Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind members, guests and others to ensure that their telephones are switched off. It is not sufficient to put them on silent, as they will interfere with the recording equipment.

We have received apologies from Deputy Kyne.

The first item on our agenda is an exchange of views with the European affairs committee of the French National Assembly. I am delighted to welcome a delegation from the Assembly to our meeting in Dublin.

The delegation is led by the committee chairperson, Ms Danielle Auroi, who is welcome, and she is accompanied by Mr. Michel Piron, who is also a member of the committee. With both Deputies are the French Ambassador to Ireland, Ms Emmanuelle D'Achon. Ms Annabelle Archien is the committee administrator, Ms Marianne Ziss is first secretary at the French Embassy in Dublin and Ms Alexandra Hambling will interpret proceedings today. Members should bear in mind that we should wait for the translation when the guests are speaking.

The French delegation is on a short visit to Ireland at our invitation during the Irish Presidency. A key priority of the committee is to engage with fellow parliamentarians to ensure we understand the joint challenges we face across Europe and within our respective countries. We are looking forward to an exchange of views today with our French colleagues and we hope to impart an understanding of what our committee sees as the interests for Ireland during the Presidency. I will outline where we are with our priorities when I get a chance to speak later today.

I understand the key themes the delegation would like to discuss today are the deepening of economic and monetary union and the implications on national parliaments, particularly in the context of budgetary integration. We will all have something to say about that. They also wish to speak about the strengthening of the economic and monetary union and where we are in agreeing the multi-annual financial framework. They will also speak about energy transition and tackling climate change, which is a subject that has dropped from the political radar in the years since the economic crisis began. I am sure there will be other areas we would also like to discuss.

I invite Ms Auroi to make her opening remarks.

Ms Danielle Auroi:

I will speak French as, unfortunately, my English is not good enough to speak to the committee in that language. I thank the committee for the time it will spend with us and in view of the fact that there is a time limit, I will not detail our committee at the French National Assembly. I will just say that Mr. Piron and I are members of the committee, and Mr. Piron is rapporteur for two important draft directives.

Our committee and this committee spend much time showing the importance of European issues at national level. We want to give ideas when it comes to Europe and we want to show our citizens how important is Europe. It is important for us to meet the committee so that we can exchange ideas, and some of us have already met during the COSAC meeting and we will meet again in a month, towards the end of the EU Presidency. Sharing ideas between parliamentarians is very different to parliamentarians simply listening to the Executive.

There are three concerns I would like to share with the committee and which are important. First, we are talking about deepening democracy and the participation of national parliaments in the context of budget integration. Over the last month and a half since the events in Nicosia, it has been decided that during the European semester, there will be a legislative time, meaning that twice a year national parliaments and the European Parliament will have the opportunity to meet at the same time as the Commission is meeting to discuss budgetary matters, as per article 13 of the treaty. France proposed this possibility and is very happy it has been adopted.

I would like to have the committee's opinion on the first time this will happen in the autumn, under the Lithuanian Presidency. I do not believe we have a date yet but it will be some time in the autumn. I ask this question because I must present a report on the democratic deepening of the EU. It is an easy topic, as the members can imagine, and it is interesting for all of us. I would like the committee's opinion on the doubt that our citizens feel regarding the efficiency of Europe in making citizens happy. Are Irish citizens more confident that the EU can do so than are their French counterparts? One year before the European Parliament elections, there is a great fear in France and in other countries - I was in Poland last week - that nationalistic movements are increasing and there is more euro-scepticism and not enough "euro-conviction". It is especially important as we are in the European year of citizenship.

The second concern is the deepening of the economic and monetary union within the multi-annual financial framework. We know we must have more ambition when it comes to the deepening of the economic and monetary union, even if we already know that the banking union is taking shape.

I congratulate the Irish Presidency because it has managed to reach some conclusions. We need the single supervisory mechanism as it is very important for European stability. We will have the European stability mechanism which is as essential as a resolution mechanism. It is very important to have a strong fight against tax fraud in all European countries. I have seen some hesitation, even though Vienna has recently changed tack. Tax harmonisation, I repeat, will only happen if we there is an efficient fight against tax fraud and evasion. It is a challenge for the multiannual financial framework and it is essential that there is a social reference. Ireland has shown good example with its plan to support young unemployed people. Thankfully, we have received an envelope of €6 billion, to that end, for accompanying measures. Unfortunately, €6 billion is not a lot for 27 member states. It is important that national measures accompany European projects.

With regard to the second point, I will share some of our concerns. We believe that the budget is not ambitious enough. The Commission proposed the budget but the Council reduced it and I think that the European Parliament is right to block it at present. Dialogue must take place between the national parliaments and the European Parliament in order to strengthen the budget for the benefit of our citizens. Under the Irish Presidency we will see, in a few weeks, if the European Parliament decides to block everything. That would prove a serious difficulty compared with what happened last year. The European Parliament does not want the same as a national assembly. Perhaps there will be a compromise. To that end, there is a mid-term review clause that the budget can be blocked for seven years, especially as it is such a small budget.

I shall now talk about a very sensitive topic for us, the EU's resources. The EU budget depends on what every member state contributes which means money is taken direct from the pockets of our citizens. The financial transaction tax has been approved by 11 member states so can go ahead. Therefore, the EU budget will be taken direct from financial flows and not from the pockets of our citizens.

My third point is on energy transition. We must fight against climate change and make it a European topic. We must defend the idea and make it a new European period. We started with the European community of coal and steel. The second European period was the Common Agricultural Policy. The third European period could be a European energy and environment policy. We have a sponsor called Mr. Jacques Delors. It is very useful to have him sponsor our proposal to have a carbon tax at EU borders. An advantage of the carbon tax would be for the EU to have its own resources. It would balance out the negative affects on the import market which is a hot topic at present. The carbon tax has two further advantages. It would encourage growth and employment. We all know that a new source of employment is in green jobs such as in energy efficiency and renewable energies. The jobs would have an important impact on employment, social aspects and the environment.

It is important for us to fight against climate change. As members will know, today we were welcomed with beautiful sunshine but when we left Paris it was only 11°C.

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

We know about bad weather.

Ms Danielle Auroi:

What is most interesting is having a rich exchange. We hope the Irish Presidency will manage to close an important file for Ireland and France. I am talking about agriculture and CAP reform. We have a common vision when it comes to husbandry and cattle and Ireland is in the same situation as France. We want further greening of the CAP because it is unlikely that the Lithuanian Presidency will follow down that road. We run the risk of Lithuania encouraging the large cereal plains in the north of Europe, which would not be good for citizens in the south, whether in Italy, Spain, France or even Austria and Germany.

Perhaps the Irish Presidency might reopen some topics, even though the Commission has the lead. I refer to the format and framework of the EU-US free trade agreement negotiations. Members will certainly know that France has some reservations on some of these topics and will exercise its right of veto on the cultural exception, if necessary. It would be useful in that context to take heed of the lessons we learned in the negotiations with Canada on its free trade agreement with the European Union. It is blocked because the original mandate was too wide and not clear enough, especially on industrial issues. There is no agreement between the European Union and Canada.

There are some agricultural methods in the United States which are not acceptable to EU citizens, for example, when it comes to animal feed, the labelling of meat products or what they do with animal carcasses.

I thank members. We are here to answer their questions, to which we will listen carefully.

Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Auroi who has raised a number of issues. I will update the delegates on the Presidency and talk about COSAC and what this committee is doing on some of the issues raised about the future of the European Union and banking and political union. There were other issues such as Article 13, about which I can talk. I will allow some of my colleagues to answer some of the questions and if they do not pick up on them, I will come back to them. If no one picks up on the issue of the financial transaction tax, I will come back to it also. The democratic deficit also concerns us. The expert on climate change is not with us today, but we can all talk about that issue.

I will start with the Presidency. At this stage, we have just over one month left. One of our key priorities was to restore stability to the European Union. That involved trying to sort out the multi-annual financial framework. We still have some way to go before reaching agreement with the European Parliament, but we think we are quite close and are hopeful we will reach agreement.

We thought it important to proceed and progress the issue of banking union. We have managed to conclude the issues involved in regard to the single supervisory mechanism, thanks to the agreement of countries such as France. We have moved in the area of banking union, but there are still issues in regard to resolution which will take more time to conclude.

Another key priority for us was seeking economic growth and job creation. Ms Auroi referred to the EU-US trade agreement. As she will know, we have progressed that issue and have also looked at trade agreements with Japan and countries in the Far East.

We have managed to get agreement on an issue of key importance to us - youth unemployment. The youth guarantee scheme agreed at the February Council is very worthwhile. We are in complete agreement on the issue of finances. The point was made that there was not enough to go around. The initial agreement was that the scheme would be accessible to those countries such as Ireland and Spain which had a youth unemployment rate of more than 25%. That level has come down to 20%, while, at the same time, the age limit has gone up from 25 to 30 years of age. Therefore, many more people are in the pot, so to speak, but the money has not increased. This is an issue for us and we believe the figure of €6 billion is nowhere near enough. Senator Kathryn Reilly might wish to speak about that matter because she will publish a report on behalf of the joint committee specifically on the youth guarantee. However, in terms of the Presidency, we are happy that we have moved forward on the issue.

The other issue about which we are very keen is enlargement. We were glad to see the agreement between Kosovo and Serbia last month. That means that the progression of Serbia towards accession has improved. We are hoping to open a chapter on Turkey before the end of next month. What is the mood in France towards Turkish accession compared to three years ago when it was considered unlikely to be agreeable? What are the delegate's views on the issue?

Enlargement was one of our priorities and we think we will get to the stage, thanks to the agreement of other member states, where we will be able to open up a chapter with Turkey.

In essence, our Presidency has been a lot of fun as well as a lot of hard work. We have managed to move forward on a lot of issues that were on our agenda. I should also have mentioned the CAP, which is very important for both France and Ireland. Our Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine has been working very hard on that issue. We are hoping to reach agreement on CAP reform before the end of our term.

We have a programme put together for COSAC and one of the key areas is enlargement. We will be talking about the Balkans, Iceland and Turkey. We will also have a session on development aid, to which NGOs and a number of philanthropists have been invited to discuss what Europe needs to do in this area, as one of the biggest aid donors in the world. Another session is planned to deal with the question of how to encourage more young people to engage with the EU. We have invited three young speakers from the Roma, LGBT and disabled communities to tell us what they expect Europe to deliver to them as citizens. We are looking forward to that session in particular. We also have a session planned on the future of Europe, at which Mr. Jacques Delors has agreed to speak, as has Ms. Viviane Reding. Mr. Delors, as our guests know, is a founding member of the Spinelli Group and a federalist. Ms Reding will be talking about political union, no doubt. Mr. Bill Cash from the UK Conservative Party will respond to the remarks of Mr. Delors and Ms Reding and we hope to have a very in-depth debate about political union and where member states see the future of Europe. A discussion between Mr. Delors, Ms Reding and Mr. Cash should make for a very stimulating and interesting event, which will take place in four weeks.

On the issue of the future of Europe, this committee is carrying out a study on the impact in Ireland of initiatives such as banking union, EMU and fiscal union, as well as the question of UK membership of the EU. Our guests will be aware that the British Government has announced that it will hold a referendum on continued membership of the EU if re-elected. If the UK chose to leave the union, that would have significant implications for us and we are examining what it might mean for us in the longer term.

I hope I have answered the majority of the questions raised. I have not dealt with the financial transactions tax issue because other committee members, such as Deputy Dooley, may want to deal with that, as well as the issue of climate change and Article 13. Senator Reilly will probably pick up on the issue of the youth guarantee.

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome our guests today. I also welcome two colleagues from the French embassy who are very prominent visitors to Leinster House and very effective in representing their country.

I wish to address the issues of political and democratic legitimacy and monetary union. Many of us feel that it is important to draw clear lines of delineation between the role of national parliaments and that of the European institutions. That division is very clear in terms of policies on deficits, Government spending and taxation. It is acceptable and beneficial for the European Union to require that Government borrowing stays within certain limits but I do not believe it is the role of the EU to determine how much any country raises through taxes or spends. If one country wants to tax at 50% of its national income and spend at 53% of its national income, while another wants to tax at 30% and spend at 33%, that should be the decision of the national parliaments. That is why we would have concerns about tax harmonisation. It seems that everyone is in favour of harmonising tax measures that tax other people, apart from their own citizens. Everybody is in favour of taxing multinational companies that are not based in their own country. They are also in favour of taxing global capital that does not originate in their own country. At the same time, everyone is against harmonising tax measures that affect their own people. That is my concern about tax harmonisation. France is adopting a stance on the audiovisual component of the free trade agreement which is in the French national interest, which is its right to do. Similarly, Ireland has concerns about measures that would negatively affect our ability to move to recovery. Only three years ago, our national deficit was almost 30% of our national income. Next year, it will be at 4.5%. Our country has made gigantic sacrifices to get to that point. We will ensure that what we think is needed to allow our country to move forward is recognised and respected by other countries, just as France will do. I say that in the context of a country that has regularly had referenda on European treaties and has always voted for their acceptance. I include here our adoption of the fiscal compact in the middle of gigantic difficulties for all of our families.

I will conclude by thanking France for its support during a period of difficulty for Ireland. I assure our guests of our continued support for European progress, as our Presidency has shown. However, I must also emphasise that our country and its people have made huge sacrifices to deal with the challenges facing us. We will continue to do all we can to ensure that our country moves towards recovery.

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

I welcome our guests, with whom we have many common causes, particularly in the agricultural arena. Ireland exports 90% of its produce, unlike our next door neighbour, which imports the great majority of its food produce.

We are not federalists. We do not believe in federalism but in close economic, social and political co-operation within the EU. We are concerned about our next door neighbour's intention to hold a referendum on its membership of the EU, which could result in Britain leaving the union. Some of us believe that could have devastating consequences for the European concept.

The original founding fathers of the modern Europe had a vision and I strongly believe - we have discussed this at our meetings on many occasions - in the need for Europe to retain its original vision. Departure from that vision can only mean going back to where Europe came from, and that is not a place to which we would want to go.

My colleague quite correctly referred to tax harmonisation. We should look at the United States, in which there are variations in taxation depending on the individual states. The same must apply to Europe. There are different demands and requirements in different countries, but there should be a general thrust towards taking a common direction and making progress with an emphasis on economic and fiscal controls and growth. Without that, the unanimity and cohesiveness that is required for the European project will diminish.

There is a danger of a two-tier Europe developing. That is not in the interest of anybody in Europe. It is not in the interests of the new member states, and it certainly is not in the interests of the existing member states. People who profess their adherence to that concept are wrong. They will be proven to be wrong.

We do not have a particular problem with the financial transaction tax, provided everybody applies it. Were it to apply right across the globe from Tokyo to the United States and right across Europe, particularly in the United Kingdom, which is reticent in that area, we would have no problem with it. We recognise that sometimes those in the private sector can find ways and means of circumnavigating the system to their advantage.

I wish to refer to the recent discussions on tax fraud. We want to state emphatically that the tax laws applied by Ireland are exactly as they profess. Our corporation tax rate is 12.5% and this is strictly enforced. All profits generated, whether through manufacturing or services, by foreign direct investment in this country are taxed at that rate. The effective rate is deemed to be about 1.5% less. I know that other European countries that profess to have a much higher corporation tax rate have in effect a much lower one. This has generated discussion in the United Kingdom and the United States in recent weeks. The discussion does not take account of the true facts. The situation is within the control of the states themselves: should states wish to tax companies from their countries on the profits they generate in other countries, they can do that. It is within the control of the United States or the United Kingdom to do so. In this country we tax companies on the basis of the goods and services manufactured here. Anything else they want to do after that is of no relevance in the Irish system of taxation.

We fully agree with the deepening of the economic and monetary union. The establishment of a common currency has had devastating consequences for countries throughout Europe. We thought the introduction of the euro throughout Europe meant the application of controls by the ECB in respect of borrowing and spending right across the eurozone states. There was no proper control and no supervision, and as a result we incurred appalling debt. My colleague has referred to measures taken by the previous and the current Governments. These cruel measures were inflicted on our people. In the past few days Ministers have repeated that taking such measures is not something they enjoy; however, they are having the beneficial effect of bringing our deficit down more rapidly than we thought, as my colleague has just said. Initially, we were worried that the burden imposed on the people of this country would break their resolve to withstand the shock of what we must deal with. We have achieved a considerable degree of success. The trade figures announced this morning show that our level of success is much greater than we had anticipated.

The country was criticised heavily when the economic bubble burst originally. We got a lot of unfair criticism in many quarters, which we did not deserve. Of course we were wrong. We hold up our hands and accept responsibility for wrongdoing. We set about rectifying that, but it is important that everybody else across Europe recognises that they also have responsibilities. If the powerful countries and the smaller countries work together we can recover the lost ground in a much more meaningful way than we might have thought just a few short years ago.

Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are a number of questions outstanding. I will take contributions from a few more members and I hope that will have answered some of the issues. Deputy Dooley might want to cover the financial transaction tax among the other issues.

Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegates for attending. I thank the ambassador, Ms Emmanuelle d'Achon, and her deputy, who maintain regular contact with the committee. They are outstanding. There is a good relationship between the Oireachtas and France.

For a long time I have advocated a much closer relationship between Ireland and France and between Ireland and Germany. We have been successful and have started to build a closer relationship at parliamentary level with Ms d'Achon and the German ambassador. We often use the opportunity in the Houses of the Oireachtas to criticise what we perceive to be the misunderstanding of our economic and tax situation and we do so in the expectation that somehow people will be listening to what we say. Of course, when one considers the detail, one appreciates that other countries have other things to deal with. It is important to have more regular dialogue similar to this, and also through COSAC, which has been helpful. If we have learned anything from the recent crisis, it is the importance of ensuring that the individual member states understand the conditions and concerns and the framework in which other parliamentarians have to work.

That brings me to the point the Chairman wants me to address, the financial transaction tax. I am a member of the main Opposition party but, notwithstanding that, I share the views of my colleague, Deputy Durkan. We have a similar view that the introduction of a financial transaction tax can only be done on a worldwide basis. The mobility of investment capital is such that we cannot expect it to reside within the borders of Europe or the EEA. It would be foolhardy if a number of countries in Europe or indeed Europe generally were to proceed on that basis. It must be done on a global basis. The G20 is the forum in which to try to seek a level of consensus. However, I support in principle the concept of a financial transaction tax, which does provide a considerable opportunity to generate significant revenues for the State.

We have been critical in the past of positions taken by some politicians in France on their perception of Ireland's low corporate tax rate. As my colleague has said, what you see is what you get, and the 12.5% rate of corporation tax is applied across the board. There are very few opportunities, through the provision of tax credits, to reduce that further. Studies and comparative analysis have been done across member states and by no measure does Ireland apply the lowest effective corporate tax rate. That is a misapprehension that is worth exposing.

I know the common consolidated tax base is an issue of particular concern for our delegation. We as a State have indicated our willingness to participate in that discussion.

This willingness should not be taken as an acceptance of a positive outcome from our perspective in supporting that principle. I know this may be at variance with the French position on that matter. We do not see it as helpful from our point of view.

We attract considerable foreign direct investment, not only for tax reasons. We are an English speaking nation, with a good base for providing onward capacity for American companies to target the European market. We want to protect this investment.

To turn to the European project, considerable damage has been done to the notion of the Community method of dealing with issues and crises and building and developing for the future. While I do not wish to be political or overly critical, the holding of bilateral meetings on a Sunday afternoon, week in and week out, during the term of President Sarkozy damaged, albeit not irreparably, the notion of a Community where it was important for smaller states to be treated as equal participants. Unfortunately, the Franco-German discussion appeared to be the focus in resolving issues as they arose. This sidelined the Commission and damaged its role. We have work to do to re-establish the authority of the Commission, the composition of which ensures equality. Its role is not only to keep the system pure. It is important in retaining the engagement of citizens of all member states. The delegates will be aware that Ireland has found it necessary to hold a second referendum on a number of occasions. Many people outside Ireland who believe the country has benefited from its relationship with the European Union, as it has, asked why Irish citizens did not share their view. Efforts to deal with the crisis at a bilateral level alienated citizens in many countries. As parliamentarians, we have a role to play in addressing this issue. We must do so in a collective way, with parliamentarians from other member states, to try to ensure the Community method is re-established. Europe is predominately made up of smaller states which must believe they have access and influence and are part of a developing European Union.

Kathryn Reilly (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Bienvenu. I welcome the delegation. I propose to discuss the issue of youth unemployment and the youth guarantee before responding to our guests' question on doubts that citizens entertain about the European Union. As the Chairman stated, I am producing a report on the youth guarantee on behalf of the joint committee. The organisations that deal with young people and the most marginalised groups across Europe are concerned about the adequacy of the funding allocated for the youth employment initiative. We are also concerned that the release of funding is being held up by the negotiations on the multi-annual financial framework.

The roll-out of the youth guarantee at national level will be important. A danger arises from the Council recommendation about gradual implementation because if member states are given too much scope to implement the guarantee, young people who are not in education, employment or training and are in most need of funding may not receive it when they need it. Concerns have also arisen regarding the funding member states will contribute to the youth guarantee, especially member states which are in programmes or fiscal difficulty. We must ensure this matter is prioritised because the costs to member states of youth unemployment in terms of GDP are very high and they will also face social and economic costs in the future.

In terms of citizens' doubts about the European Union and the issue of the democratic deficit and legitimacy, the Eurobarometer polls taken last year are very telling as they show that the level of trust of citizens in European institutions is very low. This lack of trust is also reflected in citizens' attitudes to national institutions. The President of the European Parliament made an interesting comment when he described Europe as a Frankenstein monster and spoke about the need for greater parliamentary scrutiny. I ask the delegates to comment on his remarks.

A widely published article co-authored by the Minister for Social Protection, a senior French MEP and the chairman of the EU Employment and Social Affairs Committee has been published and addresses one of the reasons citizens do not trust European institutions. It may explain the reasons there is so little trust in the European Union and people do not believe they have ownership of European institutions. The authors wrote: ...the pressure to make far-reaching “adjustments” often means that there is limited time to discuss reforms with trade unions and employers’ organisations before they are introduced, undermining reforms’ sustainability and sometimes leading to social unrest. Many citizens feel increasingly disconnected from national politics, and even more so from European decision-making, over which they feel they have little influence.

This is a key reason for the dramatic decline in the popularity of European Union institutions. In times of economic turbulence people do not believe they have ownership of the decisions being made and believe they are being rushed through.

On the issue of further integration, the article continued: "There is no solution to the crisis without reconstructing Europe’s economic and monetary union, and without shifting the focus on to people’s needs and potential". The authors called for the convening of a Bretton Woods-type conference to put in place an economic and monetary arrangement for the coming decade". They also questioned austerity which, they argued, could only bring Europe so far and stated a broader vision was needed. If people believed they had ownership of the process and would not be consistently penalised by some of the European institutions and if a lasting arrangement or "grand bargain", to use the words of the authors, were in place, there would be greater European solidarity and people would probably become more accepting of integration.

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

A large number of important questions were asked, many of which have been answered. I will start with traditional Irish plámas. I am struck immediately by the gender composition of the delegation in comparison with the gender composition of the committee members present. This is probably a result of President Hollande's decision to give equal representation to the genders. This puts us at a disadvantage.

It would be nice if the delegation could convey on my behalf, as a personal friend, and presumably on behalf of the Chairman and members, best wishes to Hélène Conway-Mouret whom I have not seen since she became a member of the French Cabinet.

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

There is nothing unusual about that.

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

I hope I am not overstepping my position in asking that my message be conveyed to her.

Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not at all.

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

We would love to hear how she interacts with the French overseas electorate, just as we are debating intensely our relationship with the Diaspora throughout the world.

Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to be associated with the Deputy's comments about Hélène Conway-Mouret. Député Axelle Lemaire also attends regular meetings and meets us on an informal basis to keep us posted.

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

Our guests raised fascinating and interesting points. Ireland has a great relationship with France, which it wishes to build and develop. We also have a great relationship with our next door neighbour, England, which we also wish to develop.

Just as France has a common interest with us, for example, in the agricultural field, we have a very important relationship with England which is now worrying us in the context of its position on Europe. Just as we have friendships in many ways, we did not have that great a friendship with the French position of Sarkozy or with the Germans who attempted to sideline and attack us because we have our own national taxation code. It has been mentioned here and it has been mentioned in America. We believe our tax code is beyond criticism in so far as it is open to anyone who wishes to see it. It is based on legislation and there are no special deals for anyone. We have our interest because we are an island nation. The witness mentioned the French potential veto of any EU-US trade relationship that is evolving quickly. We see it as very important in so far as we would see Ireland as a bridge between Europe and the US for the transfer of goods and investment and vice versa.

We may have problems in agreeing some of these measures. Obviously, our most recent disagreement was between our Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade on sanctions for Syria. I understand where the witnesses are coming from, in that France is a very large arms producing nation and has decided, along with Britain, not to go along the European path. While we will not be exporting arms, it is still a big disappointment for us as I understand 25 nations stood with us while France and Britain stood alone.

The witness mentioned that the European Parliament had not sanctioned the European budget and said she was not satisfied that it was sufficiently large. We agree. However, as one sees the evolution of the political climate in Europe, Mr. Cameron publicly applauded the reduction of the European budget as a victory for England. There are friendships that come into conflict and others that do not. We are not part of the Schengen area and, as a nation, we are ardently pro-European. We test our electorate now and again. Our Constitution obliges us to put very important and complex issues to the electorate and we are happy that on each occasion - maybe not the first time every time - we bring the people with us.

I am aware that Ms Danielle Auroi serves on the committee of foreign affairs in the French National Assembly. I am fascinated by the French position on Turkey and the Armenian massacre given that we are speaking to Turkey with a view to enlargement of the European Union. Does she think that is an important issue for France? Given that she is from a colonial power and multicultural society, presumably a contributing factor being its former colonies, what is the French position on the wearing of the hijab and the burka? Given that we are talking about Turkey being a predominantly Muslim country, are we facilitating an understanding among the Turkish electorate and politicians that they are welcome? I understand that Sarkozy might not have recognised Turkey as being a European country.

I applaud the French decision to move rapidly into the Sahel area of Mali and I understand it has a great fear of jihadists. An open debate will have to take place in Europe about the jihadists. I congratulate the French on being bold enough to make that independent decision to move to inflict damage on the jihadists who were heading to Bamako.

We agree on many things and we disagree on some. We agree with England on many things and we disagree on many. We have a strong independent political philosophy when it comes to the United States. We love the Americans but we have our own independent foreign policy. I thank the witnesses for their praise of Ireland's Presidency. As a collective, we are extremely proud of the hard work put in by our Prime Minister and Ministers. We concluded the Common Fisheries Policy agreement last night. We hope the budgetary position and other unfinished business will be resolved during our Presidency.

Ms Danielle Auroi:

We are going to answer all the questions with two voices. Perhaps I will start with an issue that was mentioned several times, that is, EU enlargement. In this period when citizens have many doubts vis-à-vis the European Union, it is even more difficult to ask this question. I want to mention especially the example of the Lithuanian Presidency which, like other states, such as Poland and Germany, will wish to open discussions with other states that Europe may not have mentioned. I will come back to Turkey later. However I want to mention the Ukraine because the Lithuanian Presidency will want to have a strong partnership with the Ukraine. It is very difficult for us as there is a lack of democracy and a lack of respect for human rights in that country, which means we are going to be very careful.

I am going to speak about something that is, perhaps, simpler and it has been mentioned already. Serbia has now won the right to start opening some chapters. Over a month ago, I was in the Serbian capital with a German colleague from the Bundestag who was saying that Croatia had joined the European Union and that was sufficient, but we believe the Balkans are going to join the European Union. It is very important for the stability of the whole region of the Balkans and for peace in that area. Let us not forget that the two world wars started in the Balkans.

Turkey asked a long time ago to join the EU. The country has several qualities. First, it is a large country and, therefore, we are changing scale completely. If Turkey joins the EU it will mean 100 million people will join the EU. That is difficult for us. Second, Turkey plays an important role in the equilibrium and peace of that region. It is a direct link between Europe and the Mediterranean area. It is an area of stability and we should bear this in mind in view of what is happening in Syria and the Lebanon, which is currently having some difficulties as well. Let us not forget that Turkey is an interface with Iran as well.

I offer one last point on Turkey. Turkey has a working model which integrates Islam without going all the way to extremism. Reference was made to the burka, but I know Turkey well and there are few burkas in Turkey. I see more burkas in Parisian suburbs. The fundamental question is that Turkey is an economic and social model that works and manages the risk of extremism within the Mediterranean area.

The committee members were nice enough to congratulate France on our intervention in the working of Mali to guarantee stability in Africa and the fight against Islamic extremists. It is important to bear in mind that Turkey is keen to reinforce the partnership, perhaps more than the EU accession. Turkey is keen to have a strong regular working method with the EU.

Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I suggest we conclude, unless you wish to continue in public session. I have been told lunch is ready. We could continue the discussion over lunch. Would that be acceptable?

Ms Danielle Auroi:

Okay. Thank you very much.

Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will adjourn the meeting and we will head there now.