Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind members and those following the proceedings in the public gallery to ensure their mobile telephones are switched off completely for the duration of the meeting as even in silent mode they cause interference with the recording equipment. The purpose of our meeting is to hold a discussion with an important representative from the European Union, namely, the Special Representative for Human Rights, Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis. I met Mr. Lambrinidis briefly this morning in advance of his meeting with the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Costello, and I understand he is on a whirlwind tour. We are delighted that he is able to appear before the committee. He is accompanied by Ms Roberta Dirosa, personal assistant to the special representative; and Mr. Colin Wrafter, director of the human rights unit of Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

The special representative took up his post in September and comes to the job with an impressive CV, copies of which have been circulated to members. Of the ten special representatives appointed to support the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Catherine Ashton, he is the first to have a thematic mandate as opposed to a geographic one. The establishment of this important position is evidence of the commitment of the high representative to develop an effective and coherent EU policy approach to promoting and protecting human rights. We look forward to discussing with him the objectives for his tenure as special representative and, in particular, his priorities during the Irish Presidency. He was only appointed last year and, as everyone in this House is aware, it takes time to get into a job.

I acknowledge the excellent work that Mr. Wrafter has done on human rights at the Department. I am sure the unit is working diligently during the Irish Presidency to support the special representative and the European external action services, as well as meeting the challenges and opportunities presented by Ireland's accession to membership of the United Nations Human Rights Council. This is a busy time for him.

Before I ask the special representative to make his presentation, I advise witnesses that they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of utterances at this committee meeting. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease making remarks on a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their remarks. They are directed that only comments and evidence in regard to the subject matter of this meeting are to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against a Member of either House of the Oireachtas, a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. As this is the normal information we give to witnesses appearing before the committee, do not get frightened by it.

I ask the special representative to address the committee for ten minutes. I am sure members will have a number of questions for him.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for inviting me to address them. If I slip sometimes into calling them dear colleagues it will be due to my European Parliament Vice President days. I apologise in advance if I do so. It is great privilege that the committee opened its doors to me for this exchange of views. It is also an opportunity for me to congratulate Ireland at a time when it is in the midst of human rights debates. It was no small feat to be elected to the Human Rights Council and Ireland is also chairing the European Council. However, Ireland's election to the Human Rights Council and the Nobel Peace Prize that the EU was awarded some months ago are just the beginning of a process because both Ireland and the EU more broadly must prove that we deserve the honours we have received.

Many people around the world look to us with great expectations. That includes those who look to my position with great expectations. My position was the result of major debate within the EU and, in my view, the peaceful revolution in human rights which occurred in June and July 2012. The EU decided unanimously to adopt a new strategic framework for human rights in which the highest common denominator was achieved, as opposed to the lowest which people might expect when the EU speaks with one voice. In every EU policy, whether in trade, development, the environment or counter terrorism, member states committed to putting human rights as the silver thread guiding action, always speaking out when human rights violations occur and working closely with international multilateral organisations and each other to achieve our goals. An action plan was unanimously approved which sets out 97 actions to be implemented in a number of areas and particular human rights themes over the next three years, with specific deadlines and specific people, institutions and member states made responsible for them.

The decision was also made as part of this peaceful revolution to appoint a Special Representative for Human Rights, and I was deeply honoured to be selected for the post by Catherine Ashton and member states. My mandate reflects what the EU considered to be the challenges facing the new policy. I am tasked with increasing the coherence and effectiveness of human rights policy.

I am also tasked with increasing the visibility of EU human rights policy. Coherence, effectiveness and visibility are the aims. My mandate is not in respect of member states but is directed towards the EU's foreign policy. If one considers each requirement, one can see what a major challenge this is. Coherence means that everyone who does human rights in the EU today - rather successfully in many cases - must try to work more closely together to make the EU's punch more effective. A number of European Commissioners have a human rights role with, in some cases, large budgets to deal with neighbourhood policy, enlargement or immigration. The external actions service has more than 150 delegations internationally to conduct the EU's foreign policy, including its human rights policy. A number of member states are extremely active on human rights through their own embassies, missions and foreign policy establishments. Ireland is, obviously, among them being extremely active on the ground in many countries. There is a need for co-ordination in that regard. The European Parliament has a remarkable political persuasion on human rights matters and is very active around the world through its resolutions, decisions and visits, which can also affect policy. Ensuring all of these strands work well together is one of the elements of my mandate - the cohesion element.

The second element of my mandate concerns effectiveness, about which there is a lot to be said. I may skip it in the interests of time and respond to any particular queries of members. Something I said to the European Parliament about visibility and effectiveness when I assumed my duties was that there is an obvious tendency for politicians such as myself to focus on visibility, which sounds easier than effectiveness. How is one going to change human rights around the world and make people's lives better in countries that so openly violate those rights? While I place some emphasis on visibility, I do not intend to increase the perception of the effectiveness of our policy by focusing on its visibility. As tempting as that might appear to be, I hope instead to increase visibility by increasing the effectiveness. It requires an ant's work on my part. I am fully aware of the difficulties but if human rights are to work, I must ensure that in two years' time when my mandate is over, the EU does not need a special representative to ensure the geographic desks talk to the human rights desks in the external actions service. I must ensure that the Commission people who work on development policy speak to the human rights people and embassies on the ground to ensure they co-ordinate to take human rights into account. To make all this work requires very careful effort behind the scenes. One cannot put out press releases and make triumphant announcements. If one is successful, one will make oneself irrelevant, which is a huge advancement for human rights in the EU and around the world. Of course, it is not enough. One must also interact with a number of countries which violate human rights. Some countries would be willing to receive EU assistance to reduce some of their violations while others, confusingly, have a troubling domestic record but a very hopeful record in multilateral forums on human rights. We must co-operate with all of these very different countries.

In the interests of brevity, I will mention very quickly some of the priorities I am setting. Some claim, given the mandate, that I have been given a boat filled with water. In some ways, my challenge is not to fill the boat, but to take a bucket and start bailing the water out so that it does not sink. My priorities involve countries I am focusing on geographically and thematic focuses. They also involve a focus on certain institutions and major challenges. I will begin with the partners. In the past four months, I hit the ground running by mapping the terrain for the EU and all the human rights players out there. I delivered a statement to the OSCE on the human dimension, visited the UN in New York and met among others, Navi Pillay and a number of UN special rapporteurs on major issues. I have also met UN officials in Geneva. I met the African Union and the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation to discuss a number of topics which I would be more than happy to expand on if members are interested. I also met with the League of Arab States and a number of international organisations, including the International Labour Organisation, which is hugely important for human rights purposes, particularly in countries which have labour issues. I also met with the Red Cross. I intend to develop very close co-operation with the Council of Europe, given the number of non-EU member states in it with which the EU interacts on human rights. I have met with ASEAN countries and others.

In terms of my dealings, I have placed and intend to keep placing a major emphasis on NGOs. Human rights NGOs and civil society organisations, including human rights defenders, are major players. I have met repeatedly with the human rights NGO network in Brussels. I consult with NGOs before every visit and brief them afterwards. It is a practice I encourage everyone to follow when they deal with human rights. It assists NGOs in being informed about what they think. When they are told what was and was not achieved, they can use that information to co-ordinate their actions. In a number of meetings, I have attempted to ensure that NGOs will play an active role. In Mexico, during the human rights dialogue I conducted, I ensured that for the first time there was a parallel EU-Mexico NGO forum in which I and the Mexican Government participated to listen to the NGOs. The EU supported a major forum for Russian and European NGOs in St. Petersburg, at which I spoke. While the president of the Presidential Council for Human Rights in Moscow attended, unfortunately no Russian Government official did.

Our first task force in Egypt was organised by Catherine Ashton in November and attended by a number of Commissioners, EU foreign affairs Ministers and others. With others, I ensured that a parallel NGO round-table discussion on issues including problems for Egyptian NGOs took place on an equal footing with the trade, investment, tourism and business aspects of the exercise. When I conducted the dialogue a month and a half ago with the African Union, we ensured that NGOs were present to debrief both sides in a seminar dealing with the rights to housing and free and fair elections on the African continent. In many ways, increasing the interaction of NGOs with the governments of their own countries is as great a challenge and obligation for an EU Special Representative for Human Rights as providing for EU contact with those NGOs.

What they need most is to have doors opened to their own Governments that often refuse to see them and, in some instances, persecute them and in the worst instances allow, unaccountably, for members of those NGOs to be arrested, detained or killed.

I had a number of contacts, in the context of coherence, with members of the EU institutions, namely a number of EU Commissioners, other non-thematic but geographic European Union special representatives, who are in different regions of the world on the ground every day and have to be co-ordinated, as well as with members of the European Parliament.

I wish to outline to the committee the types of countries that I will be focusing on. I will be focusing on the neighbourhood or, in other words, the countries in which the EU is geographically present and also financially, and otherwise, most able to make a difference. I will be focusing on countries in transition, more broadly, around the world or, in other words, countries that could go one way or the other and in which European soft power, presence and persuasion might be able to make a difference in terms of which way they tilt. I will also be focusing on and meeting the strategic partners of the EU around the world, including Russia, China, Mexico, India and so forth, as well as organisations such as the African Union.

As I see it, there are three or four major human rights challenges ahead of us, both for this committee and for me at the EU level. The first, as I have already mentioned, is the shrinking of the NGO space around the world today. There are many countries, including some where, because of their recent history or the way their democracy was built, one would assume NGOs and civil society organisations would be at the forefront of change and development but where civil society is actually under attack. Such attacks can take many forms and can include making it very difficult for NGOs to be registered or severely restricting their funding. Remarkably, some countries presume that funding coming from the EU, for example, might turn NGOs into foreign agents or traitors to their countries. At the same time, if EU funding goes to hospitals or even to training the police in those same countries, those institutions are not considered to have been corrupted by EU money. It appears that only NGOs are, or can be, corrupted and therefore, they must be forbidden from accepting such money or be persecuted. Intimidation is also a problem in some countries, with concerted campaigns to ridicule human rights defenders or NGOs, to try to make them irrelevant to society or to silence them through a number of laws that have the cumulative effect, whether or not applied, of creating a chilling effect on speech and activity. For us, in the EU, the first major challenge is to devise ways, both direct and indirect, to empower NGOs and to expand the space that is being taken away from them.

The second major human rights challenge is to universality, which is being attacked around the world, from many different quarters and with varying arguments. Those who want to limit women's rights will say that their tradition or religion so commands. Those who want to limit LGBTI rights will say the same. Those who wish to ensure that a "democracy" in their country should be immune from scrutiny for violations will claim that others do not understand them, that they are at a different level of development and must be allowed to be thus. A number of countries around the world, for a variety of reasons, are attacking the universality of human rights.

I feel that the European Union is getting very rusty with its arguments in defence of universality. It is not enough anymore to simply go around pointing out that countries have signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that human rights are universal. There has been a return to the argument that universal human rights is an allegedly Western construct that was imposed on a number of countries. We should debate this issue, at a national and European level because we are getting rusty. We ought to be able to answer, convincingly and persuasively, those who challenge the idea of the universality of human rights. In my view, not only are human rights not a Western concept, they are the universal language of the powerless around the world against the cultural relativism of the powerful. One will never hear a woman being beaten up by her husband somewhere saying that she does not want help from Ireland or Europe because her tradition requires that she be beaten up. However, one will most certainly hear her husband say that one has no right to reproach him. One will never hear journalists who were imprisoned for what they said or wrote saying that one has no right to intervene on their behalf because human rights are not universal but one will almost certainly hear governments who like to imprison journalists tell one that one does not understand the issue. It is the powerless and their universal language versus the powerful and their relativism that is really at stake.

I see a red light flashing so I assume I have exceeded the ten minutes allowed. I am trained by my time in the European Parliament and this committee is too generous, given that I usually only have two minutes in that forum. With the Chairman's permission, I will close now on the other two challenges. The third challenge concerns economic and social rights. The European Union does not focus on these rights sufficiently when we speak to others from around the world. People around the world will often say that while they recognise the fact that Europeans focus on civil and political rights, we can do so because we have resolved many economic and social problems. They will say that Europeans have food and shelter while many of their people do not and they want Europe to focus on those issues too. We must do so because we have the expertise, the social safety nets and the knowledge to promote issues such as labour rights, access to health care, education, housing and so forth. These are economic and social rights which we must address and indeed, we do so through development aid but we do not call it human rights aid, although perhaps we should. We should focus on these issues because it increases our credibility in our discussions as people are becoming increasingly resistant to a Europe that appears to be simply pointing its finger and lecturing them.

The final challenge concerns how we conduct our direct contacts, or human rights dialogues, with approximately 40 countries around the world every year. Some of these dialogues have been perceived as being ineffective to date, by NGOs, diplomats and other participants. They ask what we have achieved with China, Russia and other countries with which we conduct dialogues. That is open to debate but we must be much more open in those dialogues. We must continue to point out violations because every country which violates human rights, including civil and political rights, must have Europe as a very annoying and strong critic. We must not water our criticism down when we are in cross-table dialogue but at the same time, we must also think of smart ways to engage with them, especially in multi-lateral fora. Many times we do not do this but we must. The major battles on virtually every topic I have mentioned can be conducted in multi-lateral fora and we can have partners who may not be too good, internally, on some human rights issues with whom we could work multi-laterally. We must also, more broadly, as Europeans respond to criticisms they may have of us too. I do not deal with internal EU human rights matters but whenever I speak to anyone abroad about human rights, at some point the discussion will turn to human rights issues within Europe. I am asked about the Roma, about racism and many other issues. Europe cannot be effective if, in those dialogues, it simply tells countries to direct their questions on possible human rights violations to individual member states. That is no longer dialogue.

I do not believe Europe has anything to be embarrassed about in its human rights records but at the same time I do not believe we are perfect. We should not pretend we are perfect, we are not. We are much better than most people around the world. That is not only because of the value system in place that forces us to be better but also we have the mechanisms to debate, discuss, disagree on and promote the improvement of a fundamental rights record within our countries that are not available in many parts of the world. For seven years the European Parliament criticised the European Commission and member states for violations of fundamental rights that I felt were carried out within Europe. Some might say I was even rewarded for that by getting this position. I certainly was not imprisoned and I was not intimidated. If we could infuse that kind of structure and thinking around the world in countries with whom we disagree on other issues it would be a major success in changing the way they think and approach human rights and, perhaps, to make a difference.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you very much Mr. Lambrinidis. I am sure the question of Syria will be raised by members. The plight of the Syrian people dominates the agenda, particularly the atrocities, the recent murder of 65 young men, families disappearing and the atrocities we see on our television screens each night. What next for Syria? It appears to be a hopeless case. In his role as EU Special Representative for Human Rights, will Mr. Lambrinidis outline what can the EU do to bring those who commit these atrocities to the International Criminal Court when all this is over? That question can be answered later as I am sure there will be other questions on Syria.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and welcome the EU Special Representative on Human Rights and his colleague and also Mr. Colin Wrafter. I thank him for an interesting and stimulating contribution. His background in politics in his country and internationally has shaped him well for this important post and he has been active in the few months in which he has been in that position.

To follow on from the Chairman's question on Syria, Mr. Lambrinidis spoke about the work of NGOs not being given the assistance, co-operation or partnership of governments. We understand from correspondence that in regard to some of the NGOs working in Syria the aid they are providing is routed to the government controlled areas and not to the opposition controlled areas so that the people in those areas are not getting anything like the assistance they need. The Chairman rightly pointed out the awful situation in Syria. More than 60,000 lives have been lost, 2 million people have been displaced internally, 2 million are in need of humanitarian aid and huge numbers have been driven not only out of their homes but out of their country. I do not know if the European Union has done enough to pressurise Russia and China on the politics they have been playing at the United Nations. In a crisis such as this, it is not a time for politics as usual. In correspondence we receive from concerned citizens in our country, people express their sheer disappointment at the lack of progress in trying to deal with a very difficult issue. The international community must do more. I welcome the fact that last week the Government provided €5 million in additional humanitarian aid following a conference with the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Joe Costello, attended.

Mr. Lambrinidis mentioned that the EU is rusty in its approach. If the witness had the opportunity to draw up a template for the European Union how would he brush away that rust? He also mentioned a considerable lack of uniformity in approach to NGOs. Is there a lack of uniformity within the 27 member states of the European Union in dealing with NGOs? I was glad to note that Mr. Lambrinidis laid particular emphasis on the important role of the work of NGOs in partnership with governments throughout the world. He referred particularly to Russia. He highlighted the importance of ensuring that NGOs were given the space to do the important work they can carry out.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will take one more question from Deputy Crowe before inviting Mr. Lambrinidis to respond.

Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim céad míle fáilte roimh Mr. Lambrinidis and his colleagues. Is the role of the EU Special Representative a fine balancing act between current human rights abuses and past human rights abuses? Yesterday we heard the awful word "renditions". A report suggested that some of the rendition flights went through Ireland and other countries in Europe. There must be a balance between what we are saying internationally and what we are doing locally. For the countries affected it undermines our moral voice if we allow that to happen. How important is it to look back on issues such as that which may have been a policy of the past? This committee adopted a very strong position on the illegal settlements and recommended a ban on illegal goods in the Israeli-Palestine situation. Is that helpful? We encouraged our Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to raise the issue during the Irish Presidency of the European Union.

Clearly something needs to be done in this area. In the past two months there have been 10,000 more new settlements and the problem is getting worse. The chances of a two state solution is being undermined by the illegal settlements yet at the same time there is a special agreement with the Israeli Government. On the one hand we say this is wrong but when it comes to trade and other issues we appear to have a different view. One could look at other parts of the world where the European Union has a special trade agreement. The witness mentioned countries in transition. Recently the Columbian ambassador appeared before the committee and mentioned many positive things on the issue. There are difficulties in that part of the world for human rights defenders, trade unionists and so on. There is also the issue of using trade as a lever for positive change. Which should come first, jobs at home or what is happening abroad? I would like to hear the view of Mr. Lambrinidis on the matter without focusing on a specific country. Certainly, in the Middle East one is talking about the powerful and the powerless. In the Palestinian situation there is no balance and the Americans are not getting involved. The other power broker is ourselves, the European Union. I would like to hear his views on the importance of stepping up to the plate on that issue.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will hand over to Mr. Lambrinidis to respond. I would point out there is an EU special representative for the Middle East, Mr. Andreas Reinicke, but I presume Mr. Lambrinidis is concerned with the human rights area.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

It is very challenging for me as a former foreign minister to deal with all of those questions but I have to respect my mandate, which is human rights, and try to limit it there, although I recognise, of course, that there is no conflict in the world that has not had human rights either at the roots of its creation or as an important element for its resolution. Anyone who looks at human rights and foreign policy as if they were two separate things, are missing the ball. I will not evade any of the questions-----

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We understand.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

----but there are some elements that, I think, others should touch on more.

Syria is truly a terrible situation, and the atrocities that were mentioned are a fact. Under the human rights banner, I have been involved in trying to see if there is some level of co-ordination and if it might be possible to bring people together. Humanitarian aid is an area where this can be possible and ECHO, the department of the European Commission that deals with humanitarian aid, is extremely active in it. I have discussed Syria extensively with Peter Maurer of the International Committee of the Red Cross, which is there at present, and our cooperation is vital. There are hundreds of thousands of refugees in surrounding countries, creating potential political instability and a terrible humanitarian crisis. There are also camps for displaced persons within Syria and the EU is active in those.

There is a consensus that the International Criminal Court and the EU cannot send a message of non-accountability when it comes to the crimes in Syria. My personal opinion is that it would be a good thing if we took a united position and that the ICC should consider its involvement now and open an investigation of all violations by all sides. We all know where the lion's share of violations have taken place.

Aid in Syria and elsewhere in the world is a delicate issue. The only way to be effective with aid is to make absolutely sure it goes to everyone equally, no matter who we might think are the "bad guys" or the "good guys" according to the politics of the matter. Humanitarian aid must go to everyone. That is the whole point. I am troubled to hear people say we should only give aid in Syria to "our" people, or not caring if the aid does not trickle down to everyone. I care that the aid gets to everyone. That is extremely important because that is how humanitarian aid is supposed to work. We must supervise the system more effectively to ensure whatever aid gets there goes to the people and does not get diverted.

On the question of the uniformity of the 27 member states as they deal with NGOs, there are different ways for EU delegations and member states to deal with NGOs on the ground. Some countries have delegations that are very active in meeting human rights defenders and consulting with NGOs before European policy is drafted, making sure NGOs get involved so they can be taken into account in larger EU policy. There are other countries in which NGOs are not contacted as frequently and where the sense exists that it might be a nuisance to get too involved. In my opinion, we must provide capacity building to the NGO community in a number of countries around the world, not so we can tell them what to say or do - we do not intend to ever to do that - but to ensure they have the ability to have people on the ground, to do research and to effect policy. In many cases the EU and member states cooperate very well on the ground on issues of human rights and human rights defenders. There are a number of important human rights defenders' trials going on around the world that the EU delegation alone could not follow. We get together with national delegations and split up the trials so human rights defenders can feel they are being observed and protected by our presence, which is a reflection of the co-ordination between the EU and its member states.

The Chairman asked some important questions that essentially related to double standards. Whether internally or externally, double standards are an issue the EU must address. When I say internal double standards, I mean what people could see the EU preaching but not applying what it preaches to others. I was a member of the special committee of the European Parliament set up to look at rendition and abduction on CIA flights. The European Parliament was extremely critical of the fact that a number of EU countries did not investigate rigorously enough the issue of those violations within their borders. Also, the United States, a major advocate of human rights around the world, faces criticism over questions such as Guantanamo Bay. Such questions are important for us and the soft power we exercise in international relations and human rights largely relies on our being as consistent and vigilant internally as we are externally. We are mostly remarkably good at dealing with human rights violations in the EU but we are not perfect; that is for what we should strive.

The other issue of double standards is external. Are we dealing with some countries more softly than others either because we are closer to them politically or because we have a greater need of them economically? I intend to be very forceful and very consistent about violations in the appropriate fora and always with the countries and governments involved, no matter how painful or unpleasant that may be. I assure the committee that many countries that violate human rights respect an EU that is firm and committed and stable in its position that the country may not continue to violate those rights. If I can do anything to stop those countries, I will and if I can do anything to help them through capacity building to stop those violations, I will do it. I will not, however, say that a country cannot violate rights one day and the following day say it can because there is a big business deal involved. Such inconsistency would give the impression that we do not take seriously our own rhetoric and give the impression of weakness. We are not weak. We are extremely consistent when it comes to the protection of human rights and that is the image we should project around the world, including in countries with which we have friendly relations. It is not okay to violate human rights just because a country enjoys friendly relations with us. It is not okay for an EU member state to violate human rights and for people to remain silent because the member state is part of the family. Human rights are universal and we must be adamant about this.

Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Lambrinidis for his contribution. He mentioned the Council of Europe and the neighbourhood policy. His Greek origin would make him appreciative of the valuable role the Council of Europe can play, because 47 states are involved in it. In my contributions to the council, I have noticed that the states that are outside the European Union take their membership of the council very seriously. It could be an important arena that could make a contribution and I would like Mr. Lambrinidis to expand on his role in that area.

Mr. Lambrinidis also mentioned organisations such as the UN, the OSCE and the African Union. How does he interact with those groups and how is there not duplication in the case of a country at which he is looking or with which he is trying to engage in dialogue? When he was speaking I was struck by the number of organisations that are involved in human rights as well as NGOs. Mr. Lambrinidis has probably addressed the NGO issue. It is a matter of preventing duplication and ensuring that there is engagement with the particular country. How does that operate in practice?

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I congratulate Mr. Lambrinidis on getting the job and commend the European Union on its decision to have an ambassador in the field of human rights. I do not know where to start because Mr. Lambrinidis's work is so vast and there are so many other competing forces on human rights right across the board, from the United Nations to the OSCE, as well as human rights defenders, etc. I am trying to get a handle on how Mr. Lambrinidis, in a relatively new and small office, hopes to engage with organisations such as those he mentioned, including the Arab League and the African Union, as well as peripheral countries and emerging democracies. Given the existing forces, perhaps he would explain what kind of hat we will wear as Europeans. For example, as Mr. Lambrinidis will be aware, the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights is doing a particular job with regard to human rights, trafficking and strengthening institutions through development aid. It is such a vast area. How does Mr. Lambrinidis want to relate, for example, to Russia? It is suggested that Russia is placing very severe restrictions on the funding of NGOs.

Today's committee's agenda includes issues from the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE with regard to Sergei Magnitsky, of whom, presumably, Mr. Lambrinidis will be aware. Then, of course, I have been exposed to the issue of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, of whom, presumably, Mr. Lambrinidis will be aware as well. At the committee, we debate many issues such as whether the human rights of Ukraine's former Prime Minister, Ms Tymoshenko, are being impinged upon. We constantly hear of the possibility of anti-gay laws being introduced in Uganda, with severe ramifications there. How far can the Special Representative for Human Rights, as an office of the European Union, extend his remit?

I will concentrate particularly on a pet subject of mine that is covered in Mr. Lambrinidis's document, in which he speaks about universality and his belief that the European Union should make a greater effort to underline the universality of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. The reference to cultural rights has me fascinated. Cultural rights can be, for example, the rights or the beliefs of tribal people in Sierra Leone, where 60% of girls suffer female genital mutilation. The comparable right in Ireland, for example, as a holy Roman Catholic society, would be with regard to girls celebrating their first Holy Communion. Then one looks at the composition of some of the Muslim states where Sharia law is in vogue and amputations are the norm. What is Mr. Lambrinidis's role in addressing cultural norms in these places, and religious beliefs in others, which would be deemed by our standards to run counter to normal human rights?

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a not dissimilar question. I congratulate Mr. Lambrinidis on his post.

I have a particular interest in gender equality issues as an aspect of our foreign policy. I was particularly interested in what Mr. Lambrinidis stated about the growth in denial of the universality of rights and the denial of rights on the basis of different value systems, different religions, different cultures or different stages of development. Such denials are particularly invidious. They are much worse than targeting a particular group of people or individual women who rock the boat because it is a justification for targeting and denying rights to half the population. How does Mr. Lambrinidis deal with this? It is frustrating when witnesses appear before the committee who, if one raises these issues, will state how much they respect their women. The reality is that these women are denied every right. Under the guise of protection, they are denied economic rights, legal rights and sexual rights. All of their rights are denied them on the basis that they are so respected that they themselves could not possibly make any use of these rights and, basically, they will be protected by men. How does one move from this position? It is not something that will be changed overnight, but how does one even begin to deal with it?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome our guests, and I congratulate Mr. Lambrinidis on his appointment and wish him well. He identified a number of important issues. First, there is the need for universal recognition of the role of, and necessity to comply with, international criteria on human rights, something that is diminishing rapidly. Of course, this is not new. In the aftermath of the French Revolution many asked whether this was what they had fought for. The Russian Revolution was not spectacular in its adherence to human rights either. There is nothing new in that.

The question that we and Mr. Lambrinidis must address throughout society in each member state in the European Union, collectively and individually, is the degree to which there can be recognition of the authority of the human rights organisations and the NGOs in this regard. If the human rights messenger is disregarded or not allowed to function in whatever environment, there is nothing as demeaning and as bad for morale. Human rights apply to governments, opposition, those who feel they are downtrodden and those who are in authority, whether or not they are abusing that authority. They apply universally.

The five key points Mr. Lambrinidis raised at the European Parliament committee on this issue are correct. Recognition is important. Visibility, as he himself stated, is important, but not as key as the other parts. So too is coherence, universal application of the rule and universal acceptance of the need.

The weight of the European Union and the authority that goes with it must be recognised internationally as well. It has a significant population bloc, a considerable area of influence and responsibility, a significant area of democracy and a considerable weight of authority. Mr. Lambrinidis now carries that authority with him right throughout the globe. It is important that such authority is recognised universally. If not, then the efforts of Mr. Lambrinidis will be made difficult, both for him and for those who wish to back him up. There are some cases where it is not possible for NGOs to operate without some kind of back-up. I wonder to what extent there is a need for supportive back-up of a peacekeeping nature to allow the influence of the NGOs and of Mr. Lambrinidis's office to flourish.

As I set out at the beginning, there is a need for member states within the European Union to take ownership of the concept that has been mentioned by all members, on both the Government and Opposition sides, including those who were in authority previously and those who were not. We can think of numerous instances in the past ten, 15 or 20 years where, in the flurry of activity following the demise of unacceptable dictatorships, there were actions that were not in accord with the best principles of human rights and could never be excused as being understandable or necessary. There is always the danger, when the downtrodden get their hands on the reins of power, that they will treat those who did damage to them previously in the same fashion. That does not resolve any problem at all.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

The Council of Europe is important to me for a number of reasons, including because many members of the council who are not members of the European Union are a focus of mine. To be able to engage with them on the basis of the commitments to which they have agreed or what has been asked of them by the institution to which they belong, namely, the council, as opposed to stating what the European Union thinks, can be effective. Second, the Council of Europe has expertise that can be welcomed in countries in transition. I refer in this regard to European Union support for the Council of Europe to open offices in north Africa and the Venice Commission's engagement in discussions on a number of new constitutions. This engagement has attracted a lot of good will on the part of many countries in the region which view the Venice Commission as an objective, scientific-type body, as opposed to being political. That is the capacity building I want to continue.

Other organisations, including the African Union, were mentioned and on which I will touch. First, I thank members' for their congratulations. Most people wish me good luck.

On the question of how I engage with the African Union, I will give a classic example. First, we engage in dialogue. Second, there are a number of important issues which the Africa Union promotes around the world that are also important for us. For example, there is positive promotion by the African Union as an institution of the issues of tackling violence against women and female genital mutilation. The African Union also has a number of institutions in the area of human rights, including the African Court on Human and People's Rights, the African Commission for Human and People's Rights and the African Expert Group on Children's Rights, the only children's expert group in the world that can give binding opinions to member states of the African Union. All of these institutions receive a tremendous amount of support from us. It is important for us to be able to engage in a way that empowers others around the world who wish to establish human rights institutions to do so. We do not engage in telling them what to do with these institutions but support them in setting them up. We do this not only in the African Union but worldwide. We have much to learn from some of these institutions, including from the African Expert Group on Children's Rights which I mentioned. It could be argued that in this regard the African Union is ahead of other countries.

On my engagement with countries such as Russia, Ukraine, Uganda and others, I am not willing to be lenient in my negotiations on human rights issues. It is my job not to do so. It is the job of others to be a little more realpolitik about it. Members will understand I do not approach this job wearing rose coloured glasses but with absolute consciousness of the difficulties experienced in many countries in approaching human rights issues, the specific arguments and circumstances in that regard and the leverage the European Union may have on human rights issues in terms of being listened to, which, again, will differ from country to country. One, therefore, needs to adjust one's approach. At the end of the day, I must ensure human rights are at the centre of the debate rather than a foot note and that not only what I say should happen but also what is in the strategic framework for human rights agreed to by the 27 member states should happen.

I have engaged extensively with Russia and intend to continue to engage with it. It has many disturbing laws in relation to NGO and human rights activists, including on the funding of NGOs which are funded as foreign agents which in Russia carries a negative connotation; the imposition of fines for demonstrating and the recently introduced law on treason, under which any person who consults a foreign state in a way that violates the security interests of Russia can be accused of being a traitor. This is so broad and could be used against any Russian official or member of the Russian Duma who speaks about anything to anybody that it causes me to wonder why those who voted for it did so. Many NGOs are afraid that it will be used against them. The collective effect of all these laws, whether they are or how they are applied in practice, is the creation of a chilling environment, a chilling of speech, interaction and suspicion. This is counterproductive and a terrible way to deal with NGOs in a democracy.

As I stated previously, NGO space is shrinking and we must defend it. The true test of a democracy is not whether it is perfect in terms of its human rights record because no country is, although some are worse than others, but if it can give to people who criticise and suggest changes therein the space to do so without intimidation or the threat of imprisonment. On behalf of the European Union, I will be fighting for this around the world, with as much commitment as I can give. Sharia law, female genital mutilation and freedom of religion and beliefs are big and difficult issues. Guidelines on freedom of religion and belief are being developed at European Union level. There are in place EU guidelines on eight major topics, including violence against women, human rights defenders, the death penalty, human rights dialogue and how embassies around the world should address particular issues. The guidelines on freedom of religion and beliefs are the ninth set of guidelines. It is a complicated topic to address. As stated, there are people travelling around the world saying their religion tells them they must treat women in a particular way. In most cases, this is not true. This is a case of religion being used as legitimate cover for traditional discriminatory practices that everybody, having signed the human rights agreements in place, considers to be illegal. There can be many arguments about what is provided for in a particular religion, but there is no human right that can be imposed in violation of others' human rights. That is one of the principles of human rights universality and inter-relatedness. No one can say his or her religion states women must be beaten every day and that this is okay under international human rights law. It is not.

On what I propose to do about women's rights, on assuming office, I put this question to a number of NGOs, Members of the European Parliament, EU ambassadors and Foreign Ministers. I underlined it as a major issue.

I also said I do not want people to tell me women are being abused throughout the world because I already know. I do not want people to tell me women cannot vote or are excluded from democratic life because I know this also. I want people with experience of these situations to tell me precisely what the EU can and should focus on to make a difference. Simply cleansing our souls by pointing out a particular problem is not enough. In Egypt the EU participates in a programme to register women to vote. In many cases it involves giving them ID cards which can then be used for a number of other purposes. This is huge because many countries throughout the world do not have birth certificates particularly for girls but this also affects boys, and many countries do not issue ID cards, particularly to women. A similar programme in countries throughout the world could mean that in a matter of months or perhaps a few years millions of women would be registered to vote and given ID cards. Because this takes time and is not something one can celebrate with fireworks, some politicians may seek something else to do which would have an impressive public relations appeal. I do not care, and we are now focusing on this programme to see whether we can make a difference.

The issue of violence against women is huge and I intend to discuss it at the Commission on the Status of Women session in New York in March. Committee members may be aware that this year's topic will be violence against women. I hope to gain much expertise from it.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What is Mr. Lambrinidis's relationship with the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, ODIHR?

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

I delivered the keynote address at ODIHR. Is the Deputy asking about the human dimension?

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

With regard to the OSCE generally and ODIHR specifically, when I was in Warsaw in October I was deeply concerned to see what felt almost like the return of a Cold War climate to the discussions, as though we were going back to having two camps where no one listens to the other and there is high rhetoric-----

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On a point of information, is Mr. Lambrinidis speaking about the OSCE parliamentary assembly or OSCE ODIHR?

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

I am speaking about ODIHR and the human dimension. The OSCE has a human dimension which is what was discussed in Warsaw in October. Because of the necessity for consensus we had one more chance, in Dublin in December, to reach conclusions on the human dimension at ministerial level. The same had happened the year before. The OSCE system must re-engage at human rights level and focus on the application of the commitments which have already been agreed. Commitments are agreed and then people move on to the next issue. Re-establishing a focus on the application of commitments, scrutinising whether people have applied what they were told to do, might be effective and reinvigorate a system which seems to be too polarised, politically speaking, for real action.

We must support human rights messages, whether from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, nascent national human rights institutions in various countries and those human rights institutions which need our support. We must do this because human rights will not spread if it is down to the EU attempting to impose them. They must become the property of the people and the countries themselves, which requires these countries to have strong independent institutions and NGOs which have the capacity to be credible to make a difference, be multipliers of the debate and be politically active and effective. We support human rights messages through the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and other means.

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome our special guest and congratulate him on his appointment. He certainly has a daunting task. The programme of work he has laid out is impressive. I am most impressed by his talk of being totally consistent in dealing with all violating countries. Like other speakers I am deeply concerned about the situation in Syria. It is absolutely appalling that women and children are dying from the cold and hunger in camps which have no heating and are wet. I am concerned this situation does not have the urgency it deserves from the international community, and I include the European Union in this equation. Does aid earmarked for the victims of violence and hunger go directly to the Syrian Government? Does Mr. Lambrinidis have any advice for the Irish Government on how during the Presidency we can bring greater influence to bear on the international community to resolve this appalling situation which, as another speaker stated, has seen more than 60,000 people killed to date and the situation is deteriorating?

Mr. Lambrinidis mentioned 97 actions have been approved in a three-year action plan and spoke much about effectiveness and visibility. What would he regard as a success with regard to achievements in the coming years? What are the real issues he wishes to see addressed in the next two years? What does he regard as the most urgent matters, apart from Syria? Given the size of his brief and the enormity of the problems in his area of remit I am curious to know what support team he has. How large is his organisation?

Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for leaving the meeting earlier but I had to go to the Chamber. It is all about making a difference and it was interesting to hear Mr. Lambrinidis bring this out. I wish to discuss making a difference with regard to the rights of women and gay people. This country is holding a constitutional convention at present. Other countries are also drawing up constitutions. Does Mr. Lambrinidis have a role in advising on the rights of these two groups?

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

In EU countries?

Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, I am speaking about a number of countries in the Middle East and north Africa which are drawing up new constitutions. Alarm bells are ringing about the regressive way certain African countries are with regard to women and people who are gay.

Much attention is on Africa and we know the extent of its natural resources and mineral wealth. Those who are genuinely concerned for these countries want the benefits of these to go to the African countries and leave them. Numerous multinationals from Europe and the United States have a presence in Africa and concerns have been raised about tax justice and fairness and country by country auditing so the multinationals pay their fair share of taxes and the benefit does not all leave the country of origin. To me it is a basic human right that people benefit from the wealth in their own country.

In this regard, does Mr. Lambrinidis have any direct involvement on the European end with the European companies and countries involved in the extractive industries in Africa?

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for being late. I am smothered by a dose. I will confine myself to the Syrian issue. I spent the weekend visiting some refugee camps in Lebanon, including at al-Jalil close to the Syrian border. The stories we heard were horrendous. We also met the President of Lebanon and the EU's representative in Lebanon. Given the conditions, a number of side issues and the total number of refugees inside its borders, Lebanon is concerned that a fissure might open within itself. What practical action is the EU undertaking to resolve these issues? We saw 16 people living in a small room with a galvanised roof in a place that reached -5° Celsius at night. It was inhumane. We sometimes get sidelined onto other issues that are not as fundamental as human rights. What can Europe do in this regard?

The EU has an association agreement with Israel. What types of human rights violation will need to occur within the settlement areas for the EU to consider suspending that agreement? The committee has resolved to ask the Government to ban the importation of goods from settlement areas and to use its influence within the EU to ensure the same. Those imports support the continuation of settlements, aggravating the situation to a point at which a two-state solution is no longer feasible. What is Mr. Lambrinidis doing in this regard?

My final question is on a matter that I feel strongly about. People in the human rights field are strong proponents of abortion, the greatest and most common violation of human rights in the world. What is Mr. Lambrinidis's position on or role in this regard?

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

Come on, I have been around the track a few times. I know what to answer and what not to answer.

Deirdre Clune (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That was a great answer.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is slightly outside Mr. Lambrinidis's remit.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Nice try.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

I will pretend that it was not asked.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious of the fact that Mr. Lambrinidis has a flight.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

I do, and I thank members for their questions. Were they the last questions?

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Lambrinidis does not need to answer the last question, as it was slightly outside his remit.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

Okay.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not know-----

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry, but-----

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not raise the issue because it is important to me, but because it is a fundamental issue of human rights that most human rights activists disregard. At UN level in particular, they take the opposite stance.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Lambrinidis has a flight to catch.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

I appreciate the Chairman's direction and I thank the dear members for their last questions. I strongly recommend to the Irish EU Presidency a full briefing of the EU's presence in Syria, whether directly or through other organisations that we may or may not be funding, and an extensive discussion with the European Commission, particularly the Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection department of the European Commission, ECHO, which deals with humanitarian aid.

Our involvement is active. There are problems. Some can be discussed broadly, but others cannot. The Syrian conflict is an issue of deep concern. I would address it for its human rights and humanitarian elements. The situation of the many people, including children and women, in the camps is extremely bad at times, with abuses and rapes. The political implications include the destabilisation of neighbouring countries and so forth. We are involved in major issues. A separate briefing is almost needed on them.

Where we might see success in the next few years is in the coherence of policy. If everyone in the EU - the Commission, the Council, geographic desks and human rights people - began talking to and co-operating with one another to incorporate human rights as a central element in all of our foreign policy as opposed to a footnote to be compromised away, my position could become irrelevant. If no one needs me anymore, I will have succeeded. Let us say that, in terms of cohesion, my political suicide would be my success.

I would also be successful if, in one year's time, people believed that the presence of a human rights envoy for the EU to difficult strategic partners around the world had made a difference, had focused our partners better and had managed to push them towards being more respectful of human rights. There are more ways to bring human rights and our collective punch together. Perhaps one person can do this in the right way. There are more opportunities in having such a person than in not. Internally, I wish to become irrelevant. Externally, I wish that whoever follows me in my job can deal with the issue of universality and turn countries around in defending it; can deal with the issue of NGOs and ensure that they stop being threatened and persecuted around the world so that they can become legitimate, constructive partners with governments for positive change; and can deal with issues of economic and social rights, housing, labour rights and corruption - in a sense, this brings me to the question on tax, which I will come to shortly - which can be a significant multiplier of inequality.

I keep getting the message that we must go, but must we really? Surely I have five minutes.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is 4 p.m.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

I have two political advisers and an assistant, Ms Dirosa, but I also have all of the human rights staff of the External Action Service, EAS, a dedicated and excellent conglomeration of people who work in collaboration with me. My position is a strange animal. I am not a part of the EAS or the Commission. I am a politician - mine was a political appointment - overflying the institutions and being required to inspire them to work with me, as opposed to having the institutional right to force them. I also have the opportunity to be inspired by them. This type of expansive staff is precisely how I like having it.

The issue of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex, LGBTI, rights was raised. We have LGBTI guidelines in addition to guidelines on freedom of religion and belief. We also have a toolkit for LGBTI rights that advises our delegations around the world on how to deal with these issues. We are upgrading them to guidelines that will be published some time this year.

In many instances, we speak with countries about their new constitutions. We cannot tell them what to do. Sometimes, they are sensitive about not being seen to be instructed by Europeans in how to act in their domestic affairs, as some people might present it in that way instead of as a dialogue, which is the truth. Often, we can use the expertise of the Council of Europe, the Venice convention and such bodies within the broader European family, including particular EU member states or institutions, in advising countries on what provisions in other constitutions exist as regards particular topics, for example, non-discrimination against women.

We are not helping them to rediscover the wheel on their own, but to consider an area of existing options. We have been successful in some cases and not in others, but we have tried.

I will make two comments on taxes. A major issue of human rights relates to inequalities, including economic inequality and the exclusion of poor people from the social and political fabrics of countries, which becomes a vicious circle. These inequalities are increasing around the world in the face of financial crises. In many countries experiencing rapid growth, a careful examination of the statistics shows that the growth is not experienced by everyone equally. This is a human rights concern, as it touches upon economic and social rights. One cannot build a good health system if most of the money going to a government gets funnelled away in corruption or into a few pockets instead of being used for the general good. This is precisely the type of issue on which some people in a country do not like us to focus. They care about the EU examining issues that would burn them primarily in their daily lives.

This point gives me the opportunity to discuss the issue of corporate social responsibility, which touches a little on the Deputy's question. I encourage members to look at our websites. The EU is developing three sets of pilot guidelines for the application of corporate social responsibility agreements - the Professor John Ruggie report published by the UN, for those who might remember - at EU level. These guidelines have to do with oil and gas, the extractive industries that the Deputy mentioned, the IT sector and the employment-recruitment sector. These guidelines will be open to consultation and it might be worthwhile for this Parliament to consider, discuss and make suggestions on them if it is interested in doing so.

I referred to the issue of refugees. The question of when to stop aid is a major human rights discussion. We have a "more for more" policy in our neighbourhood policy. If someone is good on human rights, we give more. We do not necessarily have a "less for less" policy, although some assert that we should. In other words, if someone is not good on human rights, remove aid.

We also have separate human rights clauses in every political association agreement we make. We are bridging them with free trade agreements, etc. One of the 97 actions in the action plan indicates that the EU must develop criteria for the application of these human rights clauses. It is important that we have these clauses and convince countries interacting with us that, if there is a persistent and serious violation of human rights, there will be consequences. It is also important that we determine the circumstances under which these clauses will be triggered. They have been triggered a few times already. If I am not mistaken, they are triggered in most coups d'état.

In the coming months, I intend to focus on bringing together the institutions, NGOs and others that deal with this area to brainstorm and to suggest to the European Council ways in which we can make the application of the human rights clauses more effective. One wonders about what happens when, after violations have been recognised by everyone, it is still business as usual. Does this not send out the wrong message? I agree that it does and, therefore, we have developed the guidelines.

I thank the Vice Chairman for his patience and hospitality. I look forward to doing this again.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On behalf of the committee, I thank Mr. Lambrinidis for his articulate, honest and open presentation to the committee, which has been helpful. I thank members for their questions. I acknowledge the role played by Mr. Lambrinidis. The executive secretary general of the European External Action Service, EEAS, Mr. Pierre Vimont, attended one of our recent meetings, which served to focus attention on the issues raised by Mr. Lambrinidis today. There is an onus on everyone in democratic societies to lend support in a meaningful way to the ideals that Mr. Lambrinidis set out and that we all support.

Mr. Lambrinidis's colleagues, Ms Dirosa and Mr. Wrafter, have had an easy run today. I assure them that it will not always be that easy.

We thank Mr. Lambrinidis for his honesty and for the breadth of his discussion. We wish him well. He will notice that I do not wish him luck, but the two could be synonymous.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

That is fine.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Public session of this meeting is now suspended.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

I am sorry to interrupt, but I want to ask-----

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before we suspend.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

No, this has to do with after. Since everyone has asked me to be more visible, I have decided to try to use things called Facebook, Twitter and stuff. If everyone agrees to have a picture taken of all of us together, I promise members instant-----

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Recognition.

Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

-----recognition around the world when I post it. If that is okay with members, let us take a picture.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Go ahead.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will we be on the KGB hit list?