Enda Kenny
Ceist:1 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of staff vacancies at his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25200/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraDepartmental Staff.
Ceisteanna (1, 2)
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:2 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the number of staff vacancies in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26392/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (14 píosaí cainte)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together. There are no vacancies in my Department at present.
My question will be slightly longer than the Taoiseach's reply. I was interested in knowing a bit about the staffing position in the Taoiseach's Department because the Estimates show a 4% increase in staff. Last year, the Taoiseach said there were no vacancies in his Department. Has he lost staff in the time since? The figure of 4% does not indicate an increase and yet there is a 23% increase in consultancy services. Is there a change in direction in terms of outsourcing some of the work of his Department? Is that a trend which he thinks will continue or increase? What is the reason for the 23% increase in consultancy fees compared to the staffing position?
My Department, under agreements with the Department of Finance and other Departments, has been asked to reduce its numbers by 4% between 2003 and 2005, two years of which has already passed. My Department is relatively small and achieving that target will not be too big a task. I can confirm that the Department is on course to meet its target. It is proposed to achieve the reduction through the restructuring of workloads as vacancies occur and, where feasible, by exploiting efficiencies and economies in new technologies. The process is kept under review by MAC.
Most of the consultancies undertaken in my Department relate to work engaged in under the social partnership process or within the information technology unit. There is little consultancy in terms of normal departmental work.
Why the increase?
The consultancies relate to work undertaken in connection with the social partnership process. Such work would not be undertaken by staff but by outside consultancies. My Department takes up the cost of outside consultancy reports on agriculture and for trade unions and employers. Also, the IT unit undertook an extensive survey, the report of which was published this year but I am not sure if it was costed last year or is included this year. That is from where the figure for consultancies arises.
Will the Taoiseach confirm whether a member or members of his staff are mandated to liaise with Independent Members of the House with a view to——
That matter is well outside the scope of the questions.
No, it is within the scope of the question.
The questions refer to staff vacancies.
Have any vacancies been filled by staff who are mandated to liaise with Independent Members of the Oireachtas, with a view to giving them——
Or, are any vacancies likely to be created as a result of——
No, there are no vacancies in that area. As was the case in the previous Government, a member of my staff linked to the Chief Whip's office keeps in touch with Independent Members of the House.
Did the Minister with responsibility for tourism have any role in that?
He is a tourist himself.
Official Engagements.
Ceisteanna (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29)
Enda Kenny
Ceist:3 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the formal signing of the European constitutional treaty in Rome on 29 October 2004; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26997/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:4 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his participation in the ceremonies in Rome for the signing of the new European treaty. [27162/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:5 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the discussions he had with other EU leaders on the margins of the ceremonies in Rome for the signing of the new European treaty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27163/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:6 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the contact with or discussions he has had with the President of the European Commission, Mr. Jose Manuel Barosso, regarding his decision to withdraw his proposed Commission following strong opposition from the European Parliament to the proposed appointment of a person (details supplied) to the position of Commissioner for Justice and Home Affairs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27165/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraEnda Kenny
Ceist:7 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the recent European Council meeting in Brussels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27736/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraEnda Kenny
Ceist:8 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his bilateral meetings on the margins of the recent European Council meeting in Brussels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27737/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:9 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his participation in the summit in Rome to sign the EU constitutional treaty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27739/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:10 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of the meeting of the European Council in Brussels on 4 and 5 November 2004. [27850/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:11 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the discussions he had with other EU leaders in the margins of the European Council summit in Brussels on 4 and 5 November 2004. [27851/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:12 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed and conclusions reached during his recent meeting with the Chief Secretary for Administration of the Hong Kong special administrative region, Mr. Donald Tsang; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27852/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraTrevor Sargent
Ceist:13 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the formal signing of the European constitution in Rome in October 2004; the meetings he had with other EU leaders on the margins of those ceremonies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27999/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:14 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if he has had contact or sent a message to President George Bush following his re-election as President of the United States; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28068/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Joe Higgins
Ceist:15 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his contacts with President George W. Bush since his re-election as President of the United States. [28629/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraJoe Higgins
Ceist:16 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the meetings he had on the margins of the ceremony to sign the EU’s constitutional treaty in Rome; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28631/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraJoe Higgins
Ceist:17 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his visit to Rome to attend the signing of the EU’s constitutional treaty. [28632/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraTrevor Sargent
Ceist:18 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he sent a message to President George W. Bush following his re-election as President of the United States; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29646/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraTrevor Sargent
Ceist:19 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the outcome of the European Council in Brussels in early November 2004; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29647/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraTrevor Sargent
Ceist:20 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the agenda for the European Council in December 2004; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29648/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:21 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed and the conclusions reached at his meeting in Dublin with the Vice-Chairman of the People’s Republic of China, Mr. Huang Ju; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29956/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraPat Rabbitte
Ceist:22 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed and the conclusions reached at his meeting in Dublin with the US Treasury Secretary, John Snow; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29957/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:23 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he has been in contact with the President of the United States since his re-election; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29972/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraJoe Higgins
Ceist:24 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed and conclusions reached at the November 2004 European Council in Brussels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30194/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraJoe Higgins
Ceist:25 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on bilateral meetings that he held on the margins of the November 2004 European Council meeting in Brussels. [30195/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraJoe Higgins
Ceist:26 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the Chief Secretary for Administration of the Hong Kong special administrative region, Mr. Donald Tsang. [30196/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraJoe Higgins
Ceist:27 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed and conclusions reached at his meeting with the Chinese Premier, Mr. Huang Ju; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30198/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Bernard Allen
Ceist:28 Mr. Allen asked the Taoiseach the level of funding to be allocated to the National Forum on Europe for 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30051/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraTrevor Sargent
Ceist:29 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the Chinese Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Huang Ju, in Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30928/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (35 píosaí cainte)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 29, inclusive, together.
On Friday, 29 October, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and I joined our European Council colleagues in Rome to officially sign the text of the treaty to establish a constitution for Europe. The treaty will not come into effect until it has been ratified by all member states in accordance with their constitutional requirements. The target date for its entry into force is 1 November 2006.
Given the role played by Ireland during its Presidency of the EU in reaching a consensus agreement on the text of the constitution, I was asked to speak at the official ceremony. The text of the speech I gave has been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. In addition to the signing ceremony, I also hosted a reception for the Irish religious community in Rome and visited a number of Irish religious houses in the city. My address at that reception has also been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.
Other than my bilateral meetings with Prime Minister Blair at the signing ceremony in Rome, and again at the European Council in November, which I will cover in my reply to questions tabled on Northern Ireland issues, I did not have any formal bilateral meetings with other EU leaders on the margins of the signing ceremony in Rome or the November European Council.
On 10 November, I made a detailed statement to the Dáil on the discussions and outcome of the European Council which took place on 4 and 5 November. I propose, therefore, to briefly summarise the issues discussed. Mr. Wim Kok made a presentation to the European Council on the main recommendations of the high level group which had independently assessed, in the context of the mid-term review, progress to date on the Lisbon Agenda. The European Council agreed that the Commission should report by the end of January on the necessary proposals for the mid-term review. The Council discussed the communicating Europe ministerial process, launched during Ireland's Presidency.
The European Council adopted the Hague Programme on strengthening the area of freedom, security and justice. The Commission will now prepare an implementation plan for the programme. The Commission President presented the latest Commission reports on the future enlargement of the EU. External relations were also discussed, in particular Sudan-Darfur, Iraq, Iran and the Middle-East. The European Council also welcomed the revised proposals for the new European Commission, as outlined by President-designate, Mr. José Manuel Barroso. I am pleased that this Commission has now been approved and has taken office. I did not have any bilateral discussions at the Council with President-designate Barroso about the withdrawal of the Italian nominee and the presentation of a new list of commissioners.
The agenda for the December European Council has yet to be finalised. However, it is expected to take decisions on outstanding enlargement questions such as the opening of negotiations with Turkey and Croatia and the conclusion of negotiations with Bulgaria and Romania. In addition the Presidency will present a report to the European Council on progress achieved since June 2004 on the Financial Framework 2007-2013. The Council is also expected to review progress made since June this year in the fight against terrorism.
The National Forum on Europe has been allocated funding of €1.3 million for 2005, as opposed to €1.151 million in 2004. This represents a 13% increase on the funds provided for 2004. As an independent body, it is a matter for the National Forum on Europe to decide how it will utilise these funds during the year.
On 1 November, I met the Chief Secretary of Hong Kong, Mr. Donald Tsang during his official visit to Ireland. We discussed our excellent bilateral economic relations including co-operation in the areas of science and technology, education, justice and health. We also discussed Hong Kong's efforts to progress its economic and trade agenda with the European Union and the wider world.
I met with the Chinese Vice-Premier, Mr. Huang Ju during his official visit to Ireland. We noted that Ireland and China enjoy excellent bilateral political and economic relations. I said I was very much looking forward to my visit to China next January as it will provide an invaluable opportunity to strengthen our bilateral ties. I indicated to the Premier that I would be accompanied on my visit by a large trade delegation from a range of Irish businesses who look forward to developing business links and contacts with Chinese business leaders.
The Vice-Premier and I discussed co-operation in education, research and culture and noted the value of the bilateral agreements signed in these areas. I said that we were pleased to have a strong and vibrant young Chinese community living in Ireland. We discussed the steady progress in EU-China relations and the improvement of our interaction through the ASEM process.
I wrote to Mr. George Bush offering my congratulations on his re-election as President of the United States and wishing him success in meeting the challenges that he will face over the next four years in office. I also looked forward to building even closer relations with the United States both at national level and at the level of the European Union. I have also written to Senator John Kerry wishing him the best for the future.
I met with the US Secretary of Treasury, Mr. John Snow, on 15 November. We reviewed international economic issues and our bilateral trade and economic relations. We also had a brief discussion on a number of key political issues, including the Middle East peace process. Secretary Snow briefed me on the post election agenda for President Bush and on his plans for the future of the US economy.
I thank the Taoiseach for his lengthy reply. Progress on the Lisbon Agenda was discussed at the European Council meeting and the President of the Commission welcomed the report by Mr. Wim Kok. However, he described the findings as a realistic but worrying assessment of progress being made.
Will the Taoiseach comment on the National Competitiveness Council's statement that Irish prices rose by 22% more than in other EU countries during 1999-2003? Economic consultants say a lack of competition in the banking sector is costing small business €500 million and Friends First has also stated that Irish competitiveness has been seriously eroded by a sharp increase in the overall cost base which it says will not be reversible. Will the Taoiseach say how he expects Ireland to contribute to achieving elements of the Lisbon Agenda if its competitiveness is in serious decline?
Also, will the Taoiseach comment on the proposals published by Mr. Kofi Annan in respect of United Nations reform? Has Ireland contributed in any way to the panel's published proposals? Does he intend to attend at the summit conference in September to which leaders of Governments have been invited to discuss this matter? What is the Taoiseach's view of the expansion of the Security Council which, as I have repeatedly stated, was set up to reflect a world which no longer exists?
The Deputy raised two questions. On the Lisbon Agenda, Ireland continues to grow, taking into account OECD and EU projections, by at least twice the European average. In that regard I am looking at foreign direct investment and other indicators of a decade ago which put Ireland in 40th place; we are now in fourth place. In output, we are producing far more than any other country. Last year, exports stood at €331 billion. Employment is strong and unemployment is low. Our contribution to the Lisbon Agenda is second to no one when one looks at the GDP to debt ratio, salary levels and the level of wealth. There is a direct correlation between the level of wealth and salaries and the level of prices. The National Competitiveness Council is right when it does not look at the areas we do well but instead at the hidden sectors, which it claims are the professions.
The National Competitiveness Council is due to publish a report on the banking sector in December or January. However, in the last several years, enormous changes in competitiveness levels have occurred. The State banks, the ICC and ACC, and the Bank of Scotland have moved into the private banking sector. Irish Permanent Building Society amalgamated with the TSB. All these factors have brought competition in the sector to an all-time high. There are concerns about maintaining Irish banks, such as AIB and Bank of Ireland, and that such competition is a threat to them. I wonder and worry about what would happen if that occurred. I do not believe it would be good for competition. There is a counter-argument that if they were taken out, it would. However, I do not share that view. The more competition in the banking sector the better, as the banking profession has also realised. Much of the lower end market has moved to the credit unions because of legislation passed by successive Governments and the level of services they now provide. A far greater degree of competition exists in this sector.
I accept the Competition Authority's claims that other sectors, such as the legal, pharmacy and other professions where there are strong vested interests, must be tackled. A series of reports from the Competition Authority have been released. Its final report will be reflected in the pharmacy Bill, which will be before the House in the new year. The report will also reflect on other sectors. There is no doubt that competition drives prices down. Deputy Kenny will know that in going through these sectors, one will hit a large vested interests brigade, for one reason or another. The current campaign to drive prices further down calls for larger supermarkets and multiple-stores. The campaign began five years ago and is now back on the agenda with many arguments put forward. The Competition Authority and the National Competitiveness Council have bought into these arguments. However, there is a social downside to such developments too. There are as many people arguing against them as for them.
Recently a major survey on people's perceptions of stores was conducted. Those interviewed perceived that prices had gone up by approximately 15% in the last year. However, when checked, a large amount of consumer items had only gone up by under 6%. How does one answer that? I accept Deputy Kenny's points about competition and hitting some sectors. Car insurance has come down by 19.2%, which is a large drop. That is because of the focus on the industry. I accept that if the focus is not kept, results will not be achieved. A few years ago, if I claimed that by taking measures on legal issues and the courts regarding insurance we could drive down insurance costs on average by 20% and 46% for young people, many would have said it could never happen. However, it did happen because the vested interests were tackled and competition was created. More competition will be created because many big players in the insurance industry are standing outside the Irish market, waiting to see if this continues before entering it. Competition creates better prices for the consumer and makes everyone sharper. Deputy Kenny will accept that the vested interests get up to high doh, arguing against it. We will always have to contend with this as an issue.
I hope to attend the UN summit in September. We have put forward reform measures. I support Kofi Annan's measures into which he has put an enormous effort. He has had his wise men group examining them and he discussed them at length with me at Farmleigh during his recent visit to Ireland. If his measures are not adopted or implemented, there will not be another chance for a decade which would be a terrible mistake. A new UN Secretary General will be appointed in the next 18 months but this opportunity will not arise again. Kofi Annan is highly respected in the UN and internationally and he has a clear blueprint for reform. Next September will be crucial for these. Although it may be too much to hope for, I hope there is an EU voice on it and that the reforms will be passed.
I want to ask the Taoiseach about tax harmonisation and, more properly, approximation. Do I get the impression that this issue is not disposed of in European circles and institutions? Has the Taoiseach or his Government's view evolved on this matter? I take it as read that the Taoiseach read the ICTU document on this issue. Whatever the criticisms of the document, it certainly opened the argument as to whether in the medium to long-term Ireland will benefit from what is termed "the race to the bottom". One gets the impression it will remain an issue in European politics.
After President Bush's election, the Taoiseach said:
Looking at the policies in the manifestos of both candidates, had Senator Kerry been elected, US multinationals abroad would be subject to a new taxation, which would have had a significant impact on the Irish economy.
I would have begun immediately a process of lobbying to ensure such a tax would not have been introduced.
I am still puzzled why the Taoiseach made this statement. Can I ask him to address pertinently the issue of the Bill that President Bush signed into law that imposes a 5.25% tax on multinational companies for a temporary period and is designed to suck profits back into the domestic US economy? What is the Taoiseach's assessment of the impact of this measure on the Irish economy? Was this issue raised at the Taoiseach's meeting with the US Treasury Secretary, John Snow?
Tax harmonisation in Europe, as we have been discussing it on and off over the last decade from Amsterdam in 1995 onward, is no longer an issue. There has been a significant change. French Premier, Lionel Jospin was a great advocate of harmonisation and had broad based support. At one stage during negotiations on the Nice treaty, it looked as if harmonisation might be introduced as there was a French Presidency, but the debate is now over. The concept of harmonisation of anything and everything will continue to be considered by some European bureaucrats and research groups. While a group within Germany which continually examines methods of harmonisation will keep coming forward with ideas, the Government and opposition in that country will not.
There is a technical working group in Brussels of which I am always suspicious. It has enormously complicated terms of reference which I have read several times and had several people explain to me their precise meaning. Perhaps it is simply that I do not understand the terms of reference, but I am quite suspicious of what they mean. The group works on harmonisation in the bowels of a building in Brussels and I have no doubt I will not like the report it produces despite not knowing its terms of reference. I am inherently suspicious of the way some of these people operate, which is a view I am sure Deputy Rabbitte shares. My suspicions are not to do with the social and economic policies of these people, they are related to the way in which they always seem to work on a line when it is mathematically handy to do so whereby information is presented on a chart which depicts everyone on an equal basis. In that way, it looks very easy to read which is why I am suspicious.
I have had the opportunity to be on the same platform with these people within and outside the Presidency and have noted that they work with what is convenient and seems to be good policy while discounting the peripherality of some countries and the fact that there is a stretch of water between us and everywhere else. They discount the fact that ours is a fairly spread out population, much of our land is not great and we do not have natural resources. They always present the boxes nicely, but fail to take into account the issues I have outlined. Those people will surface again with a report and harmonisation will be presented in some other guise.
Deputy Rabbitte will be as aware as I am of strong moves in many countries to consider what we did a decade ago. They are considering what is the real rate of tax. We are enormously transparent in our Revenue processes and in legislation, which is a credit to the system here as against the systems operated in other countries. To ask what is the rate of corporation tax in these countries is to pose a good question. If a corporation is large enough, these countries will do a special deal with it. While we are bad enough here sometimes, I am glad we do not allow agencies and Ministers to operate that kind of system. Many countries are considering what would happen if shelters, allowances, exemptions and specially negotiated deals were removed and are asking what is the real rate of tax.
Estonia and other eastern countries are very advanced in this area. They have been making provisions as part of their EU preparations over the last decade and are quite extraordinary in the approaches they have taken.
Estonia has a zero rate.
They do not have the other systems either and have got rid of many of the hidden costs. If one requires infrastructural development in some of these places, one must pay for it oneself. They have their own enlightened approaches and have powers to make companies undertake certain tasks rather than pay tax. It is an alternative, quite attractive method of getting things done.
There is a movement which is considering that it may be better to introduce a real rate of tax. People are looking at countries which are successful at attracting foreign direct investment such as Ireland, Scotland, which does very well as part of the United Kingdom, and Finland. Without being disrespectful to Finland, I note that one company attracts a great deal of foreign direct investment there. If one discounts that one company, the figures are very different. Perhaps the Finns would argue the same about Ireland in terms of information technology, chemicals and pharmaceuticals.
I raised all of these issues in the context of a meeting on the US administration's proposals with Treasury Secretary Snow. Deputy Rabbitte will not be surprised that I spent most of my time during the discussions trying to determine administration policy on the dollar and its future. It is the major issue. There is no threat at this stage from the administration's investment policy to the flow of capital to Ireland through foreign direct investment in the IFSC and pharmaceutical, chemical and information technology companies. The administration does not appear to plan to do anything to affect what is there. Industry representatives tell me they are not unduly worried.
My comments after the election on Senator Kerry's policies were based on an issue which had been highlighted a number of times over the last year in many Irish journals. It was an issue in America. Senator Kerry intended to subject US corporations abroad to a new tax and had outlined how he would do so. Companies in all sectors here felt this could create great difficulties for them. Whether or not it would have, companies raised the matter many times. I said that if Senator Kerry, who is a very fine person, had been elected, we would have begun a process of intensive lobbying to ensure that the proposals to introduce a new tax for US multinationals abroad would not have been introduced in the manner planned. It would have done a great deal of damage here. As Deputy Rabbitte knows, it is nothing new for us to lobby the USA about multinational firms. Whenever initiatives like this are proposed, we tend to engage in lobbying. We have done so several times and, no doubt, will do so again. That was the context of my remarks.
What about the document of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions on corporation tax?
While congress would say more resources are obtained through corporation tax, there are long-term dangers. Companies which come to me in various ways always refer to long-term investment. It is always something of an eye-opener to me that none of them speak about a decade. They tend to consider periods of 15 to 25 years and are concerned with certainty. They look far beyond the term most of us here consider to be a political life span.
In world terms, Ireland is significant in chemical related industries, pharmaceuticals, information technology and financial services. The companies in these sectors are here for a long haul of ten to 25 years. More often, the investment term is from 15 to 25 years rather than up to ten. Companies consider certainty in this context. While it is not impossible, change would be extremely difficult to contend with. Perhaps there are other approaches. Last year, we had to introduce a tax incentive to support research and development, which was an area in which we were not doing very well. We had to ask why Ireland was not an attractive location for research and development activity and the reason related to tax. I accepted the point and in discussions with the ICTU and others it was decided that a tax credit had to be introduced.
I have been saying to multinational companies that they cannot have it both ways. We cannot get the bottom line taxes down to the attractive rate of 12.5% and then come up with the bright idea of having a lower credit or discriminating against people. I have been pressing the IDA and others very hard on this and telling them that they cannot have all the jam without playing ball on the other issues. I believe they accept this point. However, I caution against changing the corporation tax rate for the reason set out because instability would be created, not that they fear that Deputy Kenny, Deputy Rabbitte or I, if there was a change of Government, might change it. It is a greater perception; it would be something we would not get over easily. That is my own personal experience on a long-term basis.
Can the Taoiseach confirm that the proposed referendum on the constitution will be held in 2006? Will he also confirm that if the result of the referendum represents a rejection, he will accept the outcome, in other words, that there will be only one referendum on the matter, not two as in the case of Nice I? Also, is the Taoiseach aware that the European Federation of Public Service Unions which represents some eight million workers across the Continent has expressed concern about the proposed EU directive on services in the Internal Market? It has voiced real concern that the directive will adversely affect public services and reduce the ability of member state governments to resist a drive towards privatisation and exploitation in a number of sectors. Effectively, the directive seeks to treat public and private sector workers in exactly the same way. My concern is that a situation would arise where competition rules would apply in the public sector regarding the provision of education and health in exactly the same way as they apply in regard to commercial businesses.
Given the views the Taoiseach expressed at the recent Ógra Fianna Fáil conference in Ballyconnell, County Cavan where he was very welcome, that the market serves the people, not vice versa, will he give the House his view on this directive and advise if he concurs with the express concerns of the European Federation of Public Service Unions?
About what directive is the Deputy talking?
The proposed EU directive on services in the Internal Market.
All these proposals that become directives are debated and passed by the House. I do not have any fears that we will be forced into some kind of privatised arrangements in public services. If anything, the demand across Europe, which the European Union is driving by its very actions, is to improve public services and the rights of public workers. That is happening day in, day out in France and Germany. If the Deputy wants to take up the issue of the particular proposal, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment is probably dealing with it but I have no concerns.
On the issue of the constitution, I have no doubt that with the considerable help of Sinn Féin this time and the fact that it wants to see employment and exports grow and investment in areas like north Monaghan which need more investment, it would want the referendum passed in order that they can move forward and not be viewed as a backwater——
Is that the quid pro quo?
Please allow the Taoiseach continue.
I am sure with the assistance of the Sinn Féin electoral machine and resources——
Is that the quid pro quo in regard to the Taoiseach’s commitment to invest in the Border counties?
Deputy Ó Caoláin, in fairness to Deputies Sargent and Higgins who have questions submitted, I ask you to refrain from interrupting.
The Taoiseach made a mockery of a very important question, showed a total lack of knowledge of a directive I have raised and now he mocks——
Deputy Ó Caoláin——
I am sorry but you should be equally sorry for the Taoiseach.
I answered the Deputy's question. I said there was no draft proposal for a directive that would force Irish companies or services to be privatised.
No, it is about competition——
Deputy Ó Caoláin, I will have to ask you to leave the House because in fairness to your colleagues——
There are no white elephants like that running around——
On a point of information, a Cheann Comhairle——
The Deputy is not entitled to make a point of information.
Clearly, the Taoiseach does not know what he is talking about. A point of information would be helpful to him.
There are no such fears.
Competition rules.
The Taoiseach mentioned that we do not have natural resources. He might reflect on this given that the Germans would love to have our wind and wave power. Perhaps that is an area he needs to examine more closely.
I found his reply interesting when he said Reverend Jesse Jackson had been misquoted when he said that Ireland was in the line of fire regarding our allowance of Shannon Airport to be used by the US military. I have checked with The Irish Times and apparently he was not misquoted. It was directly taken from a tape. Was the Taoiseach told by Reverend Jesse Jackson that he did not mean to say it or does he want to provide some clarification for the House because it is a direct quote?
In regard to the Taoiseach's signing of the EU constitution on 29 October, is he able to explain, having given us many assurances during the Nice treaty campaign on enhanced co-operation not extending into the military field, the reason it is now possible for some member states to come together in enhanced co-operation in the area of defence? What has brought about this change and is the Taoiseach prepared for it? Does it have budgetary implications for this country, apart from policy implications in respect of neutrality?
Regarding the meeting with the Vice Premier of China, the Minister for Foreign Affairs stated events had moved on since Tiananmen Square, that the human rights situation was better and that, therefore, the sanctions imposed on China could be lifted. Will the Taoiseach indicate any specific improvements in China's human rights record that would justify lifting the embargo? If the Government believes there has been an improvement, what is the basis for that belief?
When the Taoiseach reported on his meeting with Vice Premier Huang of China, he waxed lyrical about the excellent bilateral relations with China. Apart from the denial of human rights by the Chinese Government in many areas of life, was he briefed before the meeting on the wide-ranging struggles throughout China by Chinese workers against massive exploitation which they suffer in many workplaces, including those of foreign companies investing in China as the so-called Chinese Communist Party rushes to embrace the worst features of global capitalism? Was the Taoiseach aware that China had more trade unionists in prison for organising against exploitation and seeking their rights than any other country in the world? Was he aware that shortly before he met Vice Premier Huang ten workers, the youngest being a 16 year old girl, were jailed for work stoppages protesting against their working conditions in a foreign company, Stella International, a shoe-making concern, in the province of Guangdong? As the Chinese workers go through their 1913 experience, except on a much greater scale than their Dublin counterparts at the time, when the Taoiseach visits China next year, which he indicated he would do, and as he is being entertained in the Great Hall of the People and banqueted in Beijing, will he be prepared to stand in front of the world and denounce this gross exploitation of workers which any socialist would think duty bound to do?
In reply to Deputy Sargent, I stated that Mr. Jesse Jackson rang to say his views were not in the context that he put them and he wanted that to be known. That is what I reported. That is what the man said and I am sure that is what he meant.
The European constitution provides that declarations made on previous treaties shall be preserved unless they are deleted or amended. The Seville Declarations will, therefore, remain fully in force and the Government will continue to ensure the commitments made in the declarations reflected in article 29.4.9 of the constitution are fully maintained. The constitution contains a protocol on structured co-operation and we are totally covered. If we want to be involved in US-chartered initiatives, we will comply with the constitution but we will not be forced to do anything. That position is absolutely clear, let there be no doubt whatever about that.
I assure Deputies Higgins and Sargent in regard to China that when Premiers Zhu and Wen visited Ireland, I raised the fundamental issues of human rights. We actively called for the release of Falun Gong prisoners two years ago, which was deeply appreciated by the Chinese community in Ireland. We succeeded in a number of high profile cases. When Ireland held the EU Presidency earlier this year, we gave a commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms. We recognised the efforts of the Chinese authorities to move towards greater recognition of individual rights and freedoms. With the EU, we have been encouraging them to accept and recognise these and move away from where they have been.
I referred, in particular, at my recent meeting to the ongoing human rights dialogue, which is an important part of EU-China relations. Ireland was pleased to host a session of the dialogue in February, at which we raised all the issues.
Workers are in jail.
Human rights issues are a constant point of discussion with the Chinese authorities at both national and European level and we will continue to raise them. If I visit China, I will raise them again in whatever hall. During our discussions, we reiterated Ireland's general commitment to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and that challenge continues. All EU governments are continuing to impress that on China. We also emphasised that Ireland is willing to share its experience and expertise with China in this area.
Co-operation and engagement should be favoured over criticism alone. During the EU-China seminars that took place in Beijing last June and on 8-9 November, we acknowledged the efforts of the Chinese authorities to move towards greater recognition of individual rights. We must continue to press this. The human rights dialogue allows us to raise a wide range of issues, including individual cases and the position of groups such as the Falun Gong. That is a positive development because until that was established, we were not able to raise these issues. I do not disagree with Deputy Joe Higgins. We will continue to use these forums to raise these issues and to press the Chinese authorities to follow proper human rights initiatives because it is important that they do so.