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

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach if he has received an agenda for the special meeting of the European Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8420/09]

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

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach about his participation in the special meeting of EU leaders to discuss the economic situation, held on 1 March 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9522/09]

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

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach if he has received a final agenda for the March 2009 meeting of EU Heads of State; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9619/09]

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

Question 4: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the special European summit on 1 March 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9660/09]

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

Question 5: To ask the Taoiseach the planned European Council meetings for the remainder of 2009 in which he will participate; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9853/09]

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

Question 6: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the spring 2009 meeting of the European Council in Brussels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10600/09]

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

Question 7: To ask the Taoiseach the bilateral meetings he undertook on the margins of the recent European Council meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10601/09]

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, together.

I attended an informal meeting of EU Heads of State and Government in Brussels on Sunday, 1 March. The meeting was called by the Czech Presidency in response to the international financial and economic crisis. The meeting was useful on a number of fronts. While there were no formal conclusions, there was broad agreement that Europe can only face the current macro-economic and financial challenges, and overcome them by continuing to act together in a co-ordinated manner, within the framework of the Single Market and EMU.

There was a shared confidence in the medium and long-term outlook for all EU economies. We agreed on the need to take action in a number of areas, notably in promoting financial stability and supporting the real economy. We also discussed the role Europe has to play in terms of the global approach to this crisis.

I attended the European Council in Brussels on 19 and 20 March. I was accompanied by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin and the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Dick Roche. As I will make a statement to the House on the Council meeting next week, I will at this stage merely give a summary account of its proceedings.

Discussions at the Council built on the work of the 1 March meeting, focusing on the need to respond to the global financial and economic crisis and to restore the proper functioning of financial markets. As part of the overall effort to stimulate economic recovery, the Council agreed on an infrastructure financing package of some €5 billion. This is in addition to those measures by the member states to stimulate their economies and other expenditure.

Agreement on the financial support of key infrastructure projects is very important for Ireland. We have secured funding of €110 million for the east-west interconnector between Ireland and Britain. There is potential to secure funding for the North Sea grid component of the offshore wind energy initiative. We will also be able to access new funds which have been agreed for rural development and rural broadband.

The Council agreed in principle to increase the resources available to the IMF so that it is better placed to help countries as appropriate. We also agreed to address the capacity of the Union to assist its non-euro members through considerably strengthening what is known as the balance of payments support. The Council agreed the approach to be pursued by the Union at the G20 discussions in London on 2 April.

We discussed climate change and the focus now is on the UN summit in Copenhagen later this year. The Council adopted a declaration launching the Eastern Partnership to promote stability, good governance and economic development in those countries to the east of the Union's borders.

On the Lisbon treaty, I reported to the Council that we are continuing to work on the legal guarantees promised in December, with a view to them being agreed by mid-2009. There was no discussion as we will return to this issue at the June European Council.

I had a bilateral meeting with the President of the European Commission, Mr. José Manuel Barroso on 19 March, before the Council meeting. Our discussion covered the current economic situation with particular regard to jobs and growth. We also discussed the Lisbon treaty. As is normal, I had discussions with various colleagues in the margins of the meeting over the course of the two days.

In addition to the Spring European Council, there will be European Council meetings on 18 and 19 June, 29 and 30 October and 10 and 11 December. Prime Minister Topalanek has announced that an EU-US summit will be held on 5 April in Prague where EU leaders will meet with US President Barack Obama. The Czech Presidency has also indicated that it intends to hold an Eastern Partnership summit on 7 May in Prague. It is my intention to participate in all of the European Councils in 2009.

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

The Taoiseach is not responsible for the collapse of the Czech Government but it will cause a serious problem. It seems there may well be a council of experts formed here. What is the Taoiseach's reaction to the fact that President Klaus may well be the person to speak on international issues for the people of the Czech Republic, given his Eurosceptic views? I acknowledge the Taoiseach can have no direct impact on this situation.

In view of the uncertainty caused by the collapse of the Czech Government, does the Taoiseach intend to indicate the proposed timing of the second referendum on the Lisbon treaty? I do not expect him to give an exact date but in my view it is important to remove the uncertainty.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am informed that Prime Minister Topalanek's government narrowly lost the vote of confidence in the Czech Parliament yesterday and while this is highly undesirable from the point of view of the Union because the Czech Republic holds the rotating Presidency and we need to have stability in these times, it is not unprecedented. It is for the Czech Republic's democratic process to resolve the domestic political issues and I will not speculate on such details. I am confident this will be carried out in a way that minimises disruption to EU business at this very important juncture. The question of the date for the holding of the referendum in Ireland will be based on the outcome of a European Council meeting that will consider the legal texts to give effect to the political guarantees we have obtained.

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

Will the Taoiseach inform the House of the progress of the work on finalising the declarations? I understand that the greater part of the work is completed and will be considered at the European summit in June at which they may or may not be authorised.

When the Taoiseach spoke to the other Heads of Government at the European Council meeting, was a briefing given on the true and up-to-date position on those declarations being prepared by the Czech Government? Assuming they are in the process of being finalised and will be accepted in June, does the Taoiseach expect the second referendum on the Lisbon treaty to be held in the autumn. In that regard, has the Government finalised its strategy for dealing with those matters of concern for people such as tax and ethical issues, sovereignty, the method for transposing directives into Irish law and the impact on different sectors? Has a strategy been agreed for dealing with those matters sequentially so that we do not have the confusion, allegations or indeed lies that accompanied those issues on the last occasion and the people are fully and properly informed on all of these matters?

Given the appreciation among Irish people of the importance of the strength of the European Central Bank in terms of financial support for Ireland and other EU member states, they will want to be assured that while the architecture coming from the Lisbon treaty is important for a population of 500 million, it is equally important that the Government has a clear strategy on all the issues which gave rise to concern the last time, and how it intends to deal with them. Perhaps the Taoiseach might comment on that.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government is appreciative of the all-party committee's work on this matter prior to the December Council meeting. It made recommendations on what can be done nationally as well as what has to be done in terms of assurances and allaying of concerns that specifically are best dealt with through the process of protocols when these are ultimately obtained in respect of certain issues. Further clarification will be given in respect of others. This is a comprehensive agenda that the Minister for Foreign Affairs is working to, as is the European Union committee.

On the question of the ongoing work, we are working within the timeframe, as I have said, to have these matters dealt with at the June European Council. I do not accept that all these matters have been finalised. It is a question of getting agreement from partner countries as well, which have to sign up to this. It is not just a matter of bringing it to the table on that day. The Presidency, of course, has the task of gauging the support of other member states for the text we propose to put.

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

Following on from that, will the Taoiseach tell the House how much progress has been made in terms of agreeing texts on the declarations agreements, protocols and so on which are to be finalised, presumably at the June summit? At what point will Opposition parties in the House be informed on what is happening with those texts? We have had no discussion or consultation about this since last December and I should like to know the up-to-date position and how much progress has been made.

I understand the discussion of those texts is being undertaken with the Czech Presidency. Given the loss of confidence in the Czech Government by that country's Parliament and the implications of that for the Czech Presidency, how is it intended to progress those discussions on the texts? If, as it appears, there is now some ambiguity about the position of the current Czech Government and how the remaining period of its Presidency will be managed and who, precisely, will have responsibility within the government for the conduct of foreign affairs, including European matters, does the Taoiseach still expect these matters to be finalised in time for the June summit? As the responsibility lies with the Czech Presidency to bring the proposals before the summit, and presumably clear the way for agreement in advance with the other member states, is the Taoiseach confident that this can now be done? It seems there are now two areas of uncertainty. One is in relation to the texts and the second concerns the capacity or potential of the Czech Presidency to deliver the agreement in June that will be required if there is to be a second referendum on the Lisbon treaty in the autumn.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Discussions are taking place with legal services and our people on the texts. Discussions are ongoing and that is part of the process. As soon as it becomes clear that a meeting of minds has been arrived at which meets requirements and has been gauged to have the necessary support, we can talk to the Opposition about what the situation then is, based on texts which we will know have passed muster with the member states that need to give their approval to the work that is ongoing.

As I understand it, the Czech Government will continue in office until the Presidency is over, based on what I was advised yesterday, when this matter was brought to my attention. I do not have any further news on that. The situation is not unprecedented. I believe, if memory serve me right, that during the Slovenian Presidency which had, perhaps, a month to go, when the Prime Minister was defeated in an election, he continued in his position and discharged his functions as President of the Council until the June Council meeting last year. It happened in recent times at any rate. Mr. Topolanek will be allowed to continue in his role, I understand, as caretaker Prime Minister until the Presidency is concluded and the parliamentary vote of no-confidence will not in any way take away from his ability to conduct EU matters as President of the Council on that basis.

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

I understand there is an informal summit meeting in early April to deal with economic matters. Has the Taoiseach plans to present any pre-budget position to that summit in relation to Ireland's economic affairs and budgetary situation?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I believe that summit will involve picking up on the G20 meeting that is to take place on 2 April. There will be an opportunity, too, for EU heads of government to meet the President of the United States, and to take whatever further steps will be envisaged as a result of the G20 meeting, discussions for which were discussed at the last Council meeting.

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

It was reported at last week's European Council meeting that the Taoiseach updated his heads of government colleagues in Brussels on the Lisbon treaty and the development of the so-called legally binding guarantees. When will the Taoiseach be in a position to brief the Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas on the same progress that he was in a position to share with the other heads of state last week? I am referring specifically to the so-called legally binding guarantees that will be an attachment to the Lisbon treaty when and if it is to be put before the Irish people once again.

The Taoiseach has not responded in any particular manner to the earlier questions put by other Deputies regarding the point that has been reached on agreement on the specific areas that he is seeking to address. Can the Taoiseach share with the House what point he is at, what areas in particular are being addressed and when the specific wording of these signalled legally binding guarantees will be published? When will the Taoiseach publish the specific wording of these signalled legally binding guarantees?

I wish to ask the Taoiseach a second question in the context of the European Council. Before putting my question, I acknowledge that the Taoiseach and the Government have been very vocal in their opposition to the actions of Israel in Gaza in the recent past. At the next European Council meeting, will the Taoiseach consider calling for the suspension of the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement with Israel, accepting that we must go further than the vocal condemnation of the actions Israel has employed against the Palestinian population of Gaza?

Does the Taoiseach accept that this particular agreement affords preferential trading arrangements with Israel and that article 2 of the agreement states that it is subject to compliance with human rights? Will he consider taking a proactive position at the next European Council meeting and seek a suspension of that agreement, recognising that it refers only to preferential trading? The proposition I put to the Taoiseach for consideration does not require a cessation of all trade with Israel.

Does the Taoiseach accept that by the Government taking that stand and putting the case before the European Council and, if possible, the European Council accepting it, the suspension of this particular agreement would deliver a very important message to the Israeli Government, especially since Israel has clearly demonstrated that it is in breach of human rights, which was confirmed by the UN Human Rights Council in its report published on Monday of this week?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In regard to the first matter, when there is sufficient progress to report, the House will be informed of these issues. As I said, we are not in a position to report sufficient progress at this point but when sufficient progress has been made, when we know where were are going and understand there will be support for what the texts state at that point, we will be in a position to have a meaningful discussion about it.

On the second point, a parliamentary question on the detail of EU policy towards the state of Israel in the context of Middle East policy would be best put to the Minister for Foreign Affairs for a most accurate and up-to-date position in terms of what Foreign Ministers have been saying and doing on this matter, acting collectively as a General Affairs and External Relations Council.

However, I do not necessarily agree the course of action the Deputy proposed would influence for the better the need for a change in policy on the Israel position in regard to Gaza or the two state solution being achieved more quickly than would otherwise be the case. I believe engaging with people, even with those with whom I disagree, on various matters in an effort to influence them. The Deputy might accept, in terms of the political developments of his party, that excluding them from processes has very limited value.

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

The Taoiseach's response on the progress with the matters pertaining to what I describe as so-called legally binding guarantees as an attachment to the Lisbon treaty was very vague. Apart altogether from the next planned address of these matters at the June European Council meeting, when will he be in a position to give a definitive report to the Houses of the Oireachtas in regard to them? Is he not in a position to give an interim report, which he gave to other Heads of State at last week's European Council meeting in Brussels on progress with same? He has not given us that information today.

In regard to the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement with Israel, I put it to the Taoiseach that the notion of a suspension of that agreement which deals specifically with preferential trading arrangements would, in some way, close down the avenue of dialogue and engagement does not hold up. I am immediately reminded of the attitude adopted by President Reagan in the United States to sanctions on South Africa during the course of the dreadful apartheid years. One must take a stand.

In my opening remarks, I was forthright in acknowledging that the Government has been vocal in its opposition to what has happened in Gaza. Does the Taoiseach accept we must go further and give international leadership? Does he accept that it is not only in terms of the Israeli audience that such steps and actions should be taken by the European Community but that the Palestinian people also need to see action and not only hear utterances on the part of the collective weight of the European Community? It is about direct dialogue with the Palestinian people and the people of Israel and their respective representatives.

It is hugely important that a step such as this would be considered. If the Taoiseach is absolutely opposed to this specific proposition, what further steps are he and the Government currently considering to bring it home to the Israeli Government that its actions are unacceptable and that over that period of time 431 children were killed in the sequential bombardment? This horrific action on the part of a democratically elected Government——

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We cannot have a speech on the Middle East in the middle of questions on the Taoiseach's meeting with EU leaders.

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

It is wholly within their ambit. This horrific action on the part of a democratically elected Government is in breach of article 2 of that particular Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement with Israel. Is it not now time to take those actions or what other actions is the Taoiseach considering?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On the comment on common foreign and security policy at EU level, that is a decision to be taken by the General Affairs and External Relations Council and, indeed, the European Council should it come up for discussion at that level. We have made our position clear. It is well known and appreciated by those who are interested in this area. We have had a consistent view on this matter.

I do not accept the reference to apartheid governments in South Africa as being a relevant reference point. While one might fundamentally disagree with Israel's policies, it is a democratic country which elects its government, the same as here. The policy in regard to the two state solution is the right of Israel to live in peace and security and the right of the Palestinians to have a viable Palestinian state.

We condemn all violence in the Middle East and we hold no brief for any infringement of human rights in respect of the conduct of military operations. What happened in Gaza was greatly regrettable; it was appalling. We have made our position very clear. It is also appalling that rockets were sent from within that area into Israel. I believe in a proportionate response and the need for great care to be taken in respect of civilian populations. All of these international conventions must be respected. The position of the Government is crystal clear on these matters. It is in the interests of obtaining a fair and just solution in the Middle East that we have taken these positions.

The point the Deputy raised suggests that a better way to bring about that solution is that we suspend the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement with Israel. Based on what the Deputy said, I am not convinced that would be something which would bring about a resolution to the wider problem more quickly.

Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I want to raise three issues, two of which follow on from what the Taoiseach said earlier. Am I correct to assume with certainty that there will be a second Lisbon treaty referendum in the last quarter of this year? If that is the case, the Taoiseach probably will be aware that the Referendum Commission stated in its report that it would need far greater time than it had to familiarise itself with the topic and disseminate information.

I understand that at the moment the legislation provides that the commission must be established within 90 days of the publication of the referendum Bill. The commission's report mentioned a term twice as long as that. Does the Taoiseach agree that it may be important to set up the Referendum Commission, if that is the model which will be used to disseminate information? Does he agree it should be set up sooner rather than later and that we should not wait until June when we will have received the guarantees?

Did the issue of Sudan and the expulsion of aid agencies from it come up at the Council meeting? If it did, what measures, if any, have we taken to ensure aid is available in Sudan?

On the previous subject Deputy Ó Caoláin mentioned, does the Taoiseach agree that perhaps we in this House could serve this difficult situation better? Instead of groups such as the Friends of Israel and the Friends of Palestine, perhaps we could look at setting up a Friends of Israel and Palestine group. Every political party here agrees with the two-state solution. Rather than placing the emphasis on division we should place it on the common ground that exists and try to come up with a common position on the problem.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Regarding the last suggestion by the Deputy, that is a matter for Members to decide. There are strongly held views on this matter. It is important, from a Government point of view, that in saying we are even-handed we are not ambiguous about the need to stand up for what is right, fair and just in all the circumstances.

It is an issue which has not been amenable to solution, despite the best diplomatic efforts of many. As we know from our own peace process, the need for people to directly engage is a fundamental part of building a process that is sustainable and resilient against those who would attack the process. In that respect, I welcome the prospect of an Israeli Government supporting a two-state solution, in view of the fact that the Israeli Labour Party, I understand, is indicating its preparedness to join the Netanyahu Government.

I hope people like Ehud Barak and others will be able to temper the policy positions of that Government in a way that would be helpful to the situation generally and pursue a diplomatic course that might enable the leadership in Palestine to respond appropriately as well.

Regarding the first matter, it might be premature to set up such a commission until such time as we see the conclusions arising out of the European Council to our satisfaction. I am aware the commission has a view as to what it regards as the optimum position, from its point of view, but we have a position where we have to get political agreement, more than likely at the June European Council meeting. Conclusions have to be satisfactory. We can then make a political decision as to where we go from there. We need to do that within a time frame that is before the tenure of the new Commission.

Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Did the Darfur issue come up at that meeting?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Not at heads of Government level, but whatever conclusions refer to foreign policy matters would have been discussed at the Foreign Ministers' meetings.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Did the Taoiseach brief his colleagues on the updated situation regarding the Lisbon treaty? The treaty issue seems to have gotten fairly short shrift. Did the Taoiseach go into the matter in detail? Is there any information he provided for them that he can usefully provide to us here? Can he give us some indication as to who is drafting the texts of the legal guarantees? Is it being done by the Department of Foreign Affairs or the European Commission? Is it being done in a consultative capacity?

When does the Taoiseach intend to consult with the Opposition on the issue? Can he tell us whether there is agreement in Cabinet regarding the guarantees on neutrality and defence? The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy John Gormley has already stated publicly that he wants the European Defence Agency excluded from any Irish agreement. It is time the issue was clarified for us so we know where exactly the Government stands.

I agree with Deputy Timmins. The Referendum Commission published its report. It was extremely critical of the short period of time it had to inform the Irish people and we know that was a major problem with the last Lisbon treaty referendum. The commission was seeking five months, well in excess of the three months available at the present time. Before that, we must have enabling legislation. Perhaps the Taoiseach could clarify that, as well as when he will bring the Opposition parties into his confidence on these issues.

The defence issue raises many complex questions that have already given rise to disagreement within our own party. The socio-ethical issues could also be quite complex. In view of this, there can be no question of a fait accompli that might take place in a legal drafting vacuum, where a package can be presented in June.

Regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the United Nations report which was published a number of days ago called for an international investigation into the allegations of the abuses of human rights. The Joint Committee on European Affairs has already set in place, through a motion, a process whereby the main players, particularly those mentioned in the United Nations report, would come attend the committee and give their views on their perception of whether there were violations of human rights and international law.

Will the Taoiseach be prepared to take the results of those proceedings, with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, to a European summit meeting and raise them in the context of what action is required to ensure Israel remains a bona fide member? At the present time it has preferential trading agreements regarding the Euromed trading agreement. There must be some sanction so that international law is not flouted, if that is the finding of the committee's deliberations.

The employment summit which has been agreed in Prague by the Czech Republic now appears to have been downgraded by Britain and France. The intention now seems to be that instead of all of the heads of states turning up at such a summit, which would underline the importance of stimulating and highlighting the issue of employment in the European Union itself, the European heads of state will not attend but rather only the troika of states involved at the present time in the Presidency will be present. Can the Taoiseach indicate whether he will attend?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Regarding the first matter, such matters are dealt with by the Department of Foreign Affairs' legal department, acting on advice from the Attorney General's office in the normal way. There is not sufficient progress to report to the Deputy. Until such time as there is sufficient progress, we are not in a position to discuss it with him. We will discuss it with him when we see what is emerging as the likely outcome. The legal texts will be consistent with the political guarantees we have obtained.

It was made clear, at the time of the December Council meeting when this agreement was reached by the French Presidency, that we would seek to have those matters, including those that are relevant and are available to be included in a subsequent accession treaty to be inserted as protocols in such an accession treaty. That is the arrangement we have agreed.

With regard to what I said at the Council meeting itself, it was not a question of getting short shrift from anybody. It was a question of the President of the European Parliament reporting to the European Council, as is normal at the beginning of every European Council. Arising from that, I was invited by the EU Council President to report on the general state of play in regard to our discussions. I confirmed to him and to the President of the European Parliament that we were in discussions and were still working within the timeframe that was agreed in the December Council meeting and that I expected to have the work completed in time for the June Council meeting so that there would be an opportunity formally to discuss and approve the outcome of that work.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the European Defence Agency?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We will ensure our position is consistent with our common foreign and security policy in these areas.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister, Deputy Gormley, is getting short shrift.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Nobody is getting short shrift. If the Deputy wants to keep his little niggle going with the Green Party, that is his business. I have outlined the overall position.

In regard to the second question, it is a matter for the committees of this House to invite who they wish to their meetings and to issue whatever reports they wish. In the context of discussions on the Middle East, which is an ongoing part of the agenda of the General Affairs Council, I am sure the Minister will make reference, where it is merited, to the views of the parliamentary committee on any of these matters. Clearly, however, the overall Government position is to uphold international humanitarian law at all times, recognising that certain issues must be adhered to and where certain issues arise, they must be dealt with.

As I have said, the question of the issuing of sanctions is always open for discussion. One must consider the pros and cons and whether such an approach would improve or disimprove the situation and whether it would influence the situation. The Minister for Foreign Affairs will be guided by those discussions with colleagues and will offer a view if such an item ever comes on the agenda. A parliamentary question to the Minister would provide the Deputy with the most up-to-date and accurate position on this matter.

The third issue raised by the Deputy relates to the employment summit. The outcome of the discussions in this regard is that the social partners would be met by the troika, comprising the current Presidency and the next two member states to assume the Presidency, to discuss their views on these matters.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In other words, it is no longer a summit.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not have the conclusion before me but my recollection is that the matter has been dealt with as I have indicated and that there will be a report to the European Council meeting, as well as to the meeting with the United States President, Mr. Obama, that is due to take place.