Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

I will concentrate on a number of issues which occupy the attention of foreign ministers at the moment. While the Union can readily function without a constitution for some time to come, which is accepted, having adequate financial resources is an immediate and indispensable requirement. The EU's current annual budget is in the region of €100 billion which, although a very large amount of money, represents 1% of the combined wealth of the member states. The relatively small scale of its budget gives the lie to the notion of the Union as a super-state in the making. Clearly, it is not. Instead, the Union functions at a certain level to pool and augment national authority in agreed ways for our collective betterment.

The Union's budget is used for three main purposes: to fund the Common Agricultural Policy and rural development generally; to support the development of less prosperous regions; and to improve Europe's economic competitiveness in the face of intensifying international competition. Let us take the Union's agricultural spending as an example. The CAP is a pillar of the Union, without which European agriculture would be in real difficulty and Irish farmers would suffer. There are no grounds for being defensive about the CAP. Those who criticise it conveniently ignore that it has been repeatedly reformed to make it more cost-effective and market-oriented.

The CAP has been shaped by the member states to meet the Union's evolving needs. It has not been foisted on the unwilling as is often implied by its critics. Agriculture is the only policy that is fully funded at European level. Under the most recent budgetary proposals, CAP is destined to consume a declining portion of the overall EU budget and just over 0.3% of Europe's gross national income. This is hardly a disproportionate price to pay to sustain a world-class European agriculture with all that this entails in terms, for example, of animal health and food safety. The EU represents one of the best blocs in the world in this respect.

The EU budget's second priority is economic and social cohesion, which has benefited Ireland enormously over the years. It is clear that the new member states have particular development needs and that European funding is especially important for them. We can sympathise with their desire to catch up with the Union's wealthier regions as quickly as possible. For this reason, Ireland has stood squarely behind the principle of economic solidarity that lies at the kernel of the Union's success to date.

The third main strand of EU spending is in the area of competitiveness. The budgetary proposals made by the Luxembourg Presidency envisaged a substantial rise in expenditure in this field. It is generally agreed that the Union needs to step up its performance if we are to secure Europe's prosperity in a rapidly changing global environment. While the implementation of the Lisbon Agenda falls largely within individual national competences, it makes sense to augment the efforts of individual governments with a strategic approach at the European level, for example in pursuit of excellence in research and development. In these ongoing negotiations, we have argued for a budget that will be adequate to fund the Union's core policies. Even though we have become one of the wealthier member states, we have not used this as an excuse for curtailing the Union's budget.

The accession of so many countries whose economies are less developed than those of the existing membership has inevitable financial consequences and the Union must be prepared to face up to these. With such little time left, we have entered an intensive phase of the negotiations on the future financial perspectives for the years from 2007 to 2013. After a disappointing failure in June, when difficulties over the British rebate prevented agreement, we have a second chance to get it right in December. For the sake of the Union's credibility, we must grasp this latest opportunity. There is a particular responsibility on the current British Presidency to create the conditions for the agreement that so narrowly eluded us in June.

I assure the House that the Government's approach is designed to secure the best possible deal for Ireland in these complex and difficult negotiations. We will play our full role in the search for this much-needed agreement, which will have a tangibly positive impact on the future of the European Union.

The second priority issue for Foreign Ministers at present is the WTO negotiations which will reach a crucial stage at the Hong Kong ministerial meeting next month. The WTO provides another example of the important role played by the European Union. The Commission has been given the responsibility to negotiate on behalf of the Union. This ensures that collective European interests are represented in a manner that would not be possible if all of us negotiated separately. The Commission's negotiators are required to remain within the mandate given to it by the Council. I have had occasion to remind the Commission of this fact at a number of recent meetings.

Contrary to what many in the international media have said in recent weeks, the Union has been to the fore in trying to bring about a balanced WTO agreement. Positive proposals have been put forward while other parties to the talks have held back. As far as agriculture is concerned, the CAP reforms agreed in 2003 constituted an important EU contribution to the current trade negotiations. EU Foreign Ministers have made it quite clear that these CAP reforms constitute the limits of Commissioner Mandelson's negotiating brief. The Government will be extremely vigilant to ensure that these limits are respected. The final decision on the EU's response to whatever emerges in Hong Kong rests with the Council of Ministers. The issues do not just concern agriculture and trade issues. The WTO and Doha agenda are about looking after the world's poorest countries, and Ireland has emphasised that in all the discussions we have had at EU level.

I would like to have had time to touch on issues relating to the constitution. I reiterate that we have an opportunity for a period of reflection. I compliment the National Forum on Europe for the work it has done. The White Paper we have issued will allow people a period of calm and collective period of reflection and positive engagement, particularly through the National Forum on Europe and other bodies such as the European Movement Ireland, with which Deputy Quinn and a number of other Deputies are associated. We must continue to articulate calmly the positive nature of membership of the European Union. We must show the positive path of what we were trying to do with the European constitution, namely, to make the larger group of 25 more effective and efficient.

See this speech in context