The minutes of the meeting held on 12 November were circulated with the agenda. Are they in order?
Business of Joint Committee.
The minutes refer to the extent to which the committee should consider EU related matters. Deputy Quinn pointed out that the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs has a specific remit and there is no point in it confining its activities to the scrutiny of secondary legislation. This committee already has a huge workload and in view of this, I hope the record of the meeting, which does not reflect what was decided, will not indicate an intention of seeking to impinge on the role of the European affairs committee. I would not like to see the Department playing one committee against the other.
I agree with Deputy Mitchell. It was clearly decided that the committee should not become bogged down with issues that can be competently addressed elsewhere.
The general agreement was that we do not wish to become too involved in matters which are the preserve of the European affairs committee. However, the committee has a broad overall concern with issues, especially in security and defence. The minutes note the points raised. The committee did not reach agreement.
I presume the tenor of the remarks made by Deputies Quinn, Higgins and me are not pre-empted by this record.
No. Whatever we do in this area will be considered with a view to trying to avoid overlap with the European affairs committee. There should be no difficulty with that.
I am concerned that the committee may exclude EU matters. It must take an overall view of foreign affairs. While I do not suggest that the excellent work of the European affairs committee be duplicated here, I have some concerns regarding Deputy Quinn's comments. I accepted them in the spirit of his suggestion that this committee can only achieve so much and that, because of its wide mandate, it is sensible to focus on specific issues. However, the committee should also be in a position to discuss EU matters from time to time. The matter should be clarified.
I am concerned about this issue and I welcome the supportive comments of Deputy Higgins. My concern is that the Department could play one committee against the other. While this committee may wish to consider security and defence issues, European affairs should be left to the European affairs committee. This committee already has a huge agenda.
I am concerned that rather than take cognisance of policies set down by this committee and the European affairs committee, the Department may seek to ensure that both committees follow its policies. In my role as foreign affairs spokesperson for my party and as Chairman of the Committee on European Affairs, I have been playing it down the middle and I am not going to be played for a chump by anybody. We must get tougher about this or that will happen. I am making my view clear. Sometimes when we go about our work peacefully and constructively, there are people outside these committees who think they can play politics with politicians. I want to put that on the record.
I wish to make a point about this which I hope will be of help. Frankly there are general issues, to which you referred, Chairman, which surface on the General Council of Ministers for Foreign Affairs and there is a myriad of issues which appear under the remit of Ministers who have been allocated a specific portfolio for Europe. Looking at the two, I can certainly see that from time to time there would be issues at the General Council meeting regarding, for example, the Troika, or the Quartet as it is now, to the Middle East, and that is a foreign affairs issue. By and large, however, the main body of matters are dealt with by a Minister for Europe. The distinction is defined in a practical sense by what is on the agenda of these various groups and we should respect that.
No doubt we respect that. If we can communicate on any of the issues, we can deal with it. I suppose it is a warning bell about what can happen. Are the minutes agreed?
I apologise for going on about this, Chairman, but I consciously made a contribution under item 4, election of the vice-chairman, at the inaugural meeting of this committee because it is a committee which has particular status in both Houses. To remind members, the precedent, which has been repeated, is that Senators are excluded from any position of office on Oireachtas joint committees. The following modest proposal, which was agreed by the Seanad Committee on Procedure and Privileges within the past 12 months and was transferred to the committee on parliamentary reform, has been put forward, that consideration be given to Senators for appointment as joint vice-chairmen of Oireachtas joint committees. This would in no way impact on the status quo. It would create one extra position. Unfortunately, the proposal has not received widespread support and that is the reason I raised it in the context of the election of the vice-chairman. I was somewhat disappointed that there was not at least an acknowledgement of lowly Senators’ point of view. I do not wish to in any way impugn the efficacy of the secretariat which is trying very hard to reflect everybody’s viewpoint.
It is not the practice to record the contribution of individual members in the minutes. They are set out in generalities. However, we will amend the minutes to include the fact that the point was raised.
Thank you, Chairman.
Are the minutes agreed? Agreed.