Ms Marie Cross:

I welcome the opportunity to engage with the committee on the review of foreign policy in the context of the exercise under way. I hope that I can be of use in providing some information of relevant to the committee. I will perhaps concentrate, in my remarks, on the implementation of foreign policy and the means of most effective engagement in my experience.

For a small country we have a very high profile on the international scene for reasons of history, heritage and culture. It is striking, as a representative abroad, how the long arm of history, that dates back to the Christian monks who left Ireland, missionaries in Africa and more recently emigration from Ireland and the migrants who had great success internationally, is of considerable advantage to us both bilaterally and in a multilateral context. It is of very valuable assistance in representing the State abroad.

As an EU member we have the opportunity to promote our interests on a wider stage, to act with partners and to ally ourselves with a Union which has the capacity, to a greater extent now than ever, to influence international events in the political, economic and the development area and, with the EU's so-called comprehensive approach, it covers all of these areas.

Within the EU, our strengths are our history, our international profile on issues, particularly in the humanitarian and disarmament issues, and our willingness to back up our commitment with practical support such as our contribution to military and civilian peacekeeping missions, our aid programme and our willingness to mobilise other countries to support our efforts in this regard.

The challenge we face in the EU - or I suppose it can be more appropriately phrased as "the reality" - is that we are a small member state within a group of 28 states. Therefore, we must work hard and effectively to build up credibility in order to be listened to as an informed, reliable and effective member state of the EU whose policies and actions will advance not only our interests but can be seen to promote the interests of the EU as a whole.

It is a reality that large member states will always be listened to but smaller ones must establish their effectiveness. Our policies must be strategically selected where we have a national interest, where we can be seen to contribute and where we have knowledge. We can also, and often do, act in the role of facilitator or broker of compromises where no direct national interest is involved. This also raises our profile as a country.

A considerable amount of background work is necessary to promote our interests in the EU. It is a resource demanding activity, both in terms of numbers and capabilities, as can be deduced from the numbers and capacity devoted to this area by all of the other 27 member states. The permanent representative in Brussels is at the forefront of dealing with the EU but a very close co-ordinated network operating between the Departments in Dublin and our embassies and missions abroad is vital.

The officials of the Irish permanent representation unit must work through the layers of the various committees with a view to preparing the issues for consideration and decision by Ministers. By the time the proposals come before the Ministers they must be ready for final decision. For example, if foreign Ministers face a lengthy agenda of between ten to 15 items in a period that spans from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. then only the most contentious issues can be debated at this stage. The agenda items under discussion are crafted and shaped by discussion in committee that is directed along the way by policy guidance from headquarters. Therefore, the work of the people who work at the permanent mission is to seek out and provide as much information as possible on the issues coming on the agenda, filling in the position of other member states and advising headquarters in Dublin. The policies are formed in capitals on the basis of information provided by the permanent representative and by the bilateral and other missions. Officers at meetings in Brussels, however, must be able to react to the ebb and flow of a discussion in the committee, to judge and, if necessary, to influence the direction of the discussion.

In the external relations foreign policy area - where issues are considered - there are a number of committees. I use it as an example because it is an area that I know well. In the external relations area the main committees are the geographical regional committees. For example, there is a Balkans committee, Africa committee, Asia committee and committees on Latin America, disarmament, human rights, civilian crisis, military, etc.

The work of such a plethora of committees feeds into the political and security committee which meets for two full days a week and more when they are preparing the agenda for foreign Ministers. The political and security committee discusses issues relating to conflicts, hears from EU special representatives - mainly for conflict areas, heads of military and civilian missions which are directed by the political and security committee and proposes actions for consideration, such as the imposition of sanctions, sending an EU force which is military or civilian, granting financial assistance, withdrawing financial assistance, etc.

In order to keep track of all of these areas of business and to adequately service the country's interests, the officers in the permanent representation unit must constantly keep up to date by informing themselves on the background to the issues. They do so by meeting relevant officials in the external action service and the desk officers which is where the proposals on the agenda often originate. They also meet representatives from other interested member states in order to get their views on issues. It is a constant mining of information. They have to maintain close dialogue with headquarters in Dublin which also engages with the bilateral missions.

Foreign staff in bilateral missions also build up information through contacts, constant meetings and a constant feed of reports to HQ from the bilateral missions passed through. That contributes significantly to the information gained and provides a background to the discussion that takes place in Brussels by shedding light on the positions of other countries on issues of importance to us. Let me give an example. If we want to bring an issue to the table we raise it within the external action service with the Presidency and we lobby in capitals. In doing so, if we want to bring an issue forward we need firstly to strategically assess the international context, the possible like-minded support from fellow member states and plan a campaign for discussion through committees with, if necessary, parallel lobbying by bilateral missions and at political level, if necessary up to the foreign Minister and the Taoiseach. It is also necessary, for the people in the permanent representation unit, to maintain close contact with MEPs who debate these issues, not just the Irish MEPs, but also chairs of committees and committee members. That is the generality.

I shall conclude by making some general points. It would be extremely useful to develop a public diplomacy strategy. We have a public diplomacy strategy - or the Department of Foreign Affairs does - which is focused on promoting the country abroad. I have felt for quite some time that it would be very useful to have one in order to inform people in Ireland of the work carried out on their behalf and in their interest. Social media could be used as a tool whereby the actions of people working in missions abroad could be detailed and would give an idea of what the work entails. There is a great fog and mystery about what people in the Department do on a day to day basis. Such a measure would open up and take the lid off some of that uncertainty. Schools and school programmes, group programmes, etc. could also be used. There is scope for such measures.

It is very important and would provide invaluable to get our people into the external action service and other Commission and Council organisations. They are international civil servants but it is extremely important to have our people in the organisations. We also need to have the capacity to accept invitations to second officials to other foreign Ministries.

This is an extremely useful way of broadening our information about how other foreign services work and bringing that information back to the Department.

One other aspect worth mentioning, which reinforces the idea of getting our people out and about and placing them in other foreign ministries, is that in an organisation of 28 member states, there are informal groupings of states which have regional interests in common and whose close political relationships add value to their EU membership. For example, Nordic member states meet together for dinner the night before European Council meetings. Other member states that have similar meetings are the central and eastern European states or the Benelux countries. These groups share information. We do not have an obvious grouping, although we speak English, which is a huge advantage because English is used so much. Therefore, we need to work all the harder at making contacts, because we come as one member state without being locked into a grouping.

I mentioned at the outset that this is a resource-heavy activity. The basic groundwork involves meeting people face to face to probe for points of interest, to sift through what is useful, to transmit relevant information and to persuade and convince others of our point of view. All of this requires committed individuals who operate at the top of their game. There is no replacement for the personal intervention.