Senator Déirdre de Búrca: I ask the Minister to excuse me for not having turned off my mobile phone before coming to the meeting. He said my ringtone was optimistic but we need optimistic ringtones on our mobile phones, anything that can help to improve the general mood.
I have a copy of a paper delivered to my house yesterday, which is being distributed widely by Alive!. It concerns the Lisbon treaty about which it contains a range of factually incorrect assertions. Hearing the statement of the Minister today, I was concerned that the matter of the Lisbon treaty is not on the agenda. I have no doubt it is a matter of extraordinary concern to members of the Council of Ministers. I heard the interview with the Minister and Nigel Farage of the UK Independence Party. I wonder if anything can be done about people who make fundamentally incorrect assertions to the public about the content of the Lisbon treaty. One expects people to hold different points of view in a debate but this is a publication. I do not know who produces the Alive! magazine—–
Deputy Noel Treacy: It is published by a priest.
Senator Déirdre de Búrca There is a priest’s name on the back of it. It informs people that the legal guarantees the Government spent so much time securing and receiving support from other member states for are not legally binding. The Charter of Fundamental Rights is described as dangerous and the leaflet suggests that, if implemented, the charter will give major powers to the European Court of Justice, affecting the right to life of the unborn, the nature of marriage, the rights of parents to protect their children and religious freedom. These are the very matters we have secured conclusively in the legal guarantees. Are there any sanctions for people who put out information that is factually incorrect? Is the Minister aware of the parties involved in this initiative?
Iceland’s application for EU membership will be discussed at the meeting. I hope Ireland will support the application. It is important that we point out in the campaign for the Lisbon treaty that it is strange that Iceland, which is in a more difficult economic situation than Ireland, is applying for membership of the EU when those who make the case against the Lisbon treaty suggest that it is bad for workers and will not be good for the Irish economy. We should emphasise this point.
The issue of economic recovery is not included on the agenda for the GAERC meeting. It was on the agenda for previous meetings and I am concerned about this. Discussions will take place on the EU preparations for the climate change conference in Copenhagen in December. If the EU is to sign up to its ambitious commitments, this will have implications for the EU economy and it will provide an opportunity to create a stronger, greener economy across the EU. This brings us back to the issue of an EU stimulus or recovery package, something much more ambitious than the current recovery plans being discussed at EU level. Ireland’s economy is in difficulty and needs the prospect of some stimulus assisted by the EU. Is it on the agenda of the Council of Ministers or has it slipped? It is pertinent to Iceland’s application for membership that the EU be in a position to provide an economic stimulus for all member states. To date, the economic recovery programmes are somewhat underwhelming. In light of the climate change conference and the commitment the EU is likely to make at that, is there serious thinking going on about attempts to stimulate a truly green economy? If the Lisbon treaty is passed we will have shared competence in the EU on an energy policy, which will provide many opportunities to all EU member states for economic recovery.
With regard to the Iranian situation and sanctions there is general concern that where sanctions were implemented in the past, such as on Iraq and Cuba, they did not always manage to be as effective as we would have liked. Sometimes the international community finds itself having implemented sanctions which are not having the required effect but from which it cannot withdraw. What types of sanctions are being considered? Are we aware of the danger of sanctions isolating a particular country? As much as possible we should encourage Iran to remain as full a member of the international community as possible. Is there a danger that sanctions might have the opposite effect and isolate Iran?
Deputy Micheál Martin: Deputy Pat Breen raised a number of issues. The talks between Turkey and Cyprus are ongoing and there has been no major development. With regard to Croatia, each membership application is decided on its merits and various chapters are opened and concluded in negotiations with applicant member states which must reach certain standards. As we discussed previously, a significant issue arises with regard to a border dispute between Croatia and Slovenia and the intensive mediation under way has not yet yielded an outcome. That is the major stumbling block to Croatia’s application for membership. Turkey’s application is a long saga and certain chapters have been opened on it. However, there are many difficulties and challenges and it will involve a longer timeframe. There is no real connection between enlargement and the Lisbon treaty and the treaty has no impact on the applications being received. Despite what various people may say that is the factual position.
We are very concerned about the situation in Afghanistan. A fundamental review is under way at EU level on Afghanistan and its neighbour, Pakistan. We began informal discussions in Stockholm last Friday; the bulk of Friday’s discussion was on the Middle East but we had a significant discussion afterwards on Afghanistan. The elections and the importance of minimising civilian casualties in the military effort are key issues as are the development of economic and social sustainability in Afghanistan, governance in the regions, local governance, corruption, security and justice.
Our inputs must be strong on alternative crop production to the poppy, particularly with regard to aid. That is very important. Through Irish Aid we have a potential role in agricultural technique, expertise and knowledge. There will be a stronger call for co-ordination of aid among all donors and we have been stressing that for quite some time. We are concerned about the broader issues of governance, corruption and human rights. We would like to see these being significant parts of the new policy and strategy on Afghanistan that will emerge from our discussions over the coming weeks, particularly at the next GAERC meeting. It is not just a military issue; it is about developing the capacity to facilitate good governance at local, regional and national levels that will ultimately determine a successful outcome.
In regard to the European Union’s relations with Iran, we are very conscious of the role of sanctions. The High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Javier Solana, is involved in ongoing and exhaustive discussions with Iran, particularly regarding the nuclear file. The EU has been very patient and has persevered along the diplomatic road. Without question, our objective is the diplomatic resolution of all outstanding issues and we are pursuing diplomacy to avoid the unthinkable in terms of the nuclear issue. It is a cause of great tension for the region and it does not solely concern the EU and the US. The EU’s approach has been strategic and temperate but there is no escaping the fact that the response has not been good.
Sanctions have always been directed against the regime rather than the populace because we are anxious that they do not make life worse for ordinary citizens. Senator de Búrca is correct in saying there is no point in using sanctions if they are counterproductive or do not achieve their goals and we will bear this in mind when we consider other graduated measures against Iran, particularly in regard to the treatment of foreign nationals and embassy staff. We may, for example, consider visa and travel restrictions on senior Iranian officials or other restrictive actions against Iranian Embassy staff in EU capitals. Again, however, we do not want to introduce measures that will be counterproductive or undermine our longer-term objectives in regard to engaging with Iran and resolving the significant issues currently on the table.
The Senator expressed her surprise that the Lisbon treaty is not on the agenda. It is not on the agenda because a referendum will be taking place in Ireland. If we pass the treaty, it will be put on the agenda for implementation. She also made reference to the Alive! newspaper. I appeal for a factual and accurate debate. We live in a democracy and I agree that many false claims can be made but it is up to those of us who support a “Yes” vote to firmly rebut them. I saw a good example of this from Blair Horan of the CPSU, who responded to a press release and website presentation from Joe Higgins, MEP, on the Charter of Fundamental Rights. This is an example of the kind of solid rebuttal required and I pay tribute to Mr. Horan for identifying a deliberate distortion of the charter to suit a particular construct of workers’ rights. It is regrettable that such issues arise. Mr. Higgins, MEP, has acknowledged the matter as a mistake and, although others may have a different perspective on the matter, at least it was exposed. There is a similar need to expose the untrue claims made in Alive!. According to the Eurobarometer report, 60% of people are aware of the guarantees that were secured in June. It is accepted that a comprehensive and effective, legally binding guarantee has been achieved with respect to the provisions in the Irish Constitution relating to the right to life, the role of the family and education. This guarantee is in addition to the Maastricht protocol, which has existed for 17 years and has been honoured throughout that time. We have no experience of an agreement concluded with the European Union that has not been honoured.
This raises the issue of trust and distrust. Some of the debate conducted by the “No” side presupposes the EU is out to do us down and acts in a conspiratorial way to undermine us but that is not our experience. We need to trust ourselves and the European Union, which works on the basis of consensus and of people working together for the advancement of the common good. The Referendum Commission was set up to clarify and provide information to people in a non-advocacy manner, by giving the facts.
Senator de Búrca mentioned Iceland and the progress of its application to join the EU will be fascinating. I have watched it keenly and have received a number of reports on the matter. Just as we are allowed the space to discuss our relationship with Europe so the people of Iceland should be allowed to hold their own debate. Given that we are also an island nation I would encourage Iceland to join as it would be good for it. There will be issues, as there always are in a discussion between an applicant state and the Union, but Iceland has strong associations with the EU and it is compatible in terms of the various chapters, so I welcome its application.
Senator de Búrca is right to draw attention to the climate change reference in Copenhagen. One of the great achievements of the French Presidency was the breakthrough in the December Council on climate change, which was followed up during the Czech Presidency. It is a very significant achievement to bring 27 member states to an agreed position on climate change, given the differences between the new member states and the more developed economies. Some member states, including ourselves, are over-reliant on fossil fuels but France and the UK have more diversified energy profiles.
The conference in Copenhagen is a significant milestone. People say we have three big forthcoming issues, namely, the Lisbon treaty, NAMA and the budget but I would add a fourth.
A Member: The Cork county final.
Deputy Micheál Martin: Yes, and the all-Ireland final is also very important. However, the conference in Copenhagen is make or break for the world. We lost ten years on climate change and it is interesting that President Obama has moved on the issue, as have the Australians where the Prime Minister, Mr. Rudd, has changed his country’s position. Europe has led in this regard. I mentioned the impact on Africa, which has been significant in terms of desertification, flooding and the vulnerability of poor communities to those events. The great tragedy is that while climate-related issues such as CO2 were created by the developed world those who will suffer the most are the poorest, and many of those are in African states. It is vital that we achieve a result and the Swedish Presidency, in line with all the Nordic countries and the United Kingdom, is very strong on the issue. We have held an internal debate on the issues and have played a role. There will be challenges and many people still think climate change is a distant issue or has been exaggerated but that is not the case. It is a crucial issue that relates to our economy and the Senator is correct to say the challenge is to turn an imperative into an opportunity for economic growth.
On green technology and renewables, we must grab this opportunity as it will form a significant part of the economic recovery if we do it well. If we develop our indigenous industries to a degree where they become part of the solution to the global problems which arise as a result of climate change, we can create jobs in what is termed green technology or the green industry. Long before these terms were coined, there were firms across the country involved in processes such as water treatment solutions. I was kept abreast of them when I was the Minister working in conjunction with Enterprise Ireland. We have a lot of good technology to help us grasp the opportunities that climate change will open up. I am an enthusiastic supporter of the Copenhagen process and hope the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, will realise what he has been fighting for over a long period on the issue.
There has been a very significant EU stimulus package and the European Central Bank has pumped approximately €120 billion into our financial system. It is an extraordinary contribution underpinning our financial and banking system, of which we should be conscious. There will be a special European Council meeting next Thursday to prepare for the Pittsburgh G20 meeting. It will focus on all aspects of economic recovery, financial sector regulation, in particular, which will be a key issue. There is also the stimulus issue which has been raised, as well as the so-called exit strategy from stimulus packages.
Filed under:
European Affairs by Deirdre
