Minister to ask the Council to look at the implications for Europe of taking the step towards sanctions, including the implications of an Iranian move to block the Straits of Hormuz, as they have clearly stated they might do.
The Minister would be the right man to mediate between Libya and the EU, because there seems to be no diplomatic method of dealing properly in the international sphere. Everything seems to be done through knee-jerk reactions. Ireland has a good relationship with Libya and had a good working relationship for many years, including in the 1980s when other countries could not deal with that country.
Although it is not on the agenda for this meeting, the Spanish Presidency has clearly stated that it is in favour of easing the visa requirements with Russia. As we will need more commodities from Russia, and the visa requirements are almost the same as those that applied during the Cold War, the Spanish Presidency has made it very clear that it wishes to see that visa requirement substantially eased. We would all benefit from this. Not only would trade benefit, but people coming from Russia who wish to take their holidays in Europe will not have these oppressive restrictions on them. I ask the Minister to support the Spanish in their quest to ensure that the visa restrictions are eased substantially.
I welcome the Minister and his officials, and I support the point made by Deputy Dooley on his enormous commitment to the Northern talks. He put aside his diary and stayed in Belfast for the duration of those talks. I congratulate him and the Secretary of State, the Taoiseach, the Prime Minister and all the parties involved. It was a great achievement.
It is important that the passport issue is clarified, following events in Dubai that resulted in the assassination of a Hamas leader. We have restrictions on our passports and they are very hard to acquire. I remember the economic passport investment scheme, which was very worthwhile in the past, but it does not apply so much now. It is quite obvious that these are forged passports, in light of what the Minister said. Our passports are special and are accepted throughout the world. I know the Minister and his officials will have this matter clarified on the international stage.
Senator Quinn made the point on Haiti and the position of the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, in regard to the additional funds given for assistance, which were well received along with the €500 million pledged by the European Union. The new High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Baroness Catherine Ashton, while she is working her way into her job, could have had a higher profile in this regard. I know she would not want to interfere with the aid going into Haiti and she knew that more attention would be paid to her position but that did not detract from others going in, including the special representative of the United States, former President Bill Clinton, those from the United Nations and others. Baroness Ashton's role was not really recognised and, as a result, the role of the European Union was not recognised internationally to the extent it should have been. However, I accept her view that she did not want to be a distraction in this regard.
On the situation in the Middle East and, in particular, the situation in Gaza, I note our colleague, Ms Nessa Childers, MEP, was successful in getting into Gaza. It is most unfortunate that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who was prepared to go to Gaza with other colleagues, was deprived of the opportunity. He should reactivate his request to visit that region.
Senator George Mitchell is in the region and has been working hard. However, it is very difficult to get the parties together. It is ironic that the State of Israel has been very helpful in regard to Haiti when 1.5 million are people living in deprived conditions in Gaza, as Ms Childers will no doubt explain.
The Egyptians have been extremely helpful. I met the Egyptian ambassador in regard to humanitarian aid. There is not enough opportunity to get that aid into Gaza and there is no opportunity to bring in material for the reconstruction of parts of Gaza. While one might reconstruct areas in Gaza, there is no reassurance from the Israelis that they would not be bombed soon afterwards.
I cannot understand why we in the European Union, which provides the largest amount of aid to Gaza and Palestine, do not have more influence. Again, Baroness Ashton will have to play a greater role in this regard. The difficulty is, first, that the settlements are going ahead in east Jerusalem, where land is being bought up and Palestinians are being evicted. At the same time, the Hamas regime in Gaza will not accept the right of Israel to exist. Surely, it could learn from the Northern Ireland conflict in regard to Sinn Féin and the IRA that this cannot continue. It is an excuse for the Israelis to point to the ideology of Hamas, supported by the Iranians, and suggest they want the destruction of Israel. As long as this continues, it is an excuse for the Israelis not to react.
Gaza has no port or airport to provide access for aid. It is one of the major issues in the world. I am aware of the Minister's involvement and that he is seeking to visit the region. I want to compliment the United Nations and, in particular, Mr. John Ging on his great work in this area. I hope the Minister, at the meeting of his colleagues, has an opportunity to reiterate Ireland's very strong position. Ireland was the first State, and the late Mr. Brian Lenihan was the first Minister for Foreign Affairs, to recognise the State of Palestine. We have a very proud tradition in that regard and I know the Minister, Deputy Martin, will continue that work on behalf of this country.
While I do not wish to curtail members, I point out that we will eventually run out of time. We should keep this in mind, although it does not affect any particular member. I call Ms Nessa Childers, MEP.
I thank the Minister for attending and for his interesting report. On Thursday, 11 February, a majority of the European Parliament, including my own group, voted to temporarily dismantle the SWIFT agreement whereby financial data of EU citizens was transferred to the United States for counter-terrorism purposes. That the Irish Government was in favour of this agreement, while the liberal group to which the Fianna Fáil members belong was against it, as were the European Greens, is one of the anomalies that are often thrown up in the EU. As the Government was in favour of the agreement, what is the Minister's opinion as to how we should proceed?
I raise this because the issue is greater than the sum of its parts. It is the first time since the Lisbon treaty that the European Parliament has the power to veto or dismantle an international agreement. We must, in this committee and elsewhere, come to understand that in the past the European Parliament has been ignored on many issues when it should not have been, and that it is not business as usual in Europe after Lisbon. The Irish Government and all the other Governments on the Council need to take this on board.
I agree with everything Senator Leyden said in regard to Gaza. When I visited Gaza, I found the people there were very interested in the Irish delegates. This is because we have a power greater than the size of our country with regard to what we can do in the Middle East, partly because of our experience with the Northern Ireland Troubles. Mr. Ging, the United Nations representative, is in a state of controlled desperation, trying to tell us the very desperate humanitarian situation that exists. I do not want to think of what will happen when the Egyptians finally close that tunnel through which food is coming. There is no plan B and no one knows how food or anything else will get into Gaza.
We could have a role within the European Union itself in leveraging that situation. As Senator Leyden said, we have a great deal of power in terms of trade with Israel. We should proceed in that regard.
I would be grateful if the Minister could answer the questions on the SWIFT agreement and Gaza.
I welcome the Minister and his officials and thank him for his work on Northern Ireland. On the passports situation, Irish passports are sacrosanct. Much of the problem is that when our people go overseas, particularly young people, many find that their passports are stolen, which creates a major difficulty for our diplomatic service in trying to get new passports for our citizens while trying to get back the originals. Those passports can end up in the wrong hands. The Minister might like to provide some figures in this regard.
I hope we can make progress on the issue of the Croatian application. Croatia did not get the support it should have got it in the past. It could have been included heretofore but the Union used a sledgehammer to crack a nut in regard to the problems with Croatia, which were proven to be unnecessary subsequently — the Irish position was absolutely consistent on that. I wish the Croatians well.
On the Haitian situation, is the humanitarian aid getting through? Are there structures in position that can ensure the people are looked after? Following that, we need to put medium to long-term structures in position to try to renew the country. We must take into account that the federal Government of the United States is in a position to make a unilateral decision and move. We live in a very broad democracy, made up of different member states, and the European Union cannot respond as quickly. When we compare the two situations, we are not comparing like with like. This is something the Union, post Lisbon, will have to address if it is to improve its global impact.
The situation in the Middle East is still very serious. In the new post Lisbon situation, the Union should be in a position to drive that agenda in a stronger way and, hopefully, there will be enough partners, including the US, to co-operate with it.
We wish the Minister well with all the meetings ahead. These are very important times for the Union and its citizens.
I wish to raise three issues. I discussed the Middle East peace process with the Minister yesterday on Priority Questions in the Dáil. Does he believe the Middle East envoy, Mr. George Mitchell, is frustrated at this stage in regard to his efforts to get some improvements in the situation, particularly after his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton's statement in regard to the settlement activities of Israel? Has this tied his hands to a certain extent?
As I said yesterday, €4 billion has been pledged for reconstruction in Gaza but not much has been spent. The people of Gaza are crying out for help to the outside world, including the EU and the United States, to try to rebuild their country, where 20,000 people have been displaced. Following the refusal to grant him a visa to visit Gaza late last year, has the Minister met the Israeli ambassador to discuss the situation? Is it his intention to secure a visa to visit Gaza this year? It is important that the European Union should show strength on this matter. Now that the Lisbon treaty is in force, we have a High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy in the person of Baroness Catherine Ashton, although some have said she is slow off the mark in the role. Is it her intention to visit Gaza on behalf of the European Union in the near future? Does the Minister expect she will obtain permission to do so?
Two rounds of elections took place in Ukraine in January and February, which were monitored by observers from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe and from the Council of Europe. There are question marks over the future direction of the country following those elections. The former President, Mr. Viktor Yushchenko, took a very positive pro-European approach and expressed an interest in the country joining the European Union in the future, as did his colleague, the Prime Minister, Ms Yulia Tymoshenko. However, the re-election of the former Prime Minister, Mr. Viktor Yanukovych, who is very pro-Russian, signals a change of direction for Ukraine. I understand this matter is on the agenda for discussion at next week's meeting.
Regarding Turkey's accession to the European Union, will the Minister update us on the situation in regard to Cyprus? It is important that issues pertaining to the division of the island should remain on the agenda, and that encouragement be given to any progress in uniting it.
This is the second meeting under the new working arrangements of the Lisbon treaty. What difference has the implementation of the treaty made?
That may be a loaded question.
I commend the Senator on his question.
Like other speakers I acknowledge the role played by the Minister in the successful talks in Northern Ireland. The outcome is an indication of a new maturity in politics in the North.
This committee has lost a member who played a constructive and positive role for several years. I take this opportunity to thank the former Senator, Ms Déirdre de Búrca, for her contribution and to wish her well for the future.
Hear, hear.
In regard to Haiti, the point made by Senator Quinn is important. The response of the European Union was substantive, which is what European citizens want. There is an important story to be told and citizens are entitled to know how money is being spent and the degree of success achieved in Haiti. We must contend not only with the immediate difficulties but, more importantly, with the long-term strategy. It is important that we communicate that strategy to European citizens.
Regarding climate change, we all agree that the Copenhagen conference did not deliver on its promise. The serious financial difficulties that have arisen not only in Europe but throughout the world have understandably received priority and taken up a good deal of time at European level. Nevertheless, can the Minister offer a guarantee that climate change remains a priority and will be treated as such?
In regard to Deputy Breen's question regarding Cyprus, we missed an opportunity at the time of Cyprus's accession to the Union in that we allowed half the island to join. That issue should be rectified. Is it still on the agenda at European level. Does the Minister expect it to be resolved?
The Minister has received a long list of useful submissions. Members correctly raised the issue of the forged passports, not in a pejorative way but merely to draw attention to the fact that the integrity and value of the passport of any country is seriously damaged by any type of misuse. Modern technology allows any Administration to cancel a passport quickly, particularly if it is a machine readable document. There is a requirement on most of us to have machine readable passports; if we do not have one, we do not get to travel to certain destinations.
On Haiti, I agree with those members who said that the European Union and the United Nations punched considerably below their weight in responding to the catastrophe. To put it simply, an emergency response should do what it says on the tin. There must be a speedy logistical response in terms of getting heavy equipment into the area fast, co-ordinating rescue efforts and so on. While non-governmental organisations and other voluntary organisations did extremely well, there was a tendency towards a lack of co-ordination. It should have been possible to unblock the harbour in a timely fashion. The blockade of Berlin, for example, was lifted at a time when technology was not nearly as advanced as it is today. There is no reason that the European Union, United Nations and United States, working together, could not have made a far more integrated effort to address the situation. I had several questions on Haiti in the House yesterday but, unfortunately, time ran out and I did not get an opportunity to elicit further information from the Minister.
The Chairman's attempts were well noted.
One's attempts, no matter how well noted and well intentioned, do not always succeed. However, the points have been well made by members today.
The Minister referred in some detail to Iran. Members have brought to his attention some of the concerns that affect many people. It is an area that could cause considerable problems for the European Union, the United Nations and others.
Members raised the Middle East and Gaza. I am in agreement with my colleague, Deputy Higgins, although members should not be concerned that this means I may join the Labour Party or anything like that. The degree to which the peace process is being moved ahead on a daily basis in the Middle East is not acceptable. It is being allowed to flounder. An attempt at least was made to move into Haiti and do something positive there. In the Middle East, on the other hand, a whole country is devastated but there is virtually no attempt to address the issue.
I concur with Deputy Power in wishing well the former Member, Ms Déirdre de Búrca, who was an active and constructive member of the committee.
The Minister will do well to address all the points raised in the time available.
I thank members for their contributions. I accept fully what the Chairman said regarding the reasons Members have tabled various questions. On the passport issue, we await a full report from our ambassador in the United Arab Emirates, Mr. Ciaran Madden. That embassy was opened only towards the end of last year. Mr. Madden has been on this case since the first media report. We issued statements yesterday with the minimal information we had at that time and I articulated those basic points. There were further meetings this morning between the deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs and our ambassador and with the Dubai police personnel, who have established direct contact with police authorities in Europe. It is not just Ireland that is being affected but other countries also. We will ensure the Garda Síochána links up with the Dubai police to follow up on this issue from a security perspective.
We became aware of this on Thursday, 4 February 2010. A report stated that four suspects in the killing in Dubai were believed to have entered the United Arab Emirates on Irish passports. Later reports indicated the number was three and subsequent press reports indicated those believed to be responsible for the killing were carrying European passports. Ambassador Madden contacted the foreign ministry of the UAE to get confirmation of the story. He called to the foreign ministry on 8 February but was told the matter was under investigation. Subsequently, the chief of police held a news conference giving details of the three passports. Having examined our systems, there was no evidence the numbers corresponded with our records. We have been unable to trace the people mentioned using the details published. Further meetings took place today and I await a full report from the ambassador.
Regarding the security of our system, it is important to note that in 2005 the Department introduced a new automatic passport system. Deputy Timmins raised this question yesterday. The new system involved the production of a more secure Irish passport data page. The new data page is made of a polycarbonate substance, making it almost impossible to alter without being detected by standard examination techniques. It is virtually impossible to produce without sophisticated production processes. In earlier booklets, the photo was inserted on a paper page and secured through a lamination process. Data is laser engraved on the new documents on a level under the polycarbonate. Photo substitution is not possible and it is impossible to alter data in the personal details page without the alteration being easily detected. The polycarbonate is further protected by a series of further security production measures, such as the image of the applicant being perforated through the data page using optically variable ink. In 2006 the security of the APS passport was incremented by the development of a new e-passport, which included a new microchip containing a digital image of the holder. This means the image of the face is presented in three areas — the photo in the personal details page, the laser perforation through the personal details page and in the microchip containing biometric data. All three must match and all three are impossible to alter without the alteration being easily detected. The data on the microchip is further protected using encryption technology.
That is the up-to-date position on the security of the Irish passport. From 2005 onwards, the automatic passport system was introduced. We will pursue this issue on the basis of the questions tabled by members. We will share the information subject to some security issues. We will liaise with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Garda Síochána on this matter.
Is it the case that our passports could not be forged?
Deputy Timmins asked me to make a statement on the security aspect of issuing Irish passports. I have put the position on record from 2005 on in terms of the APS system that was introduced.
The Minister is telling this committee the documents could not be forged.
Deputy Timmins asked a question on Haiti. There was no formal request for a battlegroup. The Haitian Government was anxious for civil and security assets and the deployment of equipment and materials. There was deployment of up to 300 police in response to the Haitian Government's request. A number of members raised the European Union response to Haiti. Comments have been made about whether high representative Ms Catherine Ashton was visible enough. I am distinctly uncomfortable with this line of argument. On the one hand I understand where members are coming from. Ms Ashton is three months in office and I would like to think the overwhelming issue should be of substance and not presentation when it comes to humanitarian aid. I am satisfied there was much substance in the European Union response. The modern world tends to be more about communication and perception than reality. We do not have to constantly sacrifice ourselves before the altar of perception and to judge ourselves more on the perception benchmark than on reality. We must really reflect on that.
Deputy Martin has had 12 good years of it. There were many launches over the past 12 years.
When the Minister finishes there will be an opportunity to contribute. The Minister can proceed.
I make this point seriously because this is the second time the committee has raised the point.
We are talking about substance.
Members are being particularly truculent today. I ask them to allow the Minister to proceed. We will allow further clarification at the end.
I refer to how and why we sold the Lisbon treaty.
I am not making this point as criticism but as a general point we should reflect on as public representatives. There is a headlong rush to be seen to be doing something as opposed to doing something. There will be a post-Haiti emergency response analysis by the EU. I am interested in the substance of that. Could support have been provided more quickly? I am not interested in whether Catherine Ashton could have gone out there quicker and done some PR exercise; I am more interested in whether we could have got goods and services, food and shelter and health and life-saving equipment out there faster. That is the only issue we should be concerned about. The idea that we should be preoccupied with being up in lights more than someone else because we are giving so much money is a poor reflection on how we are beginning to look at everything in the political world and in the communication world. There must be a time when the political world stands up and is counted so that it does not feel the need to rush headlong after a media rush on a particular topic. I have got that off my chest now.
Well done Minister, we agree.
This will come up at the meeting on Monday and I will talk to Catherine Ashton about this.
I agree with the Minister's approach but could not resist pointing out the historical contradiction.
Regarding the situation in Libya and the Schengen zone, there is a recent history in terms of Switzerland in Libya. There has been suppression of visas on both sides. The EU has the capacity to mediate a resolution of this and it will occur. I am concerned that this has happened and it is regrettable. There has been an opening by some EU states with Libya. I refer in particular to Italy. Deputy Dooley raised the question of our approach to Libya. Ambassador Hennessy was recently appointed to Rome and has responsibility for Libya. He has been in Tripoli and we are examining the commercial and economic opportunities. We will pursue those like other EU states. We will do this within an EU context and in the context of a framework of the evolution of a relationship between Libya and the EU. We will do so in a proper and correct way but we are not blind to the realities.
Regarding Iran, the twin-track approach of engagement and pressure is essential. We have to be prepared to impose sanctions if Iran refuses to negotiate. In response to Senator Hanafin's question, we are conscious of the implications but Iran has to make a choice between engagement and isolation.
The Iranian Government received a generous offer last October in regard to the Tehran research reactor following discussions under the auspices of the IAEA. Unfortunately, it has prevaricated and failed to respond definitively or in an open manner to this offer. Events have moved on and one must conclude that the country has in effect decided not to take it up. We would prefer United Nations sanctions but we may have to consider autonomous measures by the European Union. We are anxious that the sanctions are targeted at political and security elites and are smart so that they do not punish the ordinary citizens of Iran. It is welcome that the revolutionary guards and their specific business interests are being identified as a key constituency for sanctions in any new UN Security Council resolution. The European Union remains committed to a diplomatic resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue. However, a diplomatic approach does imply talking and nothing else, especially if one side is in effect refusing to negotiate. The Union has already imposed sanctions on Iran, including an assets freeze on its largest bank and a travel ban on certain Iranian officials and scientists.
In December, the European Council made it clear that the EU will support further Security Council actions and will, if necessary, act on its own. Ireland fully supports the EU's position. This is a very serious issue which is causing considerable concern across Europe and the world. I would identify it as one of the most serious issues on our desks for 2010. It will have a range of implications and global repercussions if it is not properly resolved.
A number of members asked about the Middle East, including Deputies Costello and Dooley, Senator Leyden and the Member of the European Parliament.
Nessa Childers.
I know that but it is not easy to say "Deputy" or "Senator" when it comes to Members of the European Parliament. We have to agree a form of addressing them.
Nessa will do.
The riddle of the sands.
The issue has always been the desire to initiate a process of negotiation on final status issues. George Mitchell is continuing his efforts to bring the parties to the negotiating table, despite increasing frustration on his part with both the Israeli and the Palestinian interlocutors. He visited Europe and Israel-Palestine in January and his latest proposals centre around proximity talks beginning at an official level with the idea that official discussions on practical issues could pave the way for full political negotiations. However, both sides have difficulties within their respective jurisdictions and constituencies and there has not been much movement.
President Abbas has indicated that he will in the near future respond publicly to the proposal on a talks process and the Arab partners have a role to play in supporting him in this regard. However, it is difficult to be optimistic at this stage and my own sense is that the related issues have not made it easy for him. I have long held the view that the settlement policy, the Gaza blockade and other issues have made it difficult for moderates within the Palestinian community to make progress. In a counterproductive way, the hard-liners' hand has been strengthened. We remain keen none the less to see the talks process commence.
Yesterday I stated in the Dáil that the blockade of Gaza is unacceptable and represents a collective punishment of 1.5 million people. There is no justification for it in my mind. I salute the work done by many parliamentarians. Deputy Costello asked about the travel ban on Gaza, which we understand to be across the board. It is a matter for other countries to comment further, however. It appears to me that such visits may highlight the unacceptable situation there to the international community. I hope to visit Gaza shortly and I will continue my efforts to facilitate this visit. I have raised the issue at a number of recent General Affairs and External Relations Council meetings. Europe's overarching desire is to develop a peace process but it is unacceptable on humanitarian grounds that the deprivation is allowed to continue. People cannot get the materials they need to build homes, hospitals and basic infrastructure such as sewerage, water and sanitation. I will again raise the issue again on Monday.
The December Council meeting arrived at fair and reasonably strong conclusions on the Middle East and we worked closely with the Swedish Presidency on preparing them.
In terms of growth and jobs, Deputy Costello asked about the de Larosière proposals. As the Council of Heads of State and Government signed off on these proposals in December, there will no resiling on them by member states. The proposals will now go before the European Parliament and, as Nessa Childers, MEP, has pointed out, that body's agreement can no longer be taken for granted. We did not take it for granted prior to Lisbon, however, because co-decision has been in place for quite some time. It is important that we develop an EU-wide supervisory framework for financial institutions.
We hope to end membership negotiations with Croatia by the end of 2010 but the ensuing ratification process could be lengthy and I would not hazard to predict a date for entry at present. We hope the Slovenian resolution process comes to a speedy conclusion. We support Croatia's accession and that reflects what everybody has said this morning. The Commission's position on Iceland is close to finalisation and I understand it may be issued presently.
I thank Deputy Dooley, Senator Leyden and others for their comments on Northern Ireland, which necessitated my absence from certain other meetings during January. It was worth it at the end of the day.
Deputy Dooley asked about the Swedish embassy. I raised it with the Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs, Carl Bildt, who explained the background to the issue in terms of that country's budgetary situation and increased costs. I explained that in so far as possible we have taken the position that we would maintain representation in every EU member state from a policy and political perspective given our membership of the EU and the least member states should do is maintain a presence in each other's states. That is just an observation and I am not being critical because every state will do what it must to meet its strategic objectives and imperatives and to operate within financial constraints. The point that we do not need a bells and whistles presence everywhere is something we are bearing in mind in terms of our presence in some states and working within existing resources.
Senator Quinn raised Haiti in terms of public relations. Generally I would agree that Europe could communicate better. We dealt with that in the Lisbon treaty.
I have dealt with Senator Hanafin's issues regarding Iran and Libya and the easing of visa restrictions for Russia. The Spanish Presidency proposes to ease visa restrictions and the issue must be negotiated within broader EU-Russian relationships. To be fair, the Georgian conflict is still an issue and events from August 2008 set back relations to some extent. We are committed to improving relations with Russia and the EU should do so as well. I accept the visa regime for Schengen Irish nationals is difficult and bureaucratic.
The EU found that Georgia had been the aggressor.
There was a report but I am not getting into that. There are 27 member states and the conflict created tensions, challenges and difficulties; we should not pretend otherwise. At least a process was created to try to deal with those difficulties through a talks process. This may develop into substantive negotiations between Europe and Russia because it is an important strategic partner. It is important to get relationships on a sound footing and we support that general impetus.
With regard to the Society for World Interbank Financial Telecommunications, SWIFT, agreement, we accept the Parliament has made its decision. We took a position and supported it as a member state at the level of government. Governments supported it and the Parliament has rejected it. The Council's position was reached after long and very difficult negotiations on this agreement with the US. The Commission stated in the past few days that it is withdrawing its proposals with regard to SWIFT in light of the vote in Parliament. It may resubmit proposals for a longer-term agreement in which data protection will be a major issue. The Council will return to the matter and in the mean time there are bilateral arrangements with the US on the exchange of information.
That brings me nicely to Senator Donohoe's question on the position in the aftermath of the Lisbon treaty. That is an illustration of what can happen but it is early days. It will clearly make a difference and lead to a more coherent voice from Europe to the world stage, particularly on the foreign relations side. The European external action service must be established.
There were many positives in our response to Haiti and it remains to be seen how events will pan out in other issues. There are teething problems with regard to where elements fit in institutions. We discussed at the last meeting how to develop coherence between the country holding the presidency, the president of the Council, and the high representative and Commission. The issues must be bedded down and resolved so it is too early to make pronouncements on the differences. I am confident that on a range of fronts in Parliament and the domestic parliaments, or in greater coherence at European Union level on key global issues like climate change and development, our performance will be enhanced.
I thank the Minister. The points have been well-made and responded to well. The meeting has gone on for a considerable time but we have come to a halt in the public session. I thank members for their contributions as well as the Minister and his team for attending. I wish him well and ask him to bear in mind the opinions as expressed by members in his discussion with EU colleagues.
I will do so.
