Dáil debates

Wednesday, 29 May 2013

European Council: Statements

 

11:50 am

Photo of Micheál MartinMicheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Over the years, we have given up key areas of tax competition in the name of transparency and co-operation. It appears the US issue is with the failure of their companies to repatriate profits. It is not that they have been routed through Ireland. In cases such as that of Apple, one is faced with a major employer which has been here for decades. Much of the work carried out by it and other multinational companies would be lost to Europe were Ireland not so successful in attracting them and allowing them to make a long-term commitment to growth. I wish to acknowledge the words and actions of the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, during the past week and also those of our diplomats and Industrial Development Agency Ireland. It has been a well-argued response. I ask the Taoiseach to reinstate an initiative we put in place in the United States some years ago when similar comments relating to this matter were articulated in Congress and elsewhere. At that time we took the step of locating in the embassy in Washington DC a particular team with expertise additional to that possessed by the then diplomatic team to combat the lobbying taking place in respect of and the misinformation being spread about Ireland. It is important we would up the ante in the context of Ireland's presentation of its case internationally, particularly in the United States.

The Taoiseach is also right in pointing out how a secure and affordable energy supply is vital for economic growth. However, he is wrong to say that any major new policy has been agreed or that what is to be agreed this year will play a role in our recovery. The benefits of a single energy market are some way off.

Given that there was room on the agenda to discuss international developments, it was surprising that the leaders had nothing to say in their communiqué with regard to Syria. I have concerns about the position taken by Ireland at this week's Foreign Affairs Council and its argument against lifting the arms embargo on the Syrian rebels. I accept that this is not a black and white issue. History indicates, however, that such embargoes are inherently one-sided. Russia, Iran and others have sold major amounts of arms to the Assad regime.

Hizbollah, which is a client organisation of Iran, has confirmed that it is directly involved in fighting on the side of the regime. As such, an arms embargo significantly impacts on only the rebels.

In Bosnia 20 years ago, the imposition of a supposedly even-handed embargo directly aided Milosevic and caused significant damage to the Bosnian Government. We should not allow such a situation to recur. The surest way to undermine an agreed settlement is to allow the regime to strengthen its position or to convince the rebels that they can only win support from the extremes. The Franco-British position is the correct one.

Separately, we need to step up Europe's support for democracy in the Middle East and elsewhere. This week, the secretariat of the European Endowment for Democracy, EED, opened its doors in Brussels. This was the initiative of Radek Sikorski, a former Polish Foreign Minister, when he held the Presidency of the Council. It is an excellent development and we should congratulate him on bringing the project this far. Ireland should commit to becoming a major funder and supporter of the EED.

I welcome the Council's formal decision confirming that every member state will continue to have one Commissioner, as per the agreements that I negotiated with Europe in terms of the second Lisbon treaty and the Irish referendum. This should be acknowledged across the board, including by those who opposed the referendum. We all recall the posters asserting that Ireland would lose its Commissioner if the treaty was ratified. We took that view on board, as research indicated that people were concerned about the loss of a Commissioner, and achieved an agreement under which every state would retain its Commissioner. We fought on this and other protocols, for example, corporation tax, abortion etc. All of these have been delivered in European policy. Away from the heat of a referendum campaign, all sides of the House and the debate should acknowledge that the particular clarion call of the first referendum, namely, the retention of a Commissioner for every member state, has been delivered upon. This shows that the voice of the people mattered in the evolution of the Irish position and European policy.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.