Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will do my best. With regard to the EU-Arab summit, migration was of course discussed but it was not the focus of the summit. We were very keen that the relationship between the EU and the countries of the Arab League should not all be about migration. A decision was taken to focus on other issues also.

Land aid was not discussed but there was very strong recognition from Arab states of Ireland's work at the UN and elsewhere in our support for Palestinians, of the role we play in south Lebanon and in other places, and of the funding we provide to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA. There is very strong recognition from Arab countries that Ireland has been supportive, among EU countries, of the Palestinian cause.

Yemen was discussed, climate change was discussed and human rights were certainly raised by me and by others: human rights of women, LGBT citizens, individual liberty, democracy and so on.

The nature of the event was that there was a lot of discussion and views but very little interaction. It was the first time such a summit has been done. There were roughly 50 heads of state and government present and it was one of those events where people were giving their views and statements but not so much interaction - there were no working groups, for example. It was an opportunity to do this. It was the first time it had been done and we will do it again with the EU and the Arab League. It was also a good opportunity for some bilateral meetings, as these events often are.

Ireland does not recognise Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights and it never has. We disagree with the US Administration's decision to do so. I understand that there is no joint EU position on the matter, but that may follow. This would happen at the Foreign Affairs Council or at the European Council. Because it falls under the Common Foreign and Security Policy provisions one would have to have unanimity or near unanimity to do so. One of the flaws in the Common Foreign and Security Policy is that it is not done by qualified majority voting and where there is no unanimity or consensus the European Union cannot take a decision.

Moving to qualified majority voting, however, may mean that on occasion we could end up on the wrong side of a decision, which is something we will have to consider into the future. If we want a strong European Union which can take foreign policy decisions, a consequence is that we may on occasion find ourselves being outvoted on some of those decisions. We cannot keep calling for Europe to act together more on foreign policy issues if we do not enable it to do so.

Deputy Haughey asked a very pertinent question on the Government's view on the future of Europe and the debate in that regard. We must prepare a policy statement on that. The Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, has led a public consultation on the matter, and post Brexit, or post this phase of it, we should provide that statement and debate it in the Dáil. Our working position is that we support further enlargement, the capital markets union for the deepening of the Single Market, the digital Single Market and banking union, and we want to see the delivery of the social Europe agenda based on the Gothenburg declaration. However, we do not support a European army or, at least, would not participate in one nor do we support tax harmonisation. However, that is far too simplistic and probably deserves a more detailed policy statement once we get through our current difficulties on European policy.

I was asked to comment on populism but I am not sure I can do it in a minute and a half. However, I can say that I do not like it. Populism has three essential elements. These are the idea that there is a division between the elites and the people and that only populists can represent the people; the proposal of easy solutions, which do not work, to complex and difficult problems, and the demonisation of opponents. In Ireland, we see left-wing populism to the fore rather than the right-wing populism one tends to see in other countries. I see the elements of populism mentioned much more frequently on the far left in Ireland. They claim it is the elites versus the people and that only they can represent the people. There is demonisation of opponents and simple solutions that do not work are proposed. That is very much a feature of far-left politics in Ireland whereas we do not really have far-right politics here. I hope we never do.

I was asked about Prime Minister Orbán and Fidesz. Obviously, that is a party matter but Fidesz has now been suspended from the EPP. That may result in expulsion down the line or in them rejoining. It will depend on whether the party satisfies the criteria set down and whether the three wise men who have been appointed to analyse whether it has are satisfied. The EPP is an umbrella group and every group includes parties that need further scrutiny. We have now acted. The Party of European Socialists must now consider the situation in Romania where a government led by social democrats has serious corruption issues which are under examination by the European Commission. The Party of European Socialists must also consider the situation in Britain and the increasingly Eurosceptic-led Labour Party which has serious issues around anti-Semitism to the extent that Jewish Members of Parliament are resigning.

See this speech in context