Mr. John Murphy:

While it is a Commission competence, there was a significant political interest at EU ministerial level. During our EU Presidency when this was considered, the Minister was heavily involved with his EU counterparts in seeking to influence the outcome in the Commission. Mr. Rochford referred to several significant results in this regard.

Another issue we were concerned about was the safeguarding of the possibility of providing aid not just to new investments but to support existing enterprises which are transforming what they do by way of products or processes through innovation and to have sufficient flexibility in that.

If one looks at what the IDA does, one can see that 60% of the new investment we are getting is from the existing stock of companies. However, we are seeking to move up the value chain to maximise the benefit of our involvement in research and innovation but also so that the Irish branches of those companies are in a position to successfully bid internally for new projects. The capacity to provide is important. From the point of view of Europe as a whole because it is not just an Irish agenda, it would be unrealistic to limit aid to completely new greenfield investments or completely new products or services because of the rate at which the economy is evolving. As a country with particular experience of inward investment, it is important that we are in a position to lead on that and ensure our partners are aware of the need for a degree of flexibility there. Eventually, that was recognised by the Commissioner. In these circumstances, where the Commission has competence, it jealously guards that right and does not always welcome suggestions, be they from Ministers or national parliaments.

The need for the Commission to get involved at an earlier stage was highlighted. Absolutely - we are all in the business of trying to be involved at an early stage to influence policy. It is not always easy to do that because the Commission does not always hold up its proposals at an early enough stage and say it would really like our input on this. It tends to consult a range of different actors at different times and then when it is ready, it will land you with a fairly large document to which you have to react.

I would also suggest that you should be careful what you wish for. We supplied the list of items to the committee and it identified the ones on which further input was required. This list will be multiplied if you get involved at an earlier stage and you will still end up against a deadline trying to decide how we focus on this. We are happy to work with the committee but I am afraid this will not be an easy problem to solve.