Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will not respond to Deputy Boyd Barrett because it will be a Topical Issue today and I understand the Minister of State, Deputy Costello, will deal with it.

I would like to talk about the Irish Presidency and the six months since 1 January, during which we have presided over the Council of the European Union. I do not think it is self-praise or somehow exaggerating to say it was a good Presidency. I am sorry Deputy Martin is no longer in the House because I thought his contribution was a little ironic. I spoke in the Seanad and in the Dáil on many occasions in the run-up to and during our Presidency and I have always said we have an excellent record of running Presidencies. Our six previous Presidencies have all been successful. It was somewhat ironic that Deputy Martin actually accused the Taoiseach of politicising statements made during the Presidency and then went on to make a completely politicised statement in which he could not even bring himself to give the slightest bit of credit to the Government or to Ireland for conducting what was genuinely and generally accepted as a very good Presidency.

The Presidency was important for two reasons, one of which was reputation building. It is no secret, as it is in our programme for Government and is repeated by Ministers from the Taoiseach down, that we have prioritised rebuilding Ireland's tarnished reputation. I think we all agree the Anglo Irish Bank tapes have been a very stark reminder of just how damaged our reputation has been over the past five years or so. The Presidency provided us with an excellent opportunity to demonstrate to our partners in the EU and on the global stage that we can run an effective EU agenda for six months and we did a good job in achieving that. There is no doubt in my mind, having been at the European Council on Thursday and Friday last and having literally been on the road since January, that the response to and the recognition of the achievements of the Irish Presidency are genuine in every capital in the EU and beyond and in all of the institutions. It is not simply a question of the Government praising itself, as Deputy Martin tried to claim, but it is something that is accepted widely.

It is easy to be cynical about the Presidency and to suggest it is a waste of time, that a small country, such as Ireland, cannot make any difference, that the EU agenda is set by the institutions or by certain capitals and that the whole thing is not worth bothering with. I would profoundly disagree with that. People will say that I would say that as I am the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs. However, I particularly disagree with that, having been at the forefront of our Presidency for the past six months.

For example, the trade deal has eluded the EU and the US for the past 20 years. We have talked about it incessantly but we have failed to achieve it, or to even get going on it. Given that we made it a priority - granted it was a risky priority - and created the conditions in the European Union to reach agreement and through our very positive and dynamic relationship with the US, we managed to create a situation where we could build momentum. We eventually achieved agreement among the EU Trade Ministers in the middle of June and, as Deputies know, the trade negotiations will be launched next week in Washington. That is a concrete example of a positive step which would not have been achieved had Ireland not been in the chair and which could have eluded us for many more months or, indeed, years to come. It has massive potential in terms of job creation, growth and offering a brighter future for citizens on both sides of the Atlantic.

Another achievement, of which I am very proud and which is a genuinely important one, is the progress we made on enlargement. It is easy for Europeans within the European Union to forget about enlargement, to say there is enlargement fatigue and to suggest we should somehow pull up the ladder behind us and not welcome new members states into the European Union. Serbia and Kosovo were on their knees 14 years ago. Everyone in the Chamber will remember the really alarming scenes just 14 years ago of NATO bombing both countries and the tragic consequences of that. To me, proof positive of how important, transformative and extraordinary the EU enlargement policy has been is that we have managed to bring those two countries together to engage in a genuine effort to resolve their ethnic and inter-state issues and to try to build a better future for their citizens. That is the power of the EU's enlargement policy. It is one of the most successful policies of the EU, if not the most successful policy, about which we rarely talk.

That was another important achievement under the Irish Presidency.

It is important we learn lessons from the Presidency as well. One that I have learned and which we must consider again in future is the lack of visibility of EU leaders in the member state which holds the Presidency. It was a big mistake to end rotating EU summits and during the six months of the Presidency it would not be too much to hope for that EU leaders would come for an informal Council meeting to the capital of the country hosting the Presidency. It would be beneficial as a manifestation of Presidency in that important leaders and decision makers would come to the country holding the Presidency. Moreover, it is not necessarily healthy for EU leaders to always meet in Brussels in formal Council meetings. In order to stimulate a bigger and broader picture and debate, and to give more philosophical perspective to discussions, it is important to occasionally meet in an informal context. In many of his recent speeches, President Higgins has highlighted the need for more intellectual rigour in our decision making, and it is very hard for that to happen when all Council meetings are pre-prepared and precooked in such levels of detail. That is a lesson for me and something we should advocate.

It would be helpful for the EU to have longer Presidencies and the six-month term is too short. Team Presidencies, where responsibility could be shared and two or three member states could work together over an extended period, are supposed to have been achieved through the Lisbon treaty but, in reality, six-month Presidencies are still the norm. That makes it very difficult when there are very complex negotiations with the European Parliament, when expertise is developed and officials are stuck in negotiations. All of sudden, the plug is pulled after six months and we hand over to new officials and Ministers who must learn the process again. We should consider this at some point and perhaps after the European elections.

From a domestic strategic view, we must realise that our interest lies in deepening ties with new and aspiring EU member states, including the ten countries which joined in 2004, the two which joined in 2007 and one which joined just yesterday. There are also those which will join in future. From a national perspective, our foreign and aid policies are a little skewed against such an aspiration, as between 1996 and 2009, for example, we spent €33 million in the former Yugoslavia but that programme was completely suspended because of budget cuts in 2010, and there is very little funding going to those countries. We must redirect and refocus our foreign policy, as these countries will be crucial partners for Ireland in future so we should concentrate on developing ties and being a little bit more strategic in how we spend our resources in this country.

I have much I would like to say but, unfortunately, my time is limited. People often think Presidencies come together overnight but they do not, and we began our preparations in 2010. I began chairing our interdepartmental working group with senior officials from all Departments in 2011, and all our preparations have been painstakingly detailed. That has been the recipe for success, and the Taoiseach, Tánaiste and all our Ministers stepped up to the plate and worked extremely hard. The results are clear.

I know the Taoiseach has already mentioned it but I acknowledge the excellence of the officials from all our Departments, as they are genuinely the talk of Brussels and other European capitals because of their pragmatism, willingness to get stuck in and their negotiating and other skills, which are second to none. I mention our so-called Presidency staff, who are excellent, highly-talented and immensely valuable young people who came in on short-term contracts to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Department of the Taoiseach, as well as our permanent representation in Brussels and all Departments. Most of those people will finish this week. They contributed much energy and dynamism in our Presidency and they will be sorely missed. I extend an enormous vote of thanks to these people for their contribution in rebuilding Ireland's reputation abroad and progressing the overall EU agenda and Ireland's Presidency agenda. I wish them the very best in their future careers. In other circumstances there would be a place for them in our Irish Civil Service as they are the type of people we need, as they are dynamic, talented and young. To be honest, they would put any of us to shame. Unfortunately, that cannot be the case but I know many will have bright careers in European institutions and other organisations in Brussels and elsewhere. They will be an asset to the Government and Ireland in any case.

See this speech in context