Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 29 Jan 2004

Vol. 175 No. 5

European Presidency: Statements.

I apologise for holding up the business of the House but my colleague, the Polish Prime Minister, was running a little behind schedule.

I am delighted to have the opportunity to address the Seanad on Ireland's Presidency of the European Union and developments in Northern Ireland. Last September, I had the privilege of appearing before the Sub-Committee on Seanad Reform. At that time, and in my submission to the Committee on European Affairs in June, I highlighted the European Union and Northern Ireland as areas where this House has played a significant role. It is a particular pleasure, therefore, to have this opportunity to update Senators on developments in both these areas.

First, I will address the European Union and Ireland's Presidency. Last year, before the sub-committee, I underlined the importance of ensuring that the Seanad, and the Houses of the Oireachtas as a whole, are in the best position to respond to the challenges that face Ireland now and into the future. A critical issue for us, as public representatives, is how we can use our democratic institutions to engage more people in a full understanding of the processes that fundamentally affect our lives.

The introduction in 2002 of the system of Oireachtas scrutiny of European Union measures has gone a significant part of the way towards responding to this challenge. That system, which is overseen by the Joint Oireachtas Committee on European Affairs, is established now and is working well. I congratulate Senators for their important work in this area.

As Senators will be aware, the European Union is being expanded to 25 members in May. Negotiations for further membership are ongoing and more applications are expected. This expansion and the ongoing process of European integration, coupled with an ever changing global environment will, inevitably, make the European Union more complex and challenging for all of us. It will also provide new opportunities and possibilities and we must be prepared to grasp them.

In this new context, the Seanad could provide even greater added value to the identification and elaboration of Ireland's vital national interests in the European Union. It could also make an even more effective contribution to ensuring that Ireland, in the European Union, continues to engage positively and constructively. I look forward to the publication of the final report of the Sub-Committee on Seanad Reform in the near future. I pay tribute to the chairperson of the group, Senator O'Rourke, and all its members for carrying this vital work forward. They can rest assured that the Government will give careful consideration to the recommendations in the report.

Our sixth Presidency comes at a challenging time for the European Union. There is the ongoing work of the Intergovernmental Conference to progress. In addition, we must continue the drive to create a Union of greater competitiveness with more jobs in an enlarged context. The justice and external relations agendas must also be managed and advanced.

Prior to our Presidency we prepared an annual programme with the future Netherlands Presidency. We also prepared a multiannual programme with the five future Presidencies to the end of 2006. These programmes, and our own Presidency programme, provide the framework for the work of the European Union for the coming period. The three programmes have been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas and the Presidency programme has been circulated to each Member of the House.

We have chosen a theme for our Presidency which is practical and, at the same time, visionary. Our theme, Europeans Working Together, reflects our desire to work with our partners to build on the success that the people of Europe have already created. We have made a good start. We have had meetings with the Commission and with the European Parliament. We have also held a number of successful informal Council meetings here in Ireland. In recent days, Ministers have been briefing the Parliament's committees on our Presidency priorities and our first formal Council meetings have begun. In addition, members of the Government, myself included, have maintained close contact with our counterparts on the full range of important issues with a view to moving ahead on our work programme.

Building on the European Convention, the Intergovernmental Conference made considerable progress on a constitution for Europe last year. It was, therefore, disappointing that it was not possible to reach agreement on the outstanding issues at the European Council in Brussels last month. There is no doubt in my mind that the very significant progress that was made in the IGC was due in no small part to the efficiency and determination with which the Italian Presidency approached the negotiations. We are grateful to it for this excellent work. It now falls to Ireland, as holder of the Presidency, to try to make further progress. We are determined to do whatever we can to encourage and facilitate the earliest possible agreement. Our work will be based on the report of the European Convention and the progress made so far in the IGC. This progress is reflected in particular in the papers submitted to the European Council by the Italian Presidency following the conclave of Foreign Ministers in Naples.

At the December European Council, I undertook to consult with my European partners and to make a report to the European Council in March. This series of consultations is well underway. I have had initial contact with almost all of my colleagues on the European Council. I met Prime Minister Aznar in Madrid on Monday and this morning I had a very useful meeting with Prime Minister Miller of Poland. The Swedish and Belgian Prime Ministers visited Dublin earlier this month. Further visits and contacts are planned as I continue to explore the possibilities for progress with my partners.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, and the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, are also engaged in bilateral consultations. Foreign Ministers had a fruitful informal discussion on the IGC in the margins of the General Affairs and External Relations Council in Brussels last Monday. In all our contacts, we have found that all are committed to helping us find a way forward. During February, we will begin to make an assessment of how and when we can progress matters further. I propose to make the fullest possible report to the European Council in March.

A new European Union constitution would help the Union respond to the demands and expectations of its citizens. It would help the Union play a more coherent and effective role in the world. What is required to achieve our common objective is sufficient political will to enable agreement to emerge. Over the coming months, if there is, at any stage, a real prospect of agreement, we will immediately seize the opportunity.

It is too early to say whether we can reach agreement during the Irish Presidency or whether more time will be required. Nonetheless, there is a greater awareness now about the danger of delay. The European Union moves on. During 2004, we will have elections to the European Parliament, we will appoint a new Commission, a range of national elections will be held and we will begin the first stages of the negotiations on the financial perspectives of the Union post 2007. New circumstances inevitably risk opening up progress already made. I sense that there is a growing realisation of this danger now. It is in everyone's interest to complete the IGC negotiations as soon as possible.

Ten new members will join the Union in its largest single expansion in three months time. We are delighted that the honour will fall to us, as holders of the Presidency, to welcome the new members on 1 May. A Day of Welcomes is planned. This day will consist of a major event in Dublin. The historic event will be marked too in towns around Ireland. A series of cultural events, including concerts in Belfast and Dublin, are proposed. Irish arts and culture groups will travel to participate in similar events across Europe. The historic enlargement of the European Union should be celebrated at community level.

We will aim to ensure a smooth transition from a Union of 15 to a Union of 25 by successfully integrating the new member states into the full workings of the Union. The effective and efficient management of the Union's agenda in this new enlarged context is a key priority for our Presidency. We will also progress the future enlargement agenda, with Bulgaria and Romania. I will also support Turkey in its efforts to meet the criteria for accession.

Another of our key priorities is to give renewed focus to the reform goals set out at Lisbon in 2000. Although progress has been made over the past number of years, it is clear that we must increase momentum if we are to achieve the goal of making Europe the most competitive economy in the world by 2010. This was confirmed in the Commission report prepared for the spring European Council and published last week. Each member state has a critical role to play if our collective goal is to be achieved. We intend to use the spring European Council to re-inject momentum into the process. We need to seize the opportunity to make the most of the positive signs of economic progress that are emerging in Europe and internationally.

Last November, I wrote to my colleagues in the European Council setting out my proposed approach and the key elements of the Lisbon agenda on which I intend to focus at the spring European Council. Our objective is to have a focused strategic discussion on the most pressing economic and social challenges facing Europe. We have identified a number of priority target areas where we aim to achieve real progress. These include promoting economic growth and structural reform, fostering competitiveness, delivering more and better quality employment and ensuring sustainable growth. Our objective is to set out a clear path for achieving goals in these key areas.

The Union has provided an area of peace and prosperity for its citizens for almost 50 years. We have also created a single market where our people can trade and do business without barriers. We must ensure that the freedoms we enjoy are not exploited by criminal elements for criminal gains. The ambitious agenda aimed at developing the European Union as an area of freedom, security and justice will help to equip the Union to respond to these challenges.

As holders of the Presidency, we will have an important role to play over the coming months. We will work hard to ensure the delivery of the outstanding requirements under the Amsterdam Treaty and the broader Tampere programme. This will involve advancing a wide-ranging agenda including measures on asylum, immigration, police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters and civil law co-operation.

We will take the opportunity at the justice European Council meeting to initiate an assessment of the achievements of the Tampere programme, with a view to launching a further development of the Union's justice and home affairs policies. We have identified the fight against drugs and organised crime and combating illegal immigration and trafficking in humans as areas where we will seek to build on the existing arrangements for co-operation at European Union level. Ensuring greater security and safety for the people of the European Union will be at the heart of our approach in this area.

I do not propose to go through the full list of the external relations engagements that we will have during our Presidency. Nonetheless, they are extensive and reflect the increasingly significant role the European Union plays on the world stage. A sense of the depth and breadth of these commitments and engagements can be found in the Presidency programme. Our approach will be based on the common values of the European Union - democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights. The European Union can make a major contribution to the promotion of a fairer, peaceful and more secure world.

Our Presidency will promote, in particular, EU-UN co-operation in the areas of crisis management, the fight against the spread of weapons of mass destruction, the promotion of human rights, UN reform and effective multilateralism. We will work with our partners in all regions of the world to achieve our shared goals.

There is an extensive range of commitments at Foreign Minister level and, indeed, a growing number of commitments in sectoral areas. I, together with President Prodi and High Representative Javier Solana, will represent the Union at summit meetings with Canada, Japan, the Latin American and Caribbean countries, Russia and the US.

The fight against HIV and AIDS is one of our key Presidency priorities. The rate of HIV and AIDS is increasing at its fastest in Europe and Central Asia. We will host a major international conference in Dublin towards the end of February to promote co-operation among the countries of these regions to fight the disease. We hope the outcome of this meeting will be an action plan to ensure the disease is tackled effectively through prevention, treatment and care. The conference will be a real example of effective multilateralism. The European Commission, observers and associated states of the European Union and the full range of United Nation organisations will be involved. I hope this brief overview of our work programme for the next six months gives the House some flavour of the challenges which lie ahead.

This may be the last Presidency in this form which Ireland will have the honour to conduct. I assure the House that we will continue to work hard to ensure this Presidency is remembered for having made a real and lasting contribution. It is our aim to help move forward its agenda to enable the European Union to better equip itself to meet the challenges of the future. We will do this to the best of our ability in a fair and even-handed manner. We will look to all member states, the institutions of the EU and this House for support in this important task.

There can be no going back on the process of change in Northern Ireland. It is now some two months since the Assembly elections provided the parties with mandates which we respect. With these mandates comes a responsibility to make political progress. I regret that the elections did not provide an immediate basis on which the devolved administration could be restored. I genuinely believe that the people of Northern Ireland want their own administration run by their own politicians. For most, direct rule is not the answer.

Northern Ireland is at its best when the devolved institutions of government function as intended in the Agreement. The two Governments will do everything in their power to encourage all parties to engage and address, once and for all, the issues which stand in the way of devolution. In the interests of the people of Northern Ireland, the parties must allow everyone to move forward. As Governments, we are committed to the full implementation of the Agreement and are determined to pursue this course. There should be no doubt about that issue. While we acknowledge that some time is necessary to address the current impasse, our joint determination and commitment to the Agreement is strong and undiminished.

If there had been a better way to proceed, we would have found it. There was no other way. We are satisfied that the Agreement which emerged after protracted negotiations under the chairmanship of Senator George Mitchell includes the elements essential in the context of a divided society to building relations on and between these islands. Our two Governments are determined to protect the Agreement and last week saw intensive engagement between us on Northern Ireland. Earlier in the week, I met with the Prime Minister to follow up on our meeting of 17 December and to assess the prospects for progress over the coming period. We are engaged in the practical work of taking the process forward. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Northern Ireland Secretary of State subsequently met in Dublin at the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference to address the many issues on which progress can and must be made. These include human rights and criminal justice. Full delivery in these and other important areas is not affected by the absence of devolution.

In early February, we will begin the review which was negotiated as part of the Agreement. The review will focus on the operation of the Agreement rather than on its fundamentals. It will provide an opportunity for the parties to reflect together on how the existing arrangements have functioned and to consider their future operation. We want the review to take place in an atmosphere of constructive engagement and we will work with all parties to achieve a positive outcome. All parties must reassure each other that they are engaged with the process and will do what is necessary to bring back real, active, inclusive and democratic institutions. There are responsibilities on all sides for parties and Governments.

The Government's goals are open and transparent. We do not have any hidden agenda. We want to implement the Agreement and end paramilitarism. We want to see devolved government restored and we want full and open dialogue with all strands of unionism as well as nationalism. This afternoon, I will meet in London with the Democratic Unionist Party which is led by the Reverend Ian Paisley. I approach this meeting mindful of the past, but with the future uppermost in my thoughts. We may continue to disagree on many things, but I welcome genuinely and sincerely the opening of this dialogue with the DUP. I have said that we have no hidden agenda as I believe we have demonstrated consistently in our efforts to advance peace and reconciliation on this island.

Last Monday, I met with representatives of the Ulster Political Research Group. I have long held the view that opening dialogue with representatives of the loyalist community is important. This meeting was a logical follow up to my meeting with the Loyalist Commission last June. I recognise the very real concerns loyalists have about issues which affect their communities, particularly jobs, housing and educational opportunities. I am encouraged by some of the positive work being done to address the problems in these communities. We want to be constructive and to assist in any way we can.

My views on paramilitarism and sectarianism are well known. I have made it clear to republicans and loyalists that all such activities must cease. Violence and the threat of violence are not in the interests of anyone, including their own communities. I deplore recent sectarian and racist attacks and attacks on prison officers. Such illegality must be dealt with by the police and those responsible must be brought to justice.

Last year was difficult and frustrating in terms of our efforts to make political progress in Northern Ireland. We made some real progress but suffered some real disappointments. The engagement of the Government was intensive and sustained and that will no less be the case this year. We will continue to work at all levels and in every way possible to consolidate and build on this indispensable process. I thank the Members for providing me with opportunity to brief the House on these issues.

As agreed on the Order of Business, each group has eight minutes.

I wish to share my time with Senator Bradford.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I wish the Taoiseach a very sincere welcome to the House. We very much respect the fact that he is briefing us. I have studied the documentation provided. It outlines a very comprehensive programme for the six months of the Presidency. With ten accession countries joining on 1 May, this is an historic time for this country and for the European Union. We will celebrate that nationally on the Day of Welcomes.

The points I wish to elaborate on regarding the basis of the document I have read will be constructive. They have been raised in the House before. Agriculture and food safety are issues the Taoiseach should address during the six months of the Presidency. They have come sharply into focus recently with concerns about the avian flu among chickens in Thailand which has spread throughout Asia. The issue percolates to Europe in the extremely important issue of food safety. While countries have the right to export product to this country, consumers also have rights. The consumer is entitled to know if a poultry product comes from Thailand or if a beef product comes from Brazil. The consumer should have freedom of choice.

We have very strict hygiene and quality standards for processors involved in poultry production and other areas. In light of those high standards, it is not acceptable for an Asian country to export product to this country which with further packaging is described as originating in the Netherlands or France. That is an exercise in the deception of the consumer. In the context of food safety, I would like to see the introduction of proper labelling of all European products. It should be considered and I encourage the Taoiseach to speak to the Minister for Agriculture and Food about the matter.

We have focused in our minds on immigration and asylum seekers to a great extent in recent times. I wish to speak about an element of immigration which is very important to this country. On 1 May, citizens of the ten accession countries will have the right to come here and work. That is important. Obviously, they will bring certain skills with them. Equally important is an issue of which the Leader of the House is very aware as I have raised it many times. A barrier has existed for nurses from the Philippines and other countries outside the European zone whose husbands have not had the right to work here. The matter is being examined by the Tánaiste. It is an economic disadvantage to many of those who come here to provide skills of which we have shortages like those which exist in the medical profession and nursing. We should provide every incentive possible when issuing work permits to avoid seeing these people travel instead to the North of Ireland to receive a permit there. While the issue is being addressed in respect of nurses, I would extend consideration of it to other areas in which skills shortages exist. We should be sympathetic to the rights of the partner of a work permit holder.

I hope the constitutional treaty issue is resolved during Ireland's Presidency. I acknowledge those who participated in the Praesidium, particularly former Taoiseach Deputy John Bruton for his tremendous work.

I welcome the Taoiseach to the House. While I am aware of the grave responsibility of the Taoiseach's European duties, we all envy him for the fact that he holds the Presidency of Europe at the most exciting time in the political history of the Continent.

I first spoke in this House in 1987 and at that time the Continent of Europe was divided by the Berlin wall and the Cold War. The changes since then are beyond description. Some 14 or 15 years ago it could not have been imagined that we would be now dealing with and ready to welcome into the family of Europe countries that for so long suffered under the cosh of the Cold War and the Soviet Union. Yesterday afternoon, some of my colleagues met with a delegation from Bulgaria. That country is not in the first accession stage but the enthusiasm and expectation of the delegation shows how far the Continent has come in the past ten years. The final part of the jigsaw is being moved into position. I wish the Taoiseach well in the next IGC meeting.

It is important to finalise the European constitution and it would be desirable to see it finalised in Dublin. The concept of a treaty of Dublin is one which would be a source of some degree of political satisfaction for the Taoiseach and all of us. It is important to put in place a treaty that will work. I support the Taoiseach's view on the comments attributed to Mr. Prodi concerning the two-speed Europe. There must be an end to that type of attitude and speech. This House gave a commitment to the Irish people as a result of our acceptance of the Nice treaty that every elector in the new Europe would be equal. This House must state that there will not be a two-speed Europe, that the family of Europe will be a family of equal nations. I admire the manner in which the Taoiseach is ensuring this will come to pass and that one or two of the larger European countries will not be dominant.

There have been difficulties in the past year in the relationship of Europe with the United States. There is right and wrong on both sides when it comes to difficulties between countries just as in families. We should not ignore what is happening as regards the accession countries and countries such as Bulgaria and Romania. Regardless of whether we like it, these countries have taken a decision as to how closely they wish to be linked to the United States. I would not wish to see the United States in a close relationship with the countries of central and eastern Europe and Ireland in the middle and somewhat aloof. We need to repair our relationship with the United States and ensure that the United States will have a good relationship with all of Europe and not just the accession states.

The Taoiseach's comments about UN reform are also very pertinent and important, but they have been ignored for too long. We must concede that, over the past ten years, the United Nations as an entity has not worked. It is a pity that it took the Iraqi war to demonstrate that fact. There is wrong on all sides but we must endeavour to make the United Nations work.

I wish the Taoiseach well in his talks with Dr. Paisley today. It shows how far we have come as a country that those talks will take place in a civilised and constructive fashion. Like the politics of Europe since the Second World War, compromise is required on all sides; nobody has all the answers and right and wrong do not belong exclusively to one side. There is nobody in the towns and townlands of Northern Ireland who does not wish to live in a country where there is peace, justice and security. Whether it is Dr. Paisley or Mr. Adams, the Taoiseach or Mr. Blair, they all aspire to seeing a country at peace. I wish the Taoiseach well today. He will not solve the problem today as he knows well but this is a significant step. There will be many more steps to take and I sincerely wish him well.

I wish to share my time with the Leader, Senator O'Rourke. I welcome the Taoiseach and thank him for taking time from his busy schedule to address the House. The Taoiseach has described the operational programme for the next year. The theme of the Irish Presidency is Europeans working together. The Taoiseach's goal will be to finalise the draft constitutional treaty, EU enlargement and the Lisbon Agenda.

The European Convention was established in 2001. It was asked to examine ways of bringing the Union and its institutions closer to its citizens, to ensure that it plays an important role on the international stage and to strengthen the workings of the institutions of the Union so that they operate effectively on our behalf. I acknowledge the contribution of the Irish delegation to the Convention. The delegation did tremendous work and prepared the groundwork for the draft treaty. The Government's approach was hands-on. The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, and other members of the Irish delegation made themselves available to this House, the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs and also to the National Forum on the Future of Europe under the chairmanship of Senator Maurice Hayes. The delegation provided updates to the House on the developments of the Convention's work.

One of the challenges facing the European Union today is to keep citizens fully informed and engaged regarding developments which affect their daily lives in so many ways. The constitutional treaty must be more readable, understandable and accessible to the public. Scrutiny proposals are now a function of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs. If we are unhappy with the proposals from Brussels we can ask that they be reviewed and different proposals brought forward. In other words, the State can produce the yellow card and we can identify the implied warning signals.

The final stages of the draft constitutional treaty have been reached and consensus has been reached on most issues. It had been hoped to conclude negotiations at the Intergovernmental Conference last December and it was a disappointment that it was not possible to do so. The stand-off on voting strength will not be easily resolved and the fear of a two tier Europe remains a concern and a great challenge for the Union at this time.

Ireland comes to the Presidency with a reputation for patience and perseverance. It is an opportunity to portray our country in a very positive light. The challenge for the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs is to find agreement on a new constitutional treaty for Europe. The Taoiseach is strongly committed to making progress on the draft treaty and has attached the highest priority to this issue. He will spare no effort to build a consensus and facilitate an agreement so that the citizens of Europe will have a constitutional treaty that responds to their needs and expectations. The intensive process of consultation with his counterparts is already underway. If anyone can achieve this agreement it will be our Taoiseach. I wish him and the Minister for Foreign Affairs every success in the consultation and negotiations to achieve this end.

As the Taoiseach stated, enlargement will be a major part of the Irish Presidency. The new member states will join the Union on 1 May 2004. This will be an historic occasion. The enlargement will create a population of 450 million in the EU. Europeans can leave behind the divisions of the past and build a better Europe. I am delighted to hear that there will be a Day of Welcomes with major events and concerts in Dublin and elsewhere to celebrate the inclusion of these countries in the EU. The accession of the Republic of Cyprus to the EU on 1 May 2004 provides an historic opportunity for the Irish Presidency to encourage all parties to engage in talks for a united Cyprus. The enlargement process does not end on 1 May. The Irish Presidency will pursue accession negotiations with Bulgaria and Romania with a target date for 2007 and continue to monitor the situation in Turkey.

Now that Ireland is at the heart of Europe, the twin priorities of growth and employment will be part of the Taoiseach's ambitious agenda. I noted last week that the Taoiseach warned of a big gulf between the European Union's ambition, which is to be the most dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, and the reality. This gulf is very wide, despite the EU's ambition, stated in the Lisbon strategy, of catching up by 2010. We are still behind the United States and other global economies. I know the Taoiseach is determined to use the Irish Presidency to speed up reforms to achieve the targets set out in the Lisbon agenda. My time is running out, a Chathaoirligh, so I will end by——

The Senator skipped a page.

——wishing the Taoiseach every success with his ambitious agenda. I also wish him well in his talks on Northern Ireland this afternoon.

I welcome the Taoiseach to the House and thank him for coming so readily when we approached him and his office. He spoke about two themes. I appreciate that this debate is primarily about European matters, but the Taoiseach also referred to the challenges he faces in Northern Ireland, which have often been discussed in this House. We have asked the Taoiseach to come to the House to speak about such issues and are glad he is doing so today.

Before I deal with three specific aspects of the Taoiseach's statement, I would like to thank the Members of the Seanad who are members of the Joint Committee on European Affairs. Senators from all parties are doing very valiant work at that forum. The Taoiseach mentioned the importance of the committee's scrutiny of EU legislation. We will produce proposals in this regard when we bring forward the Seanad reform programme, to which the Taoiseach kindly alluded.

The accession of ten new member states is particularly uplifting and historic for Ireland, which is a very small country. With two exceptions, the accession states are as small, if not smaller than Ireland. It falls on our shoulders to bear the responsibility of welcoming and giving proper and due recognition to the new member states. Some of the countries in question have ancient civilisations and historic backgrounds and have contributed a great deal to Europe over the centuries. This is also true of Ireland, a small island on the periphery of Europe.

I ask the Taoiseach not to entertain the notion of a two-speed Europe. Such an idea is anathema to the people of Europe. The European Union was established in order to give a voice to all countries, regardless of whether they are large, small or in-between. I hope we can erase the words "two-speed Europe". If this means we have to quieten a particular gentleman, I am sure the Taoiseach will be well able to do so during his talks. We do not want to hear about this idea.

Many people have outlined their thoughts on the deliberations on the convention. It is better that the convention be properly constructed and regarded, rather than rushed. I know the Taoiseach's talents and mind will lend him to that point of view.

I thank the Taoiseach for coming to the House and wish him good luck in all his endeavours.

Four Independent Senators wish to contribute to this debate.

They will have two minutes each.

I wish to send my best wishes to the Taoiseach. I am sure he will give us another distinguished Presidency, which will do honour to Ireland.

I want to discuss the conflict in the Middle East, particularly Palestine. In the absence of any reference to the Middle East in President Bush's state of the union speech, it is particularly important for the European Union to take a role in this regard. I warmly support the Government's balanced position on this very difficult matter. The recent visit by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, was particularly important and was very much appreciated on all sides. I hope he will have an opportunity to return to that region during the Irish Presidency, particularly to visit Gaza and the West Bank, which I visited last week with representatives of other parties. As a long-time friend of Israel, I was quite horrified by what I saw.

I would like to speak about the wall, in particular. I understand that 23 February is the deadline for making submissions to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. As holders of the Presidency of the European Union, we have an opportunity to try to negotiate a collective position. I am aware that the Taoiseach is using his considerable talents in this regard. I emphasise that the possibility exists of making a separate submission and urge that we do so. We should not use the existence of protracted negotiations as an excuse for not doing this. We should not say "We tried to negotiate and now we have passed the deadline." Everybody on the ground, including our own representatives, has said it is essential for Ireland to make a submission to the court on this basis. I understand that an Irish company, Cement Roadstone Holdings, may be involved in the construction of the wall. I ask the Taoiseach to investigate this matter, to determine whether it is true and to stop it, if possible.

The bomb in Jerusalem this morning was very tragic. Such behaviour is counter-productive, as well as morally reprehensible. I ask the Taoiseach not to take the advice of Mr. Raanan Gissin, who said today on behalf of the Israeli Government that the world should stand aside to allow Israel to deal with the matter in security terms. This is the Sharon policy and this is what happened in Sabra and Chatila. We must not let it happen again and must be there as witnesses. I urge the Taoiseach to take action in respect of this matter.

The Taoiseach is very welcome to the House. I was delighted to hear his words and I was very impressed with his vision of Europe. I would like to ask him about the challenge he will face when the EU constitution - it may be the present version or a similar document - comes to be passed by the Irish people in a referendum. I would like the Taoiseach to put this great task high on his agenda during our Presidency.

I would like to give one example of the need to sell the benefits of the European Union to the people if we are to pass the constitution. A colleague recently said to me that he was planning to go to Barcelona for the weekend with his wife. He said that Peter Sutherland and the EU should be thanked for giving us such a benefit. We should remind people of the benefits, such as cheaper air travel, we have gained as a consequence of a united Europe. We should consider what happened in Brussels yesterday, however. The European Union decided that it does not like what Ryanair is doing in Charleroi. We should be aware that this sort of thing could turn the people of Ireland against the benefits we are getting from Europe if we are not careful.

Some time ago I met Mr. Václav Klaus, who is now the President of the Czech Republic. When I spoke to him about Europe, he said he is somewhat concerned about the Czech Republic swapping a big brother in Moscow for a big brother in Brussels. We do not want the image of a big brother in Brussels, who is telling us what to do without reminding us of the benefits, to take root in Ireland. We should ensure that rather than having a big brother, we have a loveable uncle instead.

I also welcome the Taoiseach to the House. In the little time available to me, I would like to relate a small anecdote. In the first week of the Irish Presidency, I was reading through the Sunday newspapers in preparation for a review on a television programme. It struck me that it would be appropriate to review a piece on Europe, which was a topical subject at the time. I should add that I contribute to the Sunday newspapers. It was difficult to find anything about the European Union in the newspapers at the end of the first week of the Irish Presidency. What does that tell us? It tells us that the EU is very distant from the perceived interests of the people. That people do not relate to Europe and the EU community is a real problem. When the Taoiseach participates in the European election campaign this year, it would be useful if he, along with the other political parties and everyone else involved, fights the elections on European issues. The European elections have been fought on local issues for a long time and continue to be fought on such issues. As a result, people vote on local issues without relating to European issues. The Taoiseach would make a great contribution by bringing European issues to a European election. It would mean that the people would identify with such issues and with Europe as a whole.

As Senator Quinn so rightly said, the Taoiseach has an ideal and immediate opportunity to intervene in an area and a controversy which means so much to many Irish people. I refer to the Ryanair controversy at Charleroi. It is obvious that the controversy is seen - rightly or wrongly and we can discuss that at another time - as a European intervention in a local issue. I suspect it is seen as an intervention which is not to the benefit of Ireland - as a negative. It is seen as anti-consumer, anti-competitive and an opportunity for Europe to elbow in on low fares, to increase fares and to make travel more difficult and expensive. It would be useful if the Taoiseach could support the Minister for Transport in this intervention, so that we are seen to be relevant on a topical and immediate issue.

I agree with the viewpoint that Ryanair should be forced to operate under the same conditions as every other airline in Europe.

That is not my viewpoint.

I rely on the Taoiseach to ensure this is the case. It is a long road that has no turning. It is amazing how people come crawling to Government after abusing politicians and Governments for the past number of years. However, there is an issue to be dealt with and I look forward to its being dealt with properly. There is a difference between subsidies and doing deals.

I congratulate the Taoiseach on Ireland's Presidency of the European Union and wish him well in the responsible position he is to occupy for the next six months. We should be guided by the ideal of a Europe that listens to the views of its people and whose power is used in a way that people understand. Senator Quinn has just made the same point. Senator Bradford and others mentioned the importance of advancing the treaty. One of the ways in which we can do that is to have a debate on neutrality. If we did nothing else in this country except to force individual Irish people to say what they mean by neutrality it would be helpful. Nobody should be allowed to use clichés and everybody must say what they mean before they start talking about it. I do not agree with the position Fine Gael has taken on this but I admire its courage in putting it out there for debate. It is important that this is discussed. There are two extreme points of view on this issue. We need to know our responsibilities as good Europeans, even if that means defending Europe and ensuring we do not become the playthings of superpowers on the other side of the Atlantic. We need to find a balance so that ordinary people can understand what we mean by neutrality and how it can work. I ask that the Taoiseach raise this issue in a way that ordinary people understand. I wish him and the Government well in their role for the next six months.

It is now the turn of the PDs.

It is a one-man show. I wish to express to the Taoiseach our appreciation of his coming here this afternoon despite a schedule that must be onerous, as he is meeting the leadership of the DUP this afternoon in London. We are indebted to him for his presence. I am encouraged by the Taoiseach's comment that the Good Friday Agreement is the basis on which everything rests and that while it will be up for review, it is not up for renegotiation. I cannot imagine a situation in which democratic politicians would not want to run their own country and their own parliament. If people had that firmly in the front of their minds all the time, much progress could be made.

I congratulate the Taoiseach on Ireland's Presidency of the European Union and wish him and all members of the Government well. It is not readily appreciated how much effort is required on his part and that of the Government and how much commitment and energy must go into it. This morning the Taoiseach met the Prime Minister of Poland and after appearing in the House he will be going to London. He is looking remarkably well, so it is obviously agreeing with him. I am impressed by the document produced by the Government explaining the programme for the Irish Presidency. It is a wide-ranging document. The scope of activity required is not readily appreciated. I was taken with the speech given by the Taoiseach to the Institute of European Affairs and TEPSA in Dublin Castle in early December, in which he laid out in clear terms the priorities for the Irish Presidency. It was an important illustration of the vision of Europe and where it is going. I am sure the Taoiseach will continue in that direction.

It is important to note, as the Taoiseach has pointed out, that the Presidency coincides with enlargement of the EU. The Union will expand by ten members on 1 May. We will have a day of welcomes and I hope that will work well. This is the culmination of the work of Spaak, Monnet and Adenauer. It is extraordinary how far we have come. Europe has never had a period of peace like this. That is the enduring monument of the Union. It is important to state this repeatedly in debates about Europe, because it is frequently lost sight of during referendum campaigns. Instead, we dwell on economic matters. Perhaps this is because we were removed from much of the carnage that took place in Europe.

I hope the thrust of enlargement does not stop here. I note what has been said about Bulgaria and Romania and the efforts to get Turkey into a condition in which it is ready to join, with the reunification of Cyprus and so on. I cannot understand the mentality of the president of the Irish Farmers' Association on enlargement. Having gained so much from our membership of the European Community and the EU, particularly in farming circles, it is incomprehensible that we would not want those gains to accrue to other people, losing sight of the fact that the enlarged Europe will be one of the biggest markets in the world for Irish food.

It is unfortunate that the issue of the constitutional treaty and the Intergovernmental Conference has dominated reporting, although that is not to say it is not important. The Taoiseach himself said in December it was a critical step in the Union's development. It is worth restating the priorities of the Government. The programme states: "The Irish Presidency will do all it can to take forward the work on the new constitutional treaty." That is not to diminish the differences that exist. Ireland and the Netherlands are particularly well placed to deal with this issue, given our history and the fact that neither is one of the larger countries. The Taoiseach said in Dublin Castle: "Ireland has always had to rely more on the strength of our argument than on the weight of our vote." This is part of our success. We have only had to use our veto once, on the issue of milk, so these votes are not common for us. I am concerned that if we go past 1 May on the basis of the formula in the Nice treaty, it will be difficult when that is put in place to row back and implement a different formula. However, the combination of qualified majority voting based on population and votes is reasonable. The Taoiseach said he was not worried about whether it was based on the Nice treaty or the draft constitution, which is to be welcomed.

As for Mr. Prodi's remarks about a two-speed Europe, I do not think this can happen irrespective of whether he thinks it can. Every member state would have to be in favour of it, which will not happen, so I do not see the two-speed Europe as a reality. There are important issues for us, such as the questions of voting on taxation, our legal tradition and defence, which we must take into account.

Another important aspect of the Government's programme is the question of multilateralism and the need to support the United Nations in its work. The programme states that the Irish Presidency will ensure that the EU "engages actively with the wider world on the international agenda, in accordance with its values and principles." The Taoiseach enunciated those values and principles for us this afternoon and they are important. However, it is also important that we return authority to the United Nations. That is for its members to do. The UN was seriously damaged by the war in Iraq and I hope the Taoiseach can help to restore some of its authority during the Presidency. This is not inconsistent with the desire expressed in the programme to foster better relations with the United States and Russia. The emphasis on Africa is important, as there are several important issues to be considered, including the AIDS epidemic.

The Lisbon agenda is another priority. We are aiming to achieve a competitive economy by 2010. The issues of sustainable growth and increased employment are important and should be dominant within our Presidency. We should aim to improve competitiveness and ensure better research and telecommunications. By 2010, 3% of GDP should be devoted to research and development. Our experience with partnership is valuable in this respect. It is something we can bring to the table. The Union must be brought closer to its citizens. I applaud the work being done by Senator Maurice Hayes and the Forum on Europe, which is just part of the picture. It is important that our citizens understand how the Union works. I wish the Taoiseach well in his efforts during the Presidency.

I join other Senators in welcoming the Taoiseach to the House. It is good of him to take time out from his busy schedule to attend the House and share his thoughts on these important issues.

Like others, I appreciate the importance of the next six months particularly in the context of enlargement. It is remarkable that only ten years ago many of the accession states to the Union did not exist. The constitution for Europe is an issue that has been discussed in the House on a number of occasions. The Taoiseach hit the right note when he said that if the opportunity is there, we should take it. However, it is important not to engender a false sense of crisis. There will be no crisis if it is not agreed in the next six months. It is more important to get a good deal rather than just a deal. With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that the arrangements made in Nice are not satisfactory; they are something of a mess. It is important that these are revised at the earliest opportunity. However, it is equally important that they are not replaced by another mess. Whatever is put in place must be sustainable for the next ten or 15 years. It is a matter of festina lente - if the opportunity is there, take it. Let us not suggest now that it is a crisis if we do not deliver an agreement in the next six months.

I am not in sympathy with what is being said about a two-speed Europe. Somebody must speak up on behalf of the President of the European Commission, Mr. Prodi. There is already a two-speed Europe to all intents and purposes. Several important countries, including the United Kingdom, are not members of the euro zone. Ireland is not part of the Schengen Agreement and, therefore, does not share the common immigration rules that are in place in those agreement states. Ireland is also not part of NATO, whereas most EU member states are and have obligations that go with membership. On common foreign and security policy and the single currency, there are already different speeds.

It is important that we maintain some sense of vision and progress within the European project. States that want to share particular competencies, pool sovereignty for particular projects and go further than others are willing should not be obliged to proceed at the speed of the slowest and most laggardly member state. It is wrong to allow several states that are not willing to share sovereignty and progress to slow every other member state to the extent that all momentum is lost in a project where momentum is important. For the foreseeable future, with 25 member states, it is inevitable and right that member states that wish to further projects quickly should be allowed to do so. This right should be recognised rather than treated as an issue to be feared.

The Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, have referred to the Lisbon agenda as one of the priorities of the Presidency, to which no one can take particular exception. I have read the conclusions of the agenda and they have a motherhood and apple pie element to them. No one can object to improved e-commerce, information technology and more support for research and so forth. Ultimately, these matters need to be progressed by individual member states' governments. The European Commission and the Council can only play a limited role in progressing those issues. I wish the Government well in highlighting those important issues. However, I am sceptical of the process because it requires political will on the ground from member states' governments to progress matters in a meaningful way.

The Taoiseach, as well as the Minister for Foreign Affairs, referred to relations with the United States. There is a suggestion that because Ireland is somewhere between Berlin and Boston, we can use our good offices to improve relations between the EU and the Bush White House. I am sceptical about this suggestion because I believe that the Bush White House is wrong on many issues and I hope President Bush is not around this time next year. While it is well for us to say that we will look to smoothing the way across the Atlantic, we should do so from a perspective which still puts our own viewpoints to the fore. We still support the UN, multilateralism and international co-operation on issues such as environmental protection. We should not dilute those principles to make the last year of President Bush's reign in the White House any easier. By all means, use our good relations with the US, but do not compromise our principles which we share with other EU member states.

The Cyprus issue falls clean in the middle of the Irish Presidency and it is one on which we could achieve progress. There has been progress in the last four weeks with the positive development of the appointment of Mr. Talat as chief negotiator on the Turkish-Cypriot side. The appointment will test the Greek-Cypriot and Mr. Papadopoulos's commitment to the process. I understand that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, was involved with Kofi Annan yesterday in Brussels in trying to get the talks on Cyprus going again. I urge the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs to give priority to this issue as it will stand or fall in the next six to eight weeks. It deserves a political commitment from the Irish Presidency and the EU. It would be a significant achievement if 30 years of division on Cyprus could be brought to an end during the period of the Irish Presidency. It will not fail for lack of energy or commitment on our part.

Ireland is uniquely situated in dealing with African issues. When it comes to political engagement, the involvement of the EU is always associated with the former colonial powers. This does not apply to Ireland, which allows us to be better positioned to engage politically in Africa, particularly in Zimbabwe, in a way that would be difficult for other member states with a colonial past. The Minister for Foreign Affairs visited southern Africa before Christmas. Ireland should bring its influence to bear during the Presidency to work with President Mbeki in South Africa, neighbouring states and Robert Mugabe to ensure that there is a move to genuine democracy in Zimbabwe. We should engage politically, as we have militarily in Liberia, in countries such as Kenya that are making efforts to move away from autocracy and single party government.

The Taoiseach hit the right note on Northern Ireland issues. It is important to say that we are satisfied with the Agreement. It is also important to say that one party cannot cherry pick the parts of the Agreement it wants. It is clear that some parties would be happy if the devolved institutions were not resurrected. Some parties would be happy if the North-South institutions were to continue and other agendas were progressed with or without devolution. The Agreement has various parts and was put together in the knowledge that they will all hang together. It is important that they are all implemented. I wish the Taoiseach well in his talks with Dr. Paisley in London later this afternoon.

I thank all speakers from all parties and groups for their comments. Food safety is a key issue for our Presidency. The Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Walsh, answered questions on it recently in the European Parliament. I take the Senator's point on the labelling issue. I have spoken before about the standards of food safety in Asian countries. While I am not glad to see the outbreak of avian flu, I am glad there is a focus on the issue. The matter falls under the Commissioner Byrne's brief. However, given the veterinary research and work carried out in Ireland, along with the Food Safety Authority, as Senator Finucane said, we can make progress on the issue.

Senators Bradford, O'Rourke and McDowell made reference to the two-speed Europe. However, with regard to Senator McDowell's comments, the issue is not that member states will move at different paces to each other. Under treaty law, one can have a group of states coming together under enhanced co-operation and making a decision to move on a project. I have no difficulty with that as it has already happened with the Schengen Agreement and the euro. I have no problem so long as it is a collective decision of every member state to allow those states to do so. My difficulties with Mr. Prodi and others are that this is not what they are referring to when they speak of a two-speed Europe. There have been only one or two examples of enhanced co-operation moving forward and, even though the provision is there, the difficulty is that Mr. Prodi and others want to go in a different direction. My argument is not just with Romano Prodi, but also with those who support the integrationist approach to the EU. It seems extraordinary that when we get a Union of 25 member states, those who claim that they want more integration see the only way of achieving it as going outside the Union. It does not make sense if one's solution to making progress is to break away from the group. If one studies, as I have done for many months in preparation for the Presidency, which country blocks what - Senator Quinn referred to the advantage of Europe's competitiveness on which he is correct - one is more likely to find that France or Germany block proposals because they are not in their interests. When we are integrating, it is important to note what is being integrated and the reason for it. If everyone was honest, he or she would admit that people like to integrate those things they like and to block the things they do not like. There is an enormous contradiction in that regard. If representatives of all the members states are here and they agree to let four or five member states go ahead on an issue and other member states can join such an initiative now or at some time in the future on the same terms, that is different from the other concept, which is not new.

Romano Prodi, the President of Commission, is not the first one to propose its use, but accession countries - I have talked to representatives of all the accession countries about various aspects of accession this month - worry about this concept. They are in the process of joining the Union following referenda held last year. They hear people say that some countries want a two-speed Europe and their countries will be left behind. It is difficult enough for us, who have been a member of the Union for 30 years, to try to explain that concept.

I note what Senator Ross said about Ryanair and low cost fares. The only point I would make about it is that rather than talk about one issue, enforcing a fair and equitable state aid regime, which is what this is all about and I do not want to go into the detail of particular decisions, and having effective controls on state aid are hugely beneficial to small countries. If one was to remove from the equation the argument on the Ryanair issue, and I am sure Senator O'Toole would quickly remind me if I did not say this——

Say it.

This decision will affect Aer Lingus as much as Ryanair because Aer Lingus has successfully managed itself as a State company to become a low cost operator. Therefore, yesterday's decision might not have the same knock-on effect around the world because Ryanair is fast becoming the largest airline in the world, and fair play to it. That decision will also affect Aer Lingus in a significant way. It is for that reason that we will take up this matter and carry it through. The state aid issue is important to this country.

Senator Ross also raised the matter of support for the EU. The difficulty in this respect lies with the member states and what is said in the media. I was aware of this last year when preparing for the Presidency. Every time there is a meeting, people, on leaving it, say they fought for their position and objected to other people's positions. We do that all the time. However, people should point out what the Union has achieved for the Continent, including for this country. Sometimes it worries me that people here - we are only talking about this country - believe we moved from being a country with below 60% of the average wealth of a European country to a well-educated, high-tech and sophisticated country on our own. An analysis of such growth would involve whether it was due to the Internal Market, free trade, etc.

How did this country become of one of the great exporters in the world? Is it because we stayed an isolationist state with a slightly open free market? It would be interesting to carry out an analysis of the number of jobs there would be in this economy today and what products we would be exporting if we had decided to take the Icelandic view, although that comparison is unfair to Iceland because it had many trade agreements. If we had not engaged, I would say the answer to the question I posed would be very little and we would not have been able to sustain those employed in our excellent public services. Our success, whether on equality issues, the social agenda, how we have advanced laws or how we managed to develop our successful sectors, is inherently because we are part of the European Union.

A somewhat academic exercise is engaged in by Euro sceptics here who probably would not have the education they have, not to mind anything else, if we were not part of the European model. I increasingly see this in debates in colleges and I continually remind people of the European project and what has been achieved. I am always conscious that given that we joined Union 30 years ago, one must be aged 45 plus to remember the pre-period. We seem to have perhaps only one student, from what I read in the newspapers, in that age category. This is an issue we need to keep to forefront of our minds.

All Senator McDowell said about Cyprus is true. We will meet the Cypriot Foreign Minister in Dublin Castle on Monday. I have talked at length to Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey. I have had consultations indirectly with Mr. Denktash. We totally support the Annan plan. The Minister, Deputy Cowen, has spoken about that also. I talked to Mr. Papadopoulos several times since Christmas. There is opportunity to secure a united Cyprus. I have told Prime Minister Erdogan bluntly that in my view it would be difficult for him to sustain his case to get Turkish membership brought forward to any conclusive position next December if we do not get to the position of having a united Cyprus. That is not the only issue people hold against Turkish membership; there are others. However, that argument would be used against Turkey. I have told him that face to face recently as well as his Foreign Minister. I do not want in six months' time to have to tell him something else. I thought it best to be honest with our Turkish colleagues. There is an opportunity to secure that and it will put pressure on Mr. Denktash and Mr. Papadopoulos.

This country has been engaged in dealing with Cypriot problems from the start in terms of the successful role we have played under the UN. I hope we can succeed, but it will be on the basis of the Annan plan, as there is no other plan. It is like the Good Friday Agreement; there is no other basis. We will have to see if people are serious. It is a question of making progress in the next few weeks.

Senator Norris raised the issue of the wall in Jerusalem. The Palestinian Prime Minister is coming to see me next week and we will engage further in this regard. The Minister, Deputy Cowen, has met all the people on the Israeli side. It will be difficult to make progress. I had a long telephone conversation last Sunday with President Arafat. It is a sorry scene. I am not sure how we will make progress on it, but we have to keep trying. This being an election year in the United States does not make the situation easy for obvious reasons, but we will have opportunities to raise this matter with President Bush and put pressure on to try to continue to follow the roadmap and make some meaningful progress on it because it is a sad situation.

We condemn all the bombs and the activities, but if every time there was violence in Northern Ireland we had made the decision to stop, do nothing and row back, we never would have had the Good Friday Agreement. That is not condoning violence in any form, but we have to make progress and make a leap of faith because if every time there was a violent act and one went back, one would end up with nothing very quickly. The best way is to try with those who are engaged genuinely in peace to move forward, but that will be difficult.

I thank Senator O'Rourke and Senator Dardis for what they said. Senator Dardis is correct that the European Union has transformed the political situation in Europe. It has given it prosperity but, more importantly, peace for the past 50 years. Enlargement gives us a new opportunity to go forward. I was thinking of the economy and I note what was said about enlargement and about farmers or business people. However, one should read the Official Report of the debate on free trade when this country, with a population of 3.1 million, had an opportunity to have a free trade agreement, which was restricted, to move our goods into the United Kingdom. People saw this as a huge opportunity which could transform and develop the country and which would give us a chance we never had before to reverse the terrible economic plight of the 1930s and the depression of the 1950s. Many Senators will remember the late 1950s, when we had our highest unemployment levels and huge deprivation in society.

Now we are part of an Internal Market and the next generation will have equal rules and opportunities to trade successfully with 500 million people. Those who were here then arguing the pro side of the Internal Market would wonder what people are talking about when they raise concerns. This is a huge opportunity for us which, as a small country, we should not fear. We have the capacity to be as innovative as anyone in the world, but our internal difficulties on the island held us back for decades and we did not have a market for which to produce goods. Now we are second to nobody in the Internal Market. The single currency, a market of 500 million people and modern technology which overcomes many of the impediments of past generations all mean we are in a very good position. The European model is not only important for this generation, but for generations to come.

When is it proposed to sit again?

Tomorrow at 11 a.m. I hope the Taoiseach notes that we are sitting on a Friday.

The Seanad adjourned at 2 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Friday, 30 January 2004.
Barr
Roinn