Dáil debates

Tuesday, 4 December 2007

2:30 pm

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach if he has received an agenda for the December 2007 meeting of the European Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28175/07]

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach if he has informed the other EU heads of Government of the timing of the referendum on the European reform treaty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28176/07]

Photo of Eamon GilmoreEamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach his priorities for the December 2007 EU summit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29089/07]

Photo of Eamon GilmoreEamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 4: To ask the Taoiseach his plans for official trips abroad during the remainder of 2007 and the first half of 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29090/07]

Photo of Caoimhghín Ó CaoláinCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 5: To ask the Taoiseach if it is planned to carry out a review of the implementation of EU legislation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29230/07]

Photo of Eamon GilmoreEamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 6: To ask the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his address to the Association of European Journalists in Dublin Castle on 10 November 2007. [29412/07]

Photo of Lucinda CreightonLucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 7: To ask the Taoiseach if he will announce a date for the referendum on the EU reform treaty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29465/07]

Photo of Lucinda CreightonLucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Taoiseach if he plans to put in place a formal review or monitoring system to report regularly on the implementations of EU laws; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29517/07]

Photo of Caoimhghín Ó CaoláinCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 9: To ask the Taoiseach his priorities for the December 2007 meeting of the European Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30950/07]

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 9, inclusive, together.

I will first deal with the question on EU law. Transposition and implementation of EU law is, in the first instance, a matter for the relevant Departments and Ministers. My Department has a monitoring role in the timely transposition of EU legislation into Irish law, through the Interdepartmental Co-ordinating Committee on European Affairs, the ICCEUA, which is chaired by the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Roche. The transposition of EU directives is a standing item on the work programme of that committee. Departments are required to provide regular updates on directives that are applicable to their area. The updates assist in the co-ordination and monitoring of the transposition of all EU directives, including those that are counted towards the European Commission's internal market scoreboard. The European Commission has set a 1% transposition deficit target for the internal market scoreboard for 2009.

There are no particular arrangements in place to monitor specifically or review the ongoing implementation of EU law. Instead, Irish law giving effect to EU directives and regulations forms part of the overall corpus of Irish legislation. The programme for Government contains a commitment to instigate a review of the entire economic regulatory environment and I answered questions in this House recently regarding that commitment, particularly on the administrative burden arising from regulation.

I will travel to Lisbon on Thursday, 13 December to attend the signing ceremony for the reform treaty. On Friday, 14 December, I will attend the European Council in Brussels. The agenda for the Council focuses on three areas, namely, freedom, security and justice; economic, social and environmental issues; as well as external relations. At the meeting, I will emphasise the need for the EU to lead the international response to climate change. This is especially important in light of the forthcoming United Nations conference on climate change in Bali at which the EU, supported by all member states, must approach the task with a clear focus on an effective way forward to ensure a new international agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol. As I have said to this House before, the position on holding a referendum on the reform treaty is that, while no formal decision has been taken, I expect that we will hold a referendum sometime next year, probably in the summer. I have said this to several of my European Council colleagues.

Regarding plans for official visits abroad in the period ahead, I will attend the European Council next week and those during 2008. I will also attend the EU-Africa summit in Lisbon this weekend and I will travel to Lisbon for the signing ceremony for the reform treaty, as I have already mentioned. Several other trips abroad have been confirmed for 2008. I plan to visit the Republic of South Africa in January to see at first hand Irish overseas development aid efforts. I will also lead a trade delegation to South Africa. I will attend the EU-LAC summit to be held in Peru in May. I addressed the Association of European Journalists at their conference in Dublin Castle on 10 November. A copy of my speech is available on my Department's website at www.taoiseach.gov.ie.

The main priority once the treaty is signed next month will be to engage the public and ensure that they are well informed about the treaty ahead of the planned referendum next year. The National Forum on Europe will play a leading role in facilitating public debate. The Government will engage in a thorough information campaign which will include inter alia the publication and distribution of a comprehensive White Paper on the reform treaty as well as other information materials such as leaflets.

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Government decided when the referendum will be held? Is it likely to be in May-June, before the summer, or will it be held over until the autumn? Is it likely that the people will have only one chance at this? The eyes of 500 million will watch this country next year. We are the only country that needs to hold a referendum. This is a chance for Ireland, on behalf of everybody else, to ratify the treaty that will allow Europe to work with a structure that will enable 27 countries, instead of 15, to do business.

Has the Taoiseach examined the timeline for a children's rights referendum if it is to be held on the same day? The all-party committee has much work to do on this. I have said we will contribute constructively. A wording must be agreed, a Bill must be published and debated in the Dáil and Seanad, and the requisite period must be allowed before the referendum on children's rights can be held. Has the Taoiseach examined the timeline and is he happy that it will be possible to hold two referenda on one day, one on children's rights, if the committee can agree and the House can pass it, and one on the EU reform treaty?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As soon as the agreement is completed next week, with whatever final issues might be included the Attorney General will give a formal legal judgment. The outcome is not in doubt. However we must go through this legal process. Then the treaty will be signed. We must then turn our minds to the date to bring forward referendum legislation to allow us to hold the referendum. We must put the machinery in place for a referendum commission and structure a campaign. I look forward to talking to Opposition leaders next week and coming to an agreed view on that.

If possible I would like to honour the commitment we made on the children's rights referendum. The committee on the constitutional amendment on children begins its work this week. The members said they would need four months. That takes us to the end of March or so, around Easter. I understand that this timeframe cannot be improved on, which brings us into the next parliamentary session because Easter is very early in 2008. We will have to consider whether it will be possible to hold the two referendums. From talking to people around the House on this issue, there are differences of opinion. Some people favour having one, while others believe we should have two. We will have to form a judgment on this and I am quite happy to discuss these issues with colleagues from other parties.

As regards the Deputy's other question, there is no doubt, given that it looks extremely likely that Ireland will be the sole EU member state that has to have a referendum, that this will clearly focus the eyes of Europe on us. The ability of the European Union to move forward, having had a long protracted period of debate about institutional change for the better part of a decade, hopefully will be completed if each country ratifies the reform treaty in terms of its own parliamentary or electoral process or constitutional arrangements. In our case, we have to do both. Sometimes people forget a treaty must be ratified by the Houses of the Oireachtas as well as by the people. Ireland is unique within Europe in that regard and it is a very good opportunity to show Europe how we can move forward.

Essentially, the reform treaty is about developing the EU in terms of providing for 27 or more member states, as against nine or 12 in the past. It is also about the extremely important issue of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, improved parliamentary scrutiny and to give individual parliaments a greater role by being involved in such procedures. These are the essential issues. It is about reforming the institutions and how we do our business, putting arrangements in place for a larger Europe, dealing with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, parliamentary scrutiny etc. These are the big issues and the onus is on us to do what others will not be doing, namely, win popular support for the reform treaty. That would be good for this country and for Europe for the next decade. All the member states have pledged that they do not intend to return to institutional matters for the next decade. That is a wise decision, having spent so much time on this issue. This initiative will stand the test of time for at least the next decade and it will be important for this country to have played a key part.

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. I share his sentiment that this obviously will be good for Ireland and Europe. We intend to play our part in that as fully as we can.

Is the Government concerned about a revelation in a recent opinion poll that support for the EU reform treaty has halved since the previous poll? No more than the Taoiseach, I do not get carried away by opinion polls. Nonetheless, it is an indicator of interest in the whole European process. It looks as if all parties in the House, save one, support the treaty. The National Forum on Europe and the Institute of European Affairs are disseminating information so that the public can make up its mind. In that sense, a real challenge is presented if that recent opinion poll reflects any degree of truth.

Will the Taoiseach raise at the summit, as I have with leaders of the European People's Party, the question that surfaces often of the harmonisation of corporate tax rates within Europe? This could be very damaging for Ireland and we should resist it completely. In the context of Europe looking at Ireland to make a decision, this should be cleared up and assurances given that the EU does not intend to follow through on that matter. A recent European People's Party document placed no urgency on this. However, it is important for the leader of the Government to state this in respect of Ireland's position.

Is the Taoiseach concerned about comments attributed to Commissioner Fischer Boel that an expedited review of the Common Agricultural Policy should take place? The Taoiseach has often spoken about the fact that on a number of occasions we signed on for changes to the CAP. The last change was to carry us through to 2013. While everybody recognises the inevitability of change I would not see it as helpful for this country if the European Commission or the Council proposed an expedited review of the CAP given that this is a crucial decision for Ireland and Europe.

A fortnight ago, I made the comment publicly that if we put a case before the Irish people for the passing of a referendum on children's rights and enshrining them in the Constitution, whatever the legislation is and whatever the people decide we should underpin those rights with a system of family courts that is separate and distinct and focuses on family law with trained judges and mediation services available. With children's rights enshrined as central to our Constitution they should have such a family law system. Does the Taoiseach agree with this principle? It has worked well in a number of other countries. Compare this to what we have which is fragmented and dissipated and causes endless controversy and difficulties for thousands of people. I do not suggest we have a referendum on this on the same day.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Kenny asked a number of questions. With regard to the poll, it will always be shown that in a referendum, whatever the issue is, a large proportion of people will be in the "Don't Know" category. This poll shows we need the maximum amount of information out there. In fairness to the public, they go about their everyday business and cannot be expected to follow the minute level of developments from preparation for the convention, through the convention, the first round of discussions, the period of reflection and finally to what is almost agreed. For the public, this was a long drawn out process over the better part of a decade. The public will not be familiar with what is in the reform treaty and this is the challenge for the Government and people who are supportive.

The Government has a responsibility so people can listen to the conclusion of the long debate that took place and to show the importance of the issues, the reason for them and the reason the decisions worked on for almost a decade have come to this position.

On the CCCTB initiative, I do not think we would be the only country opposing it and this is important. As Deputy Kenny knows from his colleagues, this debate gunges on and is never ending. In my view it will be never ending. Countries believe it would be the greatest thing forever if we harmonised everything. There are centralists such as my old Belgian colleague who I think is no longer there — it is nine months since the election but they go on forever forming governments. Others believe this is essential and others like ourselves are opposed to them. I always held the view that complicated tax issues are first of all for the sovereign independent state to make a decision on. Tax harmonisation in other blocs of the world, such as Asia and the United States, and tax competition has never done anything but good. I do not believe Europe should be concerned with this issue. However, certain arguments may have some validity and the debate will continue. I do not foresee it being signed off but the Commission and the European Parliament are aware of our stance on it. I have been involved with four rounds of negotiations on this issue and it will keep returning in some form or other. There are those who believe in its merits and that it would solve a lot of issues for them.

For many years it has not been the case when the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, lead campaigns with IDA and Enterprise Ireland to win foreign direct investment that we have been in competition with our colleagues around Europe. Increasingly, the competition comes from China, Bangalore in India and Singapore, which must be admired for its ability as a small country to deal with these issues. At the European level, it is Switzerland rather than any EU member which is aggressive in this area. In terms of areas that are moving up, Puerto Rico is extraordinary. I do not think any of these are in the EU. I am continually making this point to colleagues and, when they look at their own figures, they see that is the position. Why, therefore, do the centralists continue to make this argument? I suppose they are equally bored with my arguments against them but it is one of those long running issues which will continue into the dim and distant future.

With regard to Deputy Kenny's question on children's rights, a number of issues arise. Three High Court judges are totally tied up with family law business. I take the Deputy's point regarding the Children Court and perhaps that could be better harmonised. I do not know what the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Brian Lenihan, has proposed or if he has any proposals to bring forward on the matter. In all circumstances, we should try to have the best, fairest and most compatible arrangements for looking after young people but I do not know the specifics of the matter.

Deputy Kenny asked about something else.

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Common Agricultural Policy.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have made an arrangement and we all know fundamental changes will occur in respect of the Common Agricultural Policy. In Berlin in 1999, during the Irish Presidency and on the previous two Financial Perspectives, we have successfully pushed that down the road.

On the most recent occasion, it was the agreement and understanding that we would move to single farm payments and reform the system in one fell swoop rather than on the phased basis sought by the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development. The argument was that if we did that, we would have a settling in period which would bring us to the end of the next Financial Perspective in 2013. It was agreed that the review would begin in a few years time but not that it would commence in 2008. I have explained our views. The French President stated last summer that he would like to commence this during the French Presidency. When I visited the President in September, this issue and our position on it was the primary focus of our discussions. I do not think he disagrees with the position and while some people would like to enter that debate earlier, as far as I am concerned the agreement on the Financial Perspective was firm despite any attempts otherwise by anyone. However, while some are making mistakes, they are not pushing it that hard. Our position is very clear.

As Deputy Kenny will appreciate, I have stated on numerous occasions that the agricultural sector has to understand the system will fundamentally change after 2013. The Department of Agriculture and Food is conscious of this and is working on it. In terms of the kinds of arrangements we have been involved in, I was lucky in Essen in 1992 when I led the negotiations and in 1998 when I was party to the negotiations with the then Ministers, Mr. O'Kennedy and Mr. MacSharry. I have been through this debate four times and I have made clear to the agriculture industry for a long number of years that the present position will not hold after 2013 and it has to be ready to take on what will be fundamental reforms at that stage.

Photo of Eamon GilmoreEamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach stated he will sign the EU reform treaty on 13 December. In doing so, he will have the support of the Labour Party and, as Deputy Kenny indicated, the Fine Gael Party. Do all the parties in government support the signing of the EU reform treaty considering that the leader of one of them was one of just 11 eurosceptics who signed the minority report at the European Convention?

I welcome the Taoiseach's statement that he will meet Opposition leaders to discuss the referendum. Will he discuss with us developing a strategy to disentangle the European referendum from the unpopularity of the Government in order that people will be focused on voting for or against the EU reform treaty as opposed to for or against the Government? Does the Taoiseach believe that the comments of Commissioner McCreevy are helpful in this context, bearing in mind that the Commissioner considered the rejection of the first Nice treaty hilarious and extolled its virtues at the time as an anti-establishment vote?

In the context of the summit in Lisbon, does the Taoiseach have a view on the proposal by President Sarkozy that a committee of wise men should be established to reflect on the future of the European Union in the period 2020 to 2030? Would it not be more useful to hold back on such an initiative until after the reform treaty has been ratified by all member states?

3:00 pm

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I acknowledge Deputy Gilmore's and the Labour Party's support for the reform treaty. As I said, the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, and I will discuss these issues with the party leaders. Obviously, we want to develop a strategy which will have the treaty passed. To do that, we need the large number of people who support the Government and the other parties to support the treaty.

On President Sarkozy's proposal for a committee of the wise, all members of the European Council have agreed to leave behind the issue of institutional debate. The French President's proposal is for a group to look at Europe in the long term, that is, beyond 2010. The idea is to generate reflection in the coming years, not to suggest institutional change. He does not see this as being in any way related to treaty negotiations and the committee is unlikely to have done much work before we have to deal with these issues.

Some of the big issues facing Europe include how Europe will evolve and develop over the next ten or 20 years, what will happen to the new neighbourhood policy that was instigated during the Irish Presidency in 2004, what will ultimately happen on the issue of Turkey, which is a big difficulty for President Sarkozy and others, and how the trading blocs of the world will operate on the other side of WTO talks, if and when an agreement is concluded. While a number of issues need to be looked at, they are seen very much in a long-term perspective. What we should do in this period of preparation is focus on the many positive aspects of the reform treaty and ensure that the focus is on the reform treaty only. That is the key issue. It is what we are asking people to support and it is what is important to Europe. It is about giving truthful information to the Irish people. To reply to the Deputy's first question, all the parties in government support the reform treaty and, I hope, not alone that but actively work for its passage.

Photo of Eamon GilmoreEamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Taoiseach for that reply. In connection with the agenda for the summit, is it intended that there will be a discussion on relations between the EU and Russia? Does he anticipate that consideration will be given to the unease expressed by election monitors about the conduct of the recent Russian elections or will there be space on the agenda for consideration of that matter?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I imagine that the Foreign Affairs Ministers will discuss Russia in some form or other. Each EU Presidency would have a report back on their own summit with Russia. I am sure it will generate some discussion. It will probably take a week or so before a comprehensive report is given to the Foreign Affairs Council on that but I would be surprised if it is not discussed by the Foreign Affairs Ministers at the Council.

Photo of Caoimhghín Ó CaoláinCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

An agency workers' directive is due to be discussed at the Council of Ministers meeting tomorrow, 5 December. Given that previously the Irish, British, Danish and German governments blocked this measure, what is the Irish Government's position in relation to such a directive now? Will the Taoiseach support the directive on this occasion and will it be a matter to be addressed at the upcoming summit?

During recent questions — this is where I take some encouragement — the Taoiseach indicated that it was his and the Government's intention to address this matter so in the context of that previous reply can he give us some positive indication today? Accepting that in order to block off all exploitative avenues of what I can only describe as a very vulnerable sector of the workforce — pay and conditions are the critical area — can the Taoiseach confirm that the directive suggests that after a period of six weeks agency workers will be treated exactly the same as all other workers? Is it the case, despite his earlier indication to me that this is a matter he wanted to see addressed, that the Irish Government is of the view that this period of time is too short? Is that the situation he has been arguing? Given the support of the trade union sector in Ireland for the introduction of the directive and the six-week period, following which all workers, irrespective of their being directly employed or agency placed, will be treated exactly the same, will he not back the trade union call for Government support on this occasion?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are a number of points here. During the negotiations on 2016 we spent a long time coming to agreement on this issue. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, has been preparing legislation on the agency Bill, which we are anxious to bring forward. We also have the employment compliance Bill. We have employed additional inspectors and we are due to increase the number to the full quota shortly. The ongoing negotiations seek clarity. They seek to regulate improvements and to try to arrive at a directive that is balanced and complies with our competitive position so we do not lose ground in that regard — we will discuss competitive issues later today in the House.

Many countries have derogations which we do not have, which are part of their agreements with the EU. As we have been a member of the Union for a long time, 35 years, we do not have such a derogation, which is a consideration. It is not a question of us blocking anything but, as always happens with a directive, of one trying to have it implemented in a way that corrects the balances, protects workers, in particular those who might be marginalised or paid below the required rate, and deals with all of the exploitation issues. On the other side, the directive seeks to retain the flexibilities that are important for international and Irish companies in Ireland, which need flexibility to get top quality expertise into their workforces.

All of these matters must be taken into account in the round. Obviously, we would like to have them brought to a satisfactory and balanced conclusion, and to pass the agency Bill and the employment compliance Bill, which is what we are determined to achieve.

Photo of Caoimhghín Ó CaoláinCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With regard to what the Taoiseach has indicated he is trying to achieve, I am mindful of a number of other considerations. My first concern is with regard to the rights of access to fair treatment by those who are employed through agency placements, whether indigenous or incoming workers. Does the Taoiseach accept that while this directive will seek to address the inconsistencies and unfairness that unfortunately is rife in employment in this State at present, against the interests of agency workers, this will directly impact on those who are directly employed in a period much shorter than the medium term? Indications of this are already well documented. Does the Taoiseach believe that it is patently in the interests of all workers, whether directly or agency employed, that this measure is adopted?

On a separate matter, the EU Food and Veterinary Office report of last March made 25 recommendations, the implementation of which would compel Brazilian beef to comply with EU safety standards. Why are we still facilitating the importation of Brazilian beef in the absence of the implementation of these recommendations, which clearly point to the need for Brazilian beef to be compelled to comply with the highest standards within the EU? Why can we not act independently in the interests of the health of our communities and, given the spill-on from that, the interests of the Irish beef sector? Why have we not yet acted to prohibit the importation of Brazilian beef that clearly currently does not meet the strict standards the EU would expect and seeks to compel compliance through the implementation of the 25 recommendations in the March report? Will the Taoiseach act on this matter in the interests of health and, as a follow-on to that, the Irish beef sector?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has made clear our position on Brazilian beef and safety and veterinary standards. She also made clear in the Agriculture Council what she is trying to achieve. We must remember it is a collective position; we do not act unilaterally but in agreement. The Minister has set out our position and the Deputy would need to put down a question on how she is following through on the various recommendations. We have clearly stated our position, and no one has been more conscious than the members of this Government and the previous Government on protecting and enhancing the beef industry, opening up markets for it and securing its future. We export 90% of the beef produced here and obviously wherever there is a threat, unfair market advantages given or standards not complied with, we are the first to raise such cases trenchantly.

As regards the issue of agency work, I am very much in support of protecting fair labour laws, as the Deputy will know from what I have said on previous occasions. That is why we are anxious to implement the arrangements contained in Towards 2016. The Minister, Deputy Martin, is anxious to proceed with that legislation, including the agency Bill and the employment compliance Bill. The Minister has informed me the drafting of the latter Bill is already under way.

As regards the ongoing discussions in Europe, we must protect our interests and, as with any directive, we must take into account those working in various sectors of the economy. There are differences, however, because agency workers are used in some sophisticated and advanced hi-tech areas. They are engaged for such projects on short-term contracts, which works out well. They are paid more than the rates, are given secure employment and, by and large, there are no difficulties in these areas. In other areas there is ongoing concern about rates agency workers are paid, and we must be cognisant of protecting them.

We are in competition across Europe for export markets, while protecting indigenous Irish employment. We must be conscious that many countries have derogations in these areas, so when we adopt any EU directive we can incur competitive costs compared to other competitors. All these matters must be taken into account. All we ever try to do in these negotiations is to get a fair and even playing field as best we can. Our labour laws are probably more advanced than most countries, while at the same time we operate our industrial relations on the basis of a collective bargaining system. It is for us to seek an arrangement that is compatible with our laws, arrangements and practices. We have 2.2 million people in the workforce and our first interest is that their rights are protected and enhanced where possible. We must never lose sight of the need to achieve balance as well as sustaining and growing that level of workforce in future.

Photo of Joan BurtonJoan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach said he will attend the EU-Africa Summit before the January Council meeting. What is his view of President Robert Mugabe attending that summit, given the current plight of the Zimbabwean people? Does the Taoiseach feel anything useful will be achieved by the Irish Government being represented at that summit, without in some way specifically noting the state to which President Mugabe has reduced that country? Like all colonial histories and their aftermaths, that of Zimbabwe is complex. However, the state of affairs in Zimbabwe is such that people are dying there. Irish Aid is assisting but it is not meant to be a pushover for what has become an extremely harsh regime that no longer has anything good to offer its own people. Will the Taoiseach comment on what line he will take in this regard?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Burton is correct in stating that I will be attending that summit meeting. Last summer I stated my views on the Zimbabwean regime when we were discussing the EU-African Summit. Some considerable time has been spent trying to arrange it. In fairness to the Portuguese Presidency, which is well positioned, it put a lot of effort into trying to make it happen over the past year and a half. I have nothing good to say about the regime in Zimbabwe and how it treats its people. I will obviously use my time to say a few harsh things about it, as will nearly all my colleagues.

To answer the Deputy's question, there is nothing to be gained from staying away from the summit. All our interests lie in helping Africa. I have worked extremely hard to invest considerable resources in overseas development aid in recent years. We have moved from a very small base seven or eight years ago to a very strong Irish NGO base and linkage base through the UN organisations throughout Africa. We are helping countries with HIV-AIDS, water supply, basic infrastructure, education and health services or whatever other services are necessary. It is in our interest to be there, to work, help and promote them and win further support for the causes these people represent.

It is a pity we have to deal with the Zimbabwe situation but I do not believe we should allow Zimbabwe to spoil or dominate the proceedings. Boycotting or staying away from the summit is an absolute waste of time and will have no value or purpose. It is always best in respect of these issues to go and say our piece. When Ireland held the Presidency of the European Union, it was suggested that we should stay away from a meeting to which representatives from Myanmar were coming. It fell to me to make the Presidency statement and we were able to berate Myanmar for its activities. It proved to be very productive and effective to have an international forum at which to speak. Anyone staying away from the forthcoming meeting is wrong. From the start, I said it was not something we would do.