The second item on the agenda is a discussion on EU-Asia and EU-Australia relations with Dr. Philomena Murray, Jean Monnet chair ad personam and associate professor, school of social and political sciences, University of Melbourne, with whom we had an interesting informal meeting last year and we are delighted to see her back again among us. I will not read the full notice of privilege but consider it said visitors have full privilege, unless they become outlandish in their approach. The normal procedure is that there will be an opening presentation, following which members will respond.
EU-Asia and EU-Australia Relations: Discussion
Dr. Philomena Murray
I thank the joint committee for its invitation. It is a great pleasure to be here. As I am based at the University of Melbourne, I get to see how the European Union is viewed from the outside. When I first arrived in Australia 20 years ago, I discovered that the European Union was not on the radar of most people, except when it came to agricultural issues. That is when I was told how inimical and difficult the European Union was. I have since had the pleasure of working on EU issues and introducing them at the University of Melbourne and being involved with other universities in that regard. I have also learned quite a bit about relations between Australia and the European Union and also the EU-Asia relationship. I will brief the committee for approximately ten minutes and then welcome questions.
On 4 and 5 October this year there will be a large summit known as the Asia-Europe Meeting, ASEM. It will be the eighth such summit. The region has 60% of the world's population and accounts for 60% of the world's trade. Why is ASEM important or not so? It is important because it brings together the Heads of Government every two years, of east Asian and European countries initially. However, it has recently expanded its membership and for the first time Australia, New Zealand and Russia will be involved. It includes many of the world's powers, except for the United States. Represented at the meeting in October will be the 27 EU countries, the ten countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations, ASEAN, with China, Japan, South Korea, India, Pakistan and Mongolia, the European Commission and the ASEAN secretariat and for the first time Australia, Russia and New Zealand. There is informal dialogue on political, economic and cultural issues. This all sounds very good and it is. However, while ministerial meetings take place and there are joint projects among businesses, parliaments, civil society and other stakeholders and while it is often regarded as a decision-making or policy-making laboratory, it is informal. Getting people from one part of the world to another to understand each other is one of its main achievements, which is very positive.
Why then do I suggest that in some ways ASEM is not important? There are many who say trade relations work without such dialogue. If one speaks to staff in the European Commission and those involved in free trade agreements, one will find there is not necessarily significant enthusiasm for ASEM as a driver of such dialogue. It is not a group which can bring about binding decisions. It is important to be aware of this, but nevertheless it can deal with multilateral issues and global perspectives. It is a way for the European Union to seek to form alliances, what can be called multilateral but also mini-lateral alliances with perhaps a group of countries on specific issues. This is where, from an Australian perspective, for instance, in peace promotion and facilitating peace initiatives and conflict resolution, the European Union as a soft power could work with countries such as Australia. In that regard, the European Union is involved in Mindanao with a number of other countries led by Malaysia following on from its success in the Aceh Monitoring Mission in the monitoring of the peace agreement in Indonesia some years ago.
In a sense, the European Union came to an understanding of its new engagement with Asia in 1994 through its first Asia strategy. It did so because of the Asian tigers, in particular, because of the need to deal with the considerable trade deficit with east Asia. There is still a considerable trade deficit, but now it has engaged in free trade agreement, FTA, negotiations. It will not have an FTA with ASEAN soon because of the situation in Burma-Myanmar and its membership of ASEAN. The European Union faces some major challenges in that regard, or one could say it is standing up for its principles on human rights.
The European Union has developed a number of strategic documents, including a strategic framework for enhanced partnership. These concentrate on trade and investment, but they also deal with the promotion of human rights, good governance, stability and the rule of law. They also look at relations with east Asia as a means of dealing with multilateral fora such as the WTO.
I have not mentioned China, except in passing. There are some who criticise the European union for not having an Asia policy, but rather for having a China policy. China is very much part of the mindset of the Union, but yet I put it to the committee that the Commission, in particular, is working diligently in developing the relationship with ASEAN and individual countries such as in the recent negotiations on the EU-Korea free trade agreement.
In many ways east Asia presents a challenge. It is not necessarily at the forefront of the European Union's mind. It is a developing relationship, but it is moving away from what is often called the donor-recipient paradigm to a more engaging and dynamic relationship. However, development aid matters, as the European Union is a key development donor in the region. Also, east Asia is quite different. It does have ASEAN, a fantastically novel organisation. However, it does not constitute a type of European Union, nor should it. The fact that representatives of Malaysia, Indonesia and Philippines even sit in the same room is something at which we should marvel, the way we did in the past about Germany and France in the history of the European Union.
The ASEAN way or, as it is often called, the Asian way depends on different norms of behaviour and interaction such as peaceful resolution of conflicts like the European Union, but there is a strong adherence to sovereignty and a reluctance to accept binding legislation. There is no equivalent of the European Court of Justice, even though this is increasingly coming up in the analysis. It has an ASEAN charter which does not compare with the Lisbon treaty, but, nevertheless, it provides for a committee of permanent representatives which visited Brussels approximately ten days ago where it met the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the European Union. It also travelled to Germany. There is movement towards a type of regionalism within east Asia. This is something the European Commission is pushing and one will also see in the ASEM discussions in October. The European Union has a number of regional integration projects which I will be happy to address during question time.
If I was to summarise the European Union's impact in east Asia, I would say it was soft, not hard. Certainly, it is a key trade and investment player. It is, in some ways, a soft power in the way it is trying to promote its own norms of governance, for instance, and in its encouragement of education and civil society links through the Asia-Europe forum. However, when it comes to being a hard power, it is the United States that matters as the key security guarantor within Asia. Second, there is significant concern about the rise of China as a potential hegemon or power within the region. That is one of the reasons the European Union is negotiating a lot with ASEAN and the other partners. The trade agreement between ASEAN and China took effect on 1 January this year.
On where the European Union fits in, it fits right in the centre. It is the main instigator of the co-operation taking place. It does not have one single interlocutor. I attended a conference on the issue a few days ago; I was in Brussels for the past week. At the ASEM conference — Asia-Europe Meeting to address global challenges — we discussed, to use Asia-Pacific language, the idea of having regional architecture. Through the offices of their former Prime Ministers, Australia and Japan brought forward proposals for a new type of Asian regional architecture. On the Australian model, former Prime Minister Rudd clearly emphasised that the United States had to be involved. He also referred to the European Union as a source of inspiration. The former Japanese Prime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama, deliberately excluded the United States. There are interesting power plays taking place in the east Asia and Asia-Pacific regions. These power plays have not only been noted by the European Union, they are also being acted upon in the context of increased engagement, including through the Asia-Europe Meeting in the area of security dialogue and other discussions.
Dr. Murray has raised a number of issues of interest to Ireland in the context of its role within the European Union. She has opened up a whole new vista for members in respect of trade and the implications relating thereto, particularly in the context of the dependency, for security reasons, of certain nations on the United States. That is also of historical significance. One need only visit the region to discover the reasons for this dependency.
I welcome Dr. Murray and thank her for her presentation. It is not often that contributors from the southern hemisphere come before the committee. Dr. Murray will be aware of the serious financial difficulties Ireland is experiencing as a result of what is often referred to as a world recession. Unfortunately, Ireland has been hit harder than most other countries by the recession. Will Dr. Murray explain how Australia has more or less remained untouched by it? Was this a result of good luck? Were particular policies pursued or was action taken in advance in order that Australia might circumvent the difficulties experienced by other countries?
Dr. Philomena Murray
I thank the Deputy for his question which is being examined——
I propose that we bank the questions from members. Dr. Murray can then respond to all of them.
Dr. Philomena Murray
I beg the Chairman's pardon. That will be fine.
I also welcome Dr. Murray and thank her for her thought-provoking presentation. It is important that we continue to develop dialogue with blocs and regions outside the European Union.
Dr. Murray referred to the summit due to be held in October, at which the United States will not be represented. From both a European and an Irish perspective, we have a reasonably good understanding and dialogue in respect of that which binds us and that which separates us. From a western European perspective, we do not have the same understanding of or ongoing dialogue with either Australia or parts of Asia. Our interest is primarily in or principally about trade. Much of this relates to the cultural differences between our respective races. If globalisation is to transcend trade and we are to work towards creating a world at peace — one of the goals of the European Union — there is a necessity to continue to develop links across cultural borders. The work Dr. Murray is doing is helpful and beneficial in that regard.
The expansion of the European Union into the south-eastern region of the Continent is advancing the case in that regard. I do not know if Dr. Murray had an opportunity to hear the Minister of State's presentation on the forthcoming meetings of the General Affairs Council and the Foreign Affairs Council. In the context of enlargement, the major hurdle the European Union must traverse is the accession of Turkey. To some extent, this development will be a watershed regarding the progress of the European Union in the context of the acceptance of what is a very different culture. Those who oppose Turkey's accession ask how the European Union will deal with the 99% of its population of 73 million who are registered as Muslim. If we are serious about attempting to bring peace to the world, we will only do so by fostering inter-cultural relationships and attempting to understand people and accepting their backgrounds. I thank Dr. Murray for her work in that regard and wish her well in her endeavours.
Like previous speakers, I welcome Dr. Murray. The relationship between Ireland and Australia is unique. I have visited Australia on a number of occasions. I did so in an official capacity in the 1980s and discovered that the percentage of Irish-Australians was greater than that of Irish-Americans. This is not well known.
Those who went to Australia were usually from the side of one's family about which one did not, for various reasons, want to talk.
In latter years plenty of young and educated people, including my son, have spent time in Australia.
In the context of the relationship between the European Union and Asia and comparing the European Union to the United States, the major difference is that the United States has a federal government. China has its own form of government. The European Union continues to develop but remains a collection of individual states and its Parliament has limited powers. However, as time passes, the impact of the European Union, in the context of negotiations with Asia or other regions, will be far greater. In the meantime, there are many issues on which there can be great co-operation, one of which is climate change and the need to reduce carbon emissions.
I am aware that Australia has large coal reserves and is exporting huge amounts of coal to China for use in power stations there. Coal is one of the main sources of carbon emissions. The need to devise ways to extract and store carbon from coal-fired power stations is a worldwide issue. In that regard, I understand there is great co-operation by Europe, the United States, Asia and Australia in identifying carbon capture and storage methods which would facilitate the continued use of this resource. This is one of the areas in which there could be far greater communication and co-operation. When the Minister of State was before us earlier, we discussed the failure of the recent climate change summit in Copenhagen. Powerful blocs such as Asia, of which China is part, the European Union and the United States can do a great deal in reaching international agreement on how we might tackle climate change. It is difficult to convince some that this is an issue of concern and importance. However, the evidence is there for everyone to see. The only way the problem of climate change can be solved is through co-operation by power blocs such as Asia and Europe. In that area alone there is a need for greater co-operation.
With regard to other issues, including trade, the European Union will develop in time. Every day of the week we hear about ongoing discussions with more and more countries which want to join the European Union. At some point it will stop and we will have a structure. We may not be around when that happens, but it will happen. We should, therefore, look at the things we could do together and try to build greater co-operation. There are sufficient brains between all of the personnel available throughout the world to deal with these major issues.
I thank Dr. Murray for her contribution and wish her well. I look forward to visiting Melbourne again in the not too distant future.
A return visit in November, I would say.
Dr. Philomena Murray
I thank members for their comments and questions. Australia is a very interesting case. It is in the Asia Pacific region, yet it has developed a close relationship with the European Union through a partnership framework agreement, signed in October 2008 and updated in what is called a dynamic and living document a year later. Therefore, there is huge dynamism. Australia is looking to learn from what is happening in the European Union but also to engage with it seriously on science and technology agreements such as the mutual recognition agreements signed with it.
Australia has had some interesting experiences. On the impact of the recession, Australia has done well because it does not have huge banks which borrowed to the same extent as European and United States banks. There is also greater control of the banking sector since about the mid-1990s, following the introduction of banking reforms. That meant one did not see banks in free-fall, as it were. There is also the fact that a spending package was introduced by the Government, as part of which many households received a grant of about 500 Australian dollars, as long as they were not above a certain limit. There was huge encouragement of spending in the economy.
Australia exports minerals. Deputy Barrett mentioned coal. Australia exports coal, particularly to China, but under the coal agreement between the European Union and Australia, it even exports coal to Europe, including Poland. Australia has been able to live, if not off the sheep's back, as it has done traditionally, then off the minerals' back, as it were.
The last aspect is educational and more general services. Australia is a key exporter of educational services to the Asia Pacific region. Many Australian universities, even schools in some cases, have an Asian campus.
As a result of all of these factors, Australia has been cushioned against the effects of the global financial crisis. In fact, for many in Australia the letters GFC do not stand for global financial crisis but for Geelong Football Club. When I have quizzes with my students, I always get both answers because they are being a little cheeky. Sometimes being a small country which has taken its own decisions, for instance, on banking issues, is an advantage. That certainly would be the case for Australia.
I thank Deputy Dooley for his comments. I agree with him that dialogue, particularly on trade issues, is what matters. I also agree that dialogue on intercultural issues is hugely important. The relatively little known Asia-Europe Forum which is based in Singapore and which I had the pleasure of visiting a few years ago works very hard on such dialogue. We must remember that Asia is where all of the world's great religions are to be found. It has huge diversity, not just of political and economic systems and ideology but also of religions. The Deputy mentioned Turkey. Some have drawn parallels with, for instance, Indonesia, the country with the largest number of people who claim to be Muslim. There are many synergies. Australia and the European Union have been working very closely with Indonesia on a number of issues, one of which is the Jakarta Centre for Law Enforcement Cooperation, for which the European Union has provided a lot of funding. It works on counter-terrorism issues, fundamentalism and people movements, particularly illegal people movements. Much work is being done that is not necessarily bloc to bloc or region to region. Sometimes it can include the European Union with, for instance, parts of east Asia. There are, actually, advantages to east Asia not being a cohesive region, as it means one can deal with individual countries also. The Deputy is so right about the intercultural relations issue which will be a key feature of the ASEM conference in October. There will be parallel dialogue with NGOs, many of whose leaders were present at the conference I attended last week. They are intent on making sure ASEM is not just about political summits but also about NGOs. It is about religious and intercultural understanding and the rights of minorities. That is what all of the parallel sessions will achieve, alongside what are known as the chairman's statements which this time will come from the Belgian Presidency.
Deputy Barrett referred to Ireland-Australia relations, on which I have worked very hard myself. I am married to an Italian Australian, which is how I ended up in Australia. When I was working in the Irish Embassy in Paris, I met this Australian. It was springtime in Paris and voilà.
Dr. Murray was swept off her feet.
Dr. Philomena Murray
When my son was small, his mathematics were not very good — he used to say he was half Irish, half Italian and half Australian. That is an interesting mix which many in Australia have.
Has Dr. Murray tried putting him on stage?
Dr. Philomena Murray
He is more interested in debating. Irish-Australian relations are so good one almost does not talk about them. It is funny that it is such a good news story. Irish people are very well regarded as hard workers. I have never encountered anything negative because I am Irish in any context. Of course, I am now also an Australian. The ease with which the Irish communicate with non-Irish Australians is enjoyable and absolutely fantastic. There have been many bilateral Irish-Australian agreements which have not been part of a Europe-Australia context. Irish music and literature are very well regarded. Whenever the Gate and Abbey theatre companies have visited, their productions were sold out in the blink of an eye. That relationship is hugely important.
When Deputy Barrett speaks about the European Union's impact becoming greater as it becomes more cohesive as an international actor, I fully agree with him. I look forward to seeing what will happen with the European External Action Service. I encountered a view in my meetings and interviews with the Commission last week that seemed to suggest that while the EEAS was going to face challenges in the short term, it might be able to come up with a more cohesive policy towards Asia that encompassed security, political, economic, trade and investment issues. It might allow for more cohesion than the current structure which lacks coherence and cohesiveness, at least in the relationship with Asia.
I take the Deputy's point about energy consumption and climate change. There is a report this morning that states China has taken over from the United States as the world's greatest consumer of energy. With this comes responsibility. Even though the fall-out after the meeting in Copenhagen was not as many would have expected, nevertheless, we will find that issue and sustainable development as key agenda items at ASEM and in summits between the European Union and China. I agree with the Deputy on the sharing of information and knowledge. The European Union is extremely good at signing science and technology and other agreements, which means academics and their students and also industries become very involved in the sharing and pooling of that resource.
That was a very interesting discussion. A standing invitation should be extended to Dr. Murray. When she is next in this hemisphere, she might give us a call. We will do our best to be still here. I am sure my colleagues on all sides of the House will do likewise. I again thank Dr. Murray for her visit. She was very helpful and supportive during the two Lisbon treaty referendum campaigns. We wish her well in her academic career.
The joint committee went into private session at 2.40 p.m. and adjourned at 2.45 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 27 July 2010.