Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Statements shall be confined to the Taoiseach and to the main spokespersons for Fine Gael, the Labour Party and Sinn Féin, who shall be called upon in that order and who may share time, which shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case.

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

I attended the meeting of the European Council in Brussels on Thursday and Friday, 29 and 30 October. I was accompanied at the meeting by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin, and by Deputy Dick Roche, Minister of State with responsibility for European Union affairs. The European Council meeting was the first regular meeting of European Heads of State in some time at which the subject of Ireland's ratification of the Lisbon treaty was not the focus of both our own national efforts and a key interest of others. However, the Council was again more concerned than one might wish with institutional issues and with the Lisbon treaty. On this occasion, the spotlight was on the Czech Republic and the prospect of the instrument of ratification being signed after the Czech Parliament had approved the ratification of the treaty.

As it was the first meeting of the Council since the decisive vote of the Irish public on 2 October last, I was invited by the Presidency to say a few words about the referendum. I was mindful of the significant difference between Ireland's predicament and that of the Czech Republic. I informed my colleagues that we completed all the formalities relating to our ratification of the treaty when the Minister of State, Deputy Dick Roche, deposited the instrument of ratification in Rome on 24 October. I recalled that we had made it clear following the outcome of the first referendum in June 2008 that we would not rush into any course of action, but would consider and assess in depth the underlying reasons for the decision of the Irish people. The Government, and the Oireachtas through the work of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union, worked to identify and understand the issues concerned. At the same time, we ensured that the significance of the EU in the everyday lives of the public was fully appreciated. I recalled our previous discussions at Council, notably the support I had sought and obtained to ensure we would get a satisfactory response to the concerns raised by the public. I thanked my colleagues around the table for their consistent engagement with that task. I made it clear that we believe that Ireland and the European Council negotiated in good faith and were true to those negotiations. I emphasised how decisive the outcome was when the referendum result was declared on 3 October. I said that the overwhelming nature of the result was a clear statement of Ireland's support for the Lisbon treaty and the Union more generally. I concluded by making clear that the most fitting conclusion to the entire process would be the rapid implementation of the Lisbon treaty.

The Council also discussed the situation that had arisen in the Czech Republic. The Council noted that the Lisbon treaty had been approved by the peoples or parliaments of all 27 member states. To provide a constructive response to the Czech Government's efforts to resolve its difficulties, the Council agreed that at the time of a future accession treaty, the Czech Republic would be able to join the UK and Poland in signing up to Protocol 30 to the Lisbon treaty, which relates to the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in those countries. While there was concern that the Czech Republic's decision to seek this change might lead others to engage in similar manoeuvres, the over-riding priority - to see the treaty enter into force and allow the Union to concentrate on policy rather than institutional issues - prevailed. The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic subsequently rejected the remaining legal challenge to the Lisbon treaty. Later the same day, the Czech President, Mr. Klaus, signed the instrument of ratification which the Czech Prime Minister, Mr. Fischer, has said he will deposit in Rome on Friday, 13 November next.

The question of discussing the new positions, notably the President of the European Council and the high representative, did not arise because of the situation with the Lisbon treaty. This issue has moved on somewhat since the Czech President, Mr. Klaus, signed that country's instrument of ratification. It is clear that the treaty will enter into force on 1 December next. The Swedish Presidency is engaging in discussions with each member state regarding the filling of the new posts. The discussions will continue over the coming days. The Swedish Presidency has signalled its intention to convene an extra meeting of the European Council tomorrow week, 19 November, to deal with this matter comprehensively.

I have consistently said that the question of who we will support for the position of President of the European Council ultimately depends on the names that are in the frame. Following the referendum result, I indicated during an interview that Mr. Tony Blair was well regarded in Ireland because of his role in the Northern Ireland peace process. More recently, when Mr. John Bruton put his name forward as a potential compromise candidate, I made it clear that I would be happy to see an Irish person in the post. I said that as Mr. Bruton has excellent experience and credentials, his candidature has the full support of the Government. It has been suggested that the President of the Council should be one of the current members of the Council. As the filling of the post of high representative cannot be done in isolation from the filling of the position of President of the Council, the same situation applies in terms of the Swedish Presidency taking soundings. There is also a question of political balance across the top EU positions.

Securing agreement to retain one Commissioner per member state under the Lisbon treaty was a very important factor for the Government in running and winning the second referendum on the Lisbon treaty. I had discussions with President Barroso about this matter on Monday and over the past couple of weeks. I will talk to him again in the coming days. We will then be in a position to put forward our nominee for the position of EU Commissioner.

As expected, the other key focus of discussion at the Council was climate change, including the issue of financing. The Council agreed a clear and ambitious mandate for the negotiations at the Copenhagen conference in December. The Union has provided leadership on climate change from the outset. The agreement reached at the October European Council allows it to continue to do so. Different views were expressed within the Council about how far the Union should commit itself in advance of the final negotiations in Copenhagen. How far it will go will depend on the actions of others. I am confident that the continuing differences of view on how the financial burden should be shared internally can be resolved. In any event, such differences do not impede the ability of the Union to push the global negotiations forward. The outcome of the Council represents a balanced outcome to accommodate the various views, as it always does.

It is widely accepted that the Copenhagen conference will not result in a fully fledged legally binding international agreement. That does not mean we should drop our level of ambition. We must ensure the conference gets us as far along the road to a comprehensive and binding agreement as possible. Rather than winding down the pressure on others to step up to the plate, we must increase it. The EU position heading into the Copenhagen conference remains ambitious. The EU has made its commitments in a transparent way, backed up by resources. By endorsing the global figure of €100 billion in international financing per annum by 2020, and by committing to pay its fair share of that, the Union is again taking the lead and setting the pace for what must be achieved in Copenhagen. The purpose of this process is to achieve an international agreement that prevents the catastrophic global consequences of our planet warming too much.

Our position is strongly conditional on others accepting and fulfilling their obligations, proportionate to their responsibilities and means. Only in that event can we agree a treaty that will achieve what we want. It looks increasingly unlikely that such a treaty will be agreed at Copenhagen, although it may be agreed shortly afterwards. The Copenhagen conference may result in a political agreement, rather than a legally binding treaty. In that event, we must work to ensure it achieves the maximum that is feasible. There is much to play for in the negotiations over the coming weeks. I wish to make it clear that Europe and Ireland remain fully committed to an ambitious, comprehensive and effective global deal. Although the December meeting creates the potential for deadline-driven momentum, the quality of the agreement is, within reason, more important than the timing.

While it was not top of the Council's agenda on this occasion, the Council was extremely mindful of the ongoing difficulties in the global and European economies. The Council recognised the progress made in improving the financial regulatory structures in relation to systemic risk and banking supervision. We agreed on the need to co-ordinate exit strategies and to avoid choking off any potential recovery. That work is being advanced most notably at the Economic and Financial Affairs Council. The Council was clear that the stimulus measures put in place by most of our partners should not be removed until the recovery is fully secured. The Commission and the Council of Ministers were asked to revert to December's European Council in relation to exit strategies. There is an increasing focus on the impact of the current economic difficulties on sustaining and creating people's jobs, which is where the real pain is felt. The Council is looking forward to discussing a new European strategy for jobs and growth. That will form part of the upcoming review of the Lisbon strategy, which is likely to be a core element of next spring's European Council, when such economic matters will be formally dealt with.

The Council focused particularly on the milk sector which, as Deputies are fully aware, is experiencing ongoing difficulties. The Council welcomed the efforts made by the European Commission to date. We are pleased that the work of the new high level group on milk is being accorded a level of recognition that reflects the priority we, like many other EU member states, attach to this real issue.

The Council returned to the issue of immigration, which had also arisen in June, not least as a result of the considerable difficulties being experienced by our Mediterranean partners. The Council noted the progress being made in implementing measures regarding illegal immigration. It called for further efforts to be made, notably in respect of FRONTEX, which is the EU's dedicated body aimed at improving co-ordination on border issues. The December European Council is expected to adopt a new multi-annual programme in the field of freedom, security and justice, which is often referred to as the Stockholm programme. The Council also adopted conclusions on the Baltic Sea strategy and on external relations.

This was a good Council from an Irish perspective. Over the past two years, Lisbon treaty issues have inevitably dominated our domestic consideration of EU issues and absorbed time, energy and resources. A similar, if less acute, difficulty has affected the rest of the Union. It is to the advantage of everyone to see the Lisbon treaty enter into force, which seems set to happen on Tuesday fortnight. I look forward to the putting in place of the new elements under the Lisbon treaty, including the filling of the new posts and the appointment of a new Commission. Then, we will be in a position, both domestically and with our EU partners, to engage thoroughly on the full panoply of issues such as climate change and energy, cross-border crime, jobs, competitiveness and agricultural markets to name a few of the major issues where decisions taken at EU level can make a real difference to our public.

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

I wish to share time with Deputies Billy Timmins and Lucinda Creighton.

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

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

I was happy to attend the EPP summit meeting prior to the recent Council meeting in Brussels on Thursday, 29 and Friday, 30 October. The Lisbon treaty referendum campaign here was without rancour in terms of the parties that supported the treaty and indeed was without the aggression of the previous campaign which was in the interest of everybody. I would like to thank all the people who were involved in any way and made a contribution to informing the electorate so that people could cast their votes as fully informed as possible about the issues either for or against. Obviously, I was very happy that there was an overwhelming endorsement of the Lisbon treaty.

Probably at the Council meeting itself and certainly at the meeting I attended there genuinely was real appreciation by European leaders of how the Irish people had gone about their business at a time when it is fair to say the Government was not riding high in the popularity stakes. The electorate here was very well able to distinguish between the issues of domestic politics and the European question, including the future of Europe and the support Europe has given us and will give us in the future. In that context it was a remarkable democratic decision by the Irish people, fully endorsing the Lisbon treaty and what that will lead to in the future.

In a peculiar way the fact that European leaders have not yet decided about the presidency and the high representative is normal for European politics as the Taoiseach is well aware. Around in the corridors, as it were, and certainly in the shadows there is mention of the names of people who would like to put their names in lights and might be afraid to do so. These matters always have a tendency to drift until the last minute. From the discussions I had with people out there, the assumption certainly was that the President of the Council would come from the EPP Grouping and, as it does not have an overall majority in the Parliament, the high representative would come from the Socialist Group. These positions may be reversed depending on the discussions that are taking place between the Government leaders and so on.

I believe the appointment of the former Taoiseach, Mr. John Bruton, would be in Europe's interest in the sense that he led a Government here which in European terms was conservative and socialist, was appointed by Europe to go to America to explain to Democrats and Republicans what Europe was about, sat on the convention and presidium dealing with the original proposed constitution and, as the Taoiseach has recognised, has had a genuine interest in the entire European process on that big broad plain of where we go. It is not as if this is someone looking for the start of a political career. There is an opportunity here in the event that he comes into play for real consideration. If, as may well be, the decision in Europe is to offer him, for example, the high representative position instead of the presidency, the Taoiseach might have to appoint him as Commissioner because, as he pointed out, the high representative must be a member of the Commission. In a non-political sense to have an Irish candidate for either of these two positions is a great honour for the country and Mr. Bruton would acquit himself with great distinction.

Following the recognition by the Council that the future for Europe is to get back to creating jobs, Chancellor Merkel has said she intends to drive the German economy - that mighty machine - to create jobs on a vast scale. I hope other countries follow suit and that, in our own way, the budget to be presented in December will contain a jobs stimulus.

I am getting many inquiries about revisiting our position on the Schengen Agreement. It seems that the visa requirements and the restrictions over entry into Ireland are causing many obstructions. I know we did not join in the beginning because of the consequences of having Border controls at Newry and elsewhere as well as with England. Given the changes in passports, there are a number of complications and perhaps that issue might be reviewed.

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

The Taoiseach mentioned that the outcome of the Lisbon treaty referendum, which we all welcomed, was a clear statement of Irish support for involvement in Europe and for the Lisbon treaty, with which I would concur. However, it is difficult to reconcile that with the decision a year earlier. I do not believe we can brush under the carpet what happened in the past year here. We need to ensure greater involvement here in the Houses and with the people with respect to the European project. I do not know when or if there will be another referendum on a European issue. I do not foresee one in the next decade or so. I would not like the practice to evolve where we would always have two referenda, one in which we say "No" and one in which we say "Yes". Let us learn the lesson and let us not be content to dismiss the "No" vote as a blip. Let us not become detached from the concerns the people have. The in-house issues, so to speak, we raised prior to the second Lisbon treaty referendum should be addressed rather than just parked there.

The European Council meeting will take place on 19 November and I concur with many of the points raised by Deputy Kenny with respect to the positions of President of the Council, the high representative and our own Commissioner. It is important that we appoint people of the highest calibre to such positions and I do not believe one is being partisan when mentioning former Taoiseach, Mr. John Bruton, who has done an excellent job in the United States. While I imagine his appointment might not have been welcomed by the secretariat at the time, he went on to prove that politicians can do those jobs quite well. He is to be commended on the work he did and how he kept in touch with people back home on a weekly basis with his very informative bulletin, which clearly indicated how he reached out to every strand and sector in society in the United States during his period there.

The Taoiseach said the Council mainly dealt with climate change. He spoke about the financial burden and endorsing the global figure of €100 billion in international financing per year by 2020. When summing up the Minister of State might give us a breakdown of that figure and whether there will be a commitment from Ireland. One of the great things about ratification of the Lisbon treaty is that, hopefully, we will be able to have coherent policies on these global issues. I note that Professor Bellamy recently stated that there was more snow on the Alps last winter than there had been in the previous 26 years, so there will be the counterargument about climate change. It is very important to have a very clear strategy outlining the scientific evidence showing the negative impact of the road we are travelling and to outline the advantages of taking measures to address it. Such a macro issue can go over the heads of many people. We tip the cap to it and issue platitudes, but we do not really grasp its seriousness.

When appointed, the high representative will be able to deal with important external relations issues. We can play a really important role here. The most emotive external relations issue for Irish people is the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. I know there is deep thinking in Europe, probably led by the Swedes and followed closely by our Government, about adopting a more proactive approach to trying to solve the problem in the Middle East. I know it has been going on for a couple of thousand years and we do not expect to solve it overnight. However, we could play a role by setting up here in Ireland, whether we use Glencree or whatever, a forum, similar to the forum in Northern Ireland. Let us set up a group here in Ireland and bring the various bodies that are very divisive on the issue together. Anyone who proclaims a reasonable view on the difficulties in the Middle East without coming down 100% on one side or the other is immediately attacked and the extremes have no room for moderation in it. It will not be solved and has not been solved in the past thousands of years by the extremes. The hope that was sent out by President Obama when he came into power seems to have stonewalled, so to speak, and now he is worried by the internal difficulties he will have. He will have to embrace the broader issues and will have to speak to the Syrian and Iranian authorities in an effort to find a solution in the Middle East.

A mindset has evolved which says that the problem cannot be solved. That is not good enough, nor is it good enough simply to park the issue. What is happening in the Middle East - in the West Bank even more so than in Gaza - is unacceptable in any modern democratic society. Ireland can play a crucial and central role by establishing a forum in this State to bring the different groups together for discussions. There is agreement among 90% of the people in terms of what the solution should be. We must seek to move forward from there.

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

I will begin by saying that it would be preferable for these debates to take place in advance of Council meetings rather than afterwards. Hindsight is a great thing but if the Parliament is to perform its function in respect of the Executive, it is important that we have an opportunity for input. Perhaps it is something that can be discussed among the Whips.

I lend my support to the candidacy of the former Taoiseach, Mr. John Bruton, for the position of President of the European Council. I hope the Taoiseach will not be a reluctant supporter of Mr. Bruton's candidacy but rather an active advocate. Mr. Bruton is not just an Irish person who happens to be seeking the Presidency of the European Council; he is an Irish person with a substantial record of public service both to this country and to the European Union. As such, he is in a position to make a hugely valuable input to the future of the European project.

It is apt that we are discussing a Council meeting which was dominated by the ratification of the Lisbon treaty. All discussions regarding Europe have been dominated by the institutional paralysis within the Union for almost eight years. The Taoiseach and the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, both played an important part in ensuring the ratification of the Lisbon treaty, as did Deputy Bruton and many others on both sides of the House. We have spent a long time seeking to formulate and devise a path forward; now that the first step on that road is achieved, there is a great opportunity to shape and influence how the Union conducts its business, including how it meets the challenges of economic recession and climate change.

The Oireachtas has work to do in examining how best to implement the much enhanced and strengthened role of national parliaments under the terms and provisions of the Lisbon treaty. I hope the Taoiseach will give some consideration to this. I already raised the issue with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, at last week's meeting of the Joint Committee on European Affairs. There is an opportunity now for the Oireachtas, perhaps through a sub-committee, to look at how we should seek to enhance the role of national parliaments and to shape policy in that regard from an Irish perspective. There is no doubt that developments in the European Union are set to gallop ahead; I understand the Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the European Parliament has already issued a report on the issue. Instead of reacting, we should seek to shape developments in this area. I urge the Taoiseach to consider the matter at Cabinet and in discussions with the Minister, Deputy Martin, and Minister of State, Deputy Roche.

In regard to the Council meeting itself, I very much support the European Union taking a leading role on the global stage in setting ambitious targets for itself and others in regard to climate change. However, I am concerned at this point in time that we may threaten our own competitiveness and put in danger the opportunity for job creation in the European Union and for making the Union more competitive in the global economy. That must be borne in mind. It may well be a positive that the outcome of these discussions, rather than being legally binding, is more likely to be in the nature of a political agreement. Perhaps it will be better to work towards a treaty in the future when we have brought on board the developing countries as well as the United States to the extent that they have bought into the type of leadership the European Union has been advocating. We cannot go it alone but must instead ensure full engagement from all partners and stakeholders.

I noted the reports in yesterday's media regarding the extension of the deadline from 2013 to 2014 for Ireland to achieve its target of reducing its budget deficit to 3% of GDP. I understand this will be discussed at the ECOFIN meeting on 3 December, but I assume there will also be some reference to it at the forthcoming special Council meeting. I hope the extension of the deadline will not be used as a get-out clause in the December budget, that is, as an opportunity to avoid some of the tough decisions that must be taken in the national interest. The longer we put off the decisions that must be taken, the more painful it will be for us all in the long term. We appreciate the latitude being shown to Ireland by the European Commission, which is reflective of the realities of our situation, but it must not be used as a means of putting off until next year what needs to be done this year for the sake of the Irish people. I urge the Taoiseach to reflect on that.

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

It is appropriate that we are discussing European Union matters on the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The latter was part of the residual hangover from the destruction and mayhem of two world wars. It was that legacy which encouraged the founders of the European project to produce the Treaty of Rome which ultimately gave rise to the European Union. The entire project was based on the objective of securing peace and prosperity for the peoples of Europe and, as part of this, the Union played a transitional role in bringing the totalitarian states behind the Iron Curtain into democracy. It is appropriate that this discussion is taking place as the Union's institutions are finally being reformed according to the provisions of the Lisbon treaty. The Union can now seek to point the way forward on the global stage on such issues as climate change, the elimination of poverty and the challenges facing the world economy.

The ratification of the Lisbon treaty was, from the Irish perspective, the high point of the discussions at the summit. All the other member states breathed a sight of relief that the wayward child had at last come back to the fold. After all our self-analysis, soul-searching, debate and electioneering, the model country of Europe was back in line. The welcome we received was in contrast to the short shrift given to the President of the Czech Republic. Thankfully, all 27 member states are now in a position to ensure the Lisbon treaty is put into force at the beginning of December.

I am pleased that the Swedish Presidency has proposed a special summit. This is necessary given the number of issues down the line, not least the Copenhagen conference and the continuing economic crisis. The Union cannot afford to wait until the December summit to address all these issues and formulate our positions. Previous speakers mentioned the various appointments that must be made and I am glad the Taoiseach said in a forthright fashion that the Government has given full support to the candidacy of John Bruton. That is a welcome statement. I am glad the European socialist group is seeking the important post of EU High Representative for foreign and security policy. While the functions of the President of the European Council are clearly laid down, the High Representative's functions will be important because he or she will be the face of the Union around the world. Those who opposed the Lisbon treaty argued that this was an executive post, the appointee would be the leader of a federalist group and it would be the beginning of the end of the Union as we understand it. It is crucial that the person who is appointed to the post demonstrates that is not the case and that the decisions of the Council and the Union will be reflected by the High Representative abroad as he or she will be a contact point. The first term of office will be important in that respect and perhaps that position needs to be examined closely. I am sure the Taoiseach will do that in his discussions over the next few days with President Barroso.

Deputy Creighton referred to the question of putting our own house in order. The Lisbon treaty was strong about the new role that will be given to national parliaments and, while it will be up to them to take on this role, it will be also up to governments to ensure they are enabled to do so. The Heads of Government at the EU summit should discuss how best the new role can be exercised by parliaments. It is not sufficient to say parliaments have this role and they can get their act together in this regard. Governments will have be involved as well because an upgraded role for parliaments cannot be provided unless additional resources and structures are put in place. That will mean new Standing Orders for the Oireachtas because a new role cannot be taken on by the Dáil or Seanad unless they rearrange the way they conduct their business. We must examine how we conduct our business at home and there will also have to be interaction with the other member states. How best this new role can be managed and most effectively implemented in the interest of strengthening the democratic process, especially in increasing awareness of the Union in the country, requires examination on both a micro and a macro level.

The climate change conference in Copenhagen looms. Climate change is a major issue with €100 billion required annually until 2020 to assist developing countries in mitigating the worst effects of dealing with the reduction in carbon emissions. How will the Union get that amount together? In addition, between €5 billion and €7 billion will be needed annually for the next three years globally to get the initiative off the ground. This will impact on every member state but it will have a more significant impact on Ireland, which is a net importer of energy. We produce little energy while 90% of our energy comes from fossil fuels but we have a significant opportunity to produce alternative sources of energy. Ireland should be at the cutting edge of technology and the Government should set a target of 2050, for example, for Ireland to be a net exporter of energy. It should be ensured that the infrastructure programme for the transmission of energy can link Ireland to mainland Europe in order that we can export as well as import energy.

While it will be an economic weight on Ireland to meet its part of the cost of the climate change initiative, which will be colossal, the Copenhagen conference looks less likely to result in the ambitious projects that were mooted and it will not result in a binding legal agreement, despite all the talk up to recent times. It will be simply a political agreement which raises questions about where we stand within the EU and where we stand in regard to developing countries. We have a long road to travel before we secure the strong regulations required to build on the Kyoto protocol and to produce a legally binding way forward.

Employment and financial regulation were also discussed at the Council. I welcome the commitments regarding the supervisory role the Union is seeking and an enhanced regulatory role both within the Union and globally and that work is under way. I was disappointed by the lack of attention paid to high unemployment levels, which is a major issue facing the Union. While it was acknowledged, the position is deteriorating and there is no indication the measures being taken will significantly increase employment levels. They may improve economies but unemployment remains a major consideration. It is ironic the only reference to this issue was how member states that had adopted stimulus packages could get out of them when economic recovery takes place. They may not increase employment levels. The reference to addressing employment in the review of the Lisbon strategy is not good enough. The Taoiseach needs to be more specific and less aspirational on these matters because the State could be dragged down by high unemployment even when economies begin to prosper again.

The Taoiseach referred to Afghanistan and Pakistan but I am not sure to what extent they were discussed. It is unfortunate that an election held in Afghanistan was declared invalid because of fraud but the attempt to hold a second election resulted in one of the candidates pulling out because his perception was that there could not be a valid election, as fraud would be still an issue. Democracy in the country has not been strengthened. The US President stated yesterday that 28,000 more American troops would be deployed while Prime Minister Brown said he was fully supportive of this move. The situation seems to be descending into an even greater morass. Casualties are increasing and there seems to be no direction in the conflict. The European Union simply says it will contribute to strengthening civilian structures in Afghanistan. That is meaningless. Pakistan is now becoming engulfed and suicide bombing is spreading there. Given the Taliban presence in Pakistan, that country could shortly become involved. There could be conflagration in the entire area. No direction is coming from the European Union although some member states are deeply involved in the conflict. This flashpoint needs to be addressed.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As there are no further speakers, I invite the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dick Roche to take questions. I will then invite him to make a five minute statement.

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

I raised the issue of climate change. Could a forum be established in Ireland where Palestinians and Israelis could be brought together to agree a Common Position?

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was struck by the contribution of Deputy Timmins, who has experience in the peacekeeping forces. This is a very good idea. Rather than continually wringing our hands in desperation at the ongoing stasis in the Middle East, we must look for steps forward.

Deputy Timmins mentioned Glencree. On Friday of this week, the Glencree peace award will be made. People who have been at war with each other come together in the Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation. One finds people there who were once avowed enemies and willing to kill each other north of the Border. One meets people there who have come through the South African experience. Deputy Timmins has put his finger on something we should look at.

We have an opportunity to put down markers in this area. We have had an experience and we understand the process through which we have come. Our hands are clean. We do not have a colonial past and we did not play any part in the so-called settlements in the Middle East which led to the current problem. Of course, Israel does not always look fondly on our inputs in that area. Nevertheless, Deputy Timmins's point is well made. Perhaps it could be discussed in an Oireachtas committee. The issue is not controversial and it might have broad political support in both Houses. I look forward to talking to the Deputy about it and I would carry any suggestions that come out of a cross-party agreement in the Oireachtas to European forums. Deputy Timmins is right. Ireland has a role to play and it would be a welcome one.

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

There is concern among certain member states at the impending pressure from the European Commission to phase out stimulus packages, guarantee schemes and financial supports. If this happens prematurely, there is a risk of a second slump or even a further and deeper recession. Could the Minister of State address this issue?

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputies Creighton, Timmins and Costello touched on this in their contributions. The EU recognises that a cautious approach must be taken, particularly to support and stimulus packages and most particularly to their phasing out. I am sure the Deputy is aware that there is significant discussion on this issue in the United States. While the stimulus package started very early there and significant numbers of jobs were under way, particularly in social construction, the money is now beginning to run out and they are now talking about further lay-offs. The problem with a stimulus package is how to reverse out of it. Exit strategies will have to be prepared and co-ordinated. The Council itself made a reference to the fact that such strategies must be prepared in the framework of the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact, as has been requested by the Commission. The objective is to ensure that there is strong and sustainable economic recovery and that the danger highlighted by Deputy Creighton and others will not come about, visiting a new shock on the system.

The Council is concerned about employment. Chancellor Merkel issued a statement yesterday on driving employment in the German economy. There is a specific acknowledgment that the increase in employment levels and the promotion of active social inclusion and protection will be focal points in the new European strategy for jobs. This realisation underlines much of the discussion in the European Union.

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

It may be looking very far down the road to talk about exiting from the broad based stimulus policies when recovery is secured. That presumes that recovery will be secured. That is not what I would have thought the summit will be discussing. We must have recovery and we need to look at other policies to achieve it and to increase employment. There is a recognition that employment is deteriorating. It is accepted that the employment situation in Europe can be expected to deteriorate further. That is stated in the conclusions. How does that rest with a strategy to expand the employment base and create new areas of employment? At the bottom of section 28, it is stated that the European Council "looks forward to discussing a new European strategy for jobs and growth as part of the upcoming review of the Lisbon strategy". To read this one would never imagine we are in an economic crisis.

We did not have a stimulus package in this country so there is no question of our trying to exit a stimulus package when the recovery comes about. What input did we have into this element of the discussion, which is central to ourselves? We are seen as a country with high unemployment. It has risen from 4% two years ago to more than 12%. Our economy is export orientated so that it is unlikely that we will not experience an increase in employment even when our economy recovers. We could find ourselves in a reasonably good economic situation but with persistent long-term unemployment. We need to consider the danger to countries like Ireland and small economies which will find it hard to grow jobs. We must have an input in this area.

Is there an Irish position on the Copenhagen conference? It is only around the corner. We have heard of the intentions of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Taoiseach to travel to the conference but what is our position on the conference. It is a colossal enterprise with €100 billion required in developing country funds. We are talking about €5 billion to €7 billion. What contribution are we expected to make? There must be tentative discussions on these matters. Will we be in a position to bear the brunt we will be expected to bear? How will that feed into the movement towards alternative energy? The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, said that by next year, 4% of fuel will have to be bio-fuel. However, 90% of that will have to be imported. That will not result in any improvement in terms of our fossil fuel usage. The principle will be the same in that it will be imported energy. It is not really alternative energy. It will probably be imported from countries in which perhaps as much land as possible should be devoted to food crops; otherwise, the forests of the world will be depleted. It is meaningless unless we produce the bio-fuel ourselves. This is a major issue and we are some distance from thinking it through very carefully.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The key issue as far as Copenhagen is concerned is that, first and foremost, Europe is prepared to lead. Ireland very strongly supports that line. To go back to the point made by Deputies Timmins and Creighton, the solution which will come from Copenhagen will have to be balanced. Europe cannot carry the full burden. The other nations in the developed world, in particular the United States and the rapidly growing economies such as China and India, must carry their fair share of the burden too.

The first phase will be to decide what the overall global targets are while the second phase will be to decide what proportion will be taken by Europe. At that stage, the discussion will have to be on how the member states will share the burden, as happened after Kyoto. That is the sequence in which the issue will be decided.

Deputy Costello made a very important point on bio-fuels. It would be great if the alternative energy sources could be sourced within our country because that is the best way to go. To go back to my time in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government when the Department produced a joint paper with the Department responsible for energy, that was the intention. That is the way it will develop.

Deputy Costello was correct that we need to be very careful about the issue of bio-fuels. There is a clash between, and a debate on, bio-fuels and food production. The Deputy made the point that there is a discussion about the extraordinary situation of rainforests, which are part of attenuating carbon emissions and which hold the carbons, being destroyed to produce soy which goes to feeding cattle that are transported half way around the world and end up on plates in Europe. That issue must be looked at.

The point Deputy Costello missed in his contribution, in particular on the pronouncements yesterday by the Minster for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, was that bio-fuels by their nature will cut our carbon emissions problems. Again, to go back to my time in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and when we were rapidly developing as an economy, we had issues in regard to very large amounts of carbon emissions, for example, from the building industry, other industrial activity and even transport. The downturn has had the effect of dampening that.

The key point which will inform the discussions after Copenhagen, because it is generally agreed that a final solution will not be agreed there, is that there will have to be equity and, to go back to Deputy Creighton's point, Europe cannot carry the full burden. The United States, the other developed countries, Brazil and the rapidly growing economies must carry their burden too. That will be the key issue which will have to be decided. In my experience after Kyoto, that is exactly the kind of trading that went on internally in Europe, that is, to decide the individual burdens or the tonnages to be carried by each member state.

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

I agree with the point Deputy Costello made in regard to stimulus packages. It is ironic that we are defending the stimulus packages introduced in other member states when we have not seen any stimulation of our own economy. Perhaps that is a debate for another day.

I refer to a point I made earlier about the extension of the deadline from 2013 to 2014, which has been confirmed. I would like some assurance from the Minister of State - perhaps he has discussed it with the Taoiseach - on the likely impact of this on the forthcoming budget. I know it is not directly related to the recent EU Council meeting but we have some latitude to go slightly beyond that. Perhaps the Minister of State will address that point, namely, my fear that this may be used as an opportunity by the Government to get out of commitments which have already been made to deliver significant savings in the December budget.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I noted very carefully Deputy Creighton's original contribution. I agree with the general tenor of her point. We face two types of problems. There is a cyclical element in our current economic problems and there are the structural problems in our economy, in particular in our public finances, which must be addressed.

I hope the steadfastness Deputy Creighton has demonstrated and advocated to Government will be reflected on all sides of this House when we come to the budget because the reality is - I think the Deputy has very honestly recognised this - that there are tough bullets to be bitten. Whether there is an additional year, and the impact that will have, is not the issue. As the Deputy said, the European Union has been very supportive. She made a contribution many times during the recent referendum debate and I again compliment her and Deputies Costello and Timmins on their roles in the referendum debate. The reality is that the solutions to these problems lie in this House and we must make decisions.

Deputy Costello made the point, which I did not address, about stimulus packages which Deputy Creighton picked up. There is not a homogeneous one size fits all solution across the European Union. The economic structures in each of the 27 member states are radically different. Ireland has one of the most open economies in the world. Stimulus packages by their nature tend to leak. If one creates a stimulus package for the automobile industry in Ireland, it would give some relief to people who have suffered very badly but the benefit would leak.

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

We do not have an automobile industry.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am illustrating the point the Deputy made. We must be very careful because the propensity to say, "We will do that too", must be broken. We must resolve our problems on our own, in particular the structural problems in our public finances. There is no point stretching that over a long period because if we do not take action, we will end up in the situation in which we found ourselves in the late 1980s when we had a per capita debt which was higher than that Sudan or Ethiopia and when every penny which came in under PAYE tax had to go to serve that debt. That would be a betrayal of all that has been achieved in recent years and of the future generation.

We must solve all those problems. The Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance have stated our determination to deal with them, and not because it is the easy thing to do politically - God only knows it is not as there is no popularity in cutting. However, the reality is that we must take the scalpel, although we must be careful how we wield it.

I hope Deputy Creighton will be able to enthuse all those who sit behind her on the backbenches who sometimes reflect quite contrary views to her way of thinking because to my mind her way of thinking is the right way.

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

The Taoiseach said the ratification process has moved on with President Klaus signing the treaty. The treaty will enter into force on 1 December. That is a new and earlier date than expected. What is proposed? Are any celebrations proposed? Will another summit meeting be held on that occasion or some other recognition of the event?

I have a question about an issue which Deputy Creighton and I have already raised, that of Oireachtas reform. What is Government policy for dealing with the new powers conferred by the Lisbon treaty on the Parliaments of member states? This is a substantial area and was highlighted by the Joint Committee on European Affairs, the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and the special sub-committee on the way forward.

I refer to the regionalisation of the European Union which seems to be taking place. President Sarkozy's French Presidency of the EU established the Mediterranean region and the Baltic region has been established under the Swedish Presidency. Are we to expect that under the Irish Presidency in 2013 or so, the Atlantic region will be established?

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As a result of our referendum one thing is certain and that is we are not going to see the establishment of a eurosceptic north-eastern European region. Deputy Costello asked about commemorative events next month. To my knowledge there are no special ceremonies proposed. A December European Council meeting will be held as usual and as the Taoiseach mentioned, there will be a special Council meeting next week at which the high posts that must be filled will be discussed.

The former Deputy and Taoiseach, John Bruton, was mentioned in the House. I regard John Bruton as a very good friend and we worked closely together on the convention on the future of Europe. He has many talents that could be brought to the role in question. The most significant factor is whether the role is to be chairman or chief. In my view, having been at the convention and at all the IGCs, intergovernmental conferences, the role was always intended to be that of a chairman. It was intended to be a co-ordinating role. This is not to say it was to be stilted or narrow in scope as it is a very important role. It must provide continuity and energise the Union, to make sure the agenda is followed and to ensure that progress is made by the Union.

There is also an external representation review. However, I never saw the role of President as being European President. This was one of the great myths spouted during the two referenda in this country. I wish John Bruton well. The success or otherwise of his potential candidacy will very much depend on the support he gets from within the EPP family because that is where the first decisions will be made. I do not wish to intrude but I am sure Deputy Kenny has made appropriate representations. John Bruton is held in high regard within that group. To return to the point made by Deputy Costello about the next European Council, the nature of these posts is that they will be filled in a way that should perhaps be more open than it is. They will be filled by the Presidency taking a series of soundings and coming back to the various exponents of various candidates and attempting in that way to reach a consensus.

On the issue of regionalisation of the Union, it is not regionalisation but rather a recognition of the specific regions in the neighbourhood policies of the European Union member state. These need specific attention. This time last year, we saw how critical it was to have a good policy towards the east, when Bulgaria and Romania had the gas cut off because of the dispute between Russia and the Ukraine and the resulting detrimental impact. The Mediterranean region initiative was launched with some celebration by the French Presidency. They were very colourful ceremonies. This was a very sensible recognition of the specific issues within the Mediterranean basin, not least for example, illegal immigration. Malta is in a dreadful state and Cyprus and Italy are handling a significant burden in this regard so there needs to be a specific policy for that area. On the issue of the Baltic region, the Baltic Sea is very heavily polluted, not because of effluent discharged from Europe but rather effluent discharged from Russia over a long period.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I invite the Minister of State to conclude so that he will have a further five minutes in which to make a statement.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree that both Houses of the Oireachtas have a new mandate to involve themselves in European affairs. The Houses should come forward with solutions. I do not agree that the solutions should necessarily require the expenditure or further resources as the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission has excellent staff who are capable of carrying the extra burden.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have invited the Minister of State to make a five-minute statement.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Acting Chairman is kindness personified.

Following on the Taoiseach's statement, a number of issues were touched on by Deputy Costello. Where Afghanistan and Pakistan are concerned, there has been a number of significant developments since the European Council, including the conclusion of the presidential election process. We are all aware of that. Now that the process has been completed, it is essential that President Karzai establish a credible and competent Government that will promote national unity without delay. The new Government must swiftly develop a comprehensive agenda on the challenges facing Afghanistan, especially the challenges of good governance, the fight against corruption and the issue of security.

The European Union is ready to help. At the European Council we endorsed a paper prepared by the Commission and Council Secretariat, entitled Strengthening EU Action in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which had been agreed by Foreign Ministers at the General Affairs and External Relations Council, GAERC, earlier in the week. This paper will form the basis of the EU position at the international conference which has been called for once the new Afghan Government takes up office.

While not on the formal agenda for the European Council, member states took the opportunity to discuss Iran during the formal dinner. Based on those discussions, a declaration on Iran was annexed to the Presidency conclusions, in which the EU called for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear question, set out the EU's grave concerns regarding Iran's persistent failure to meet its international obligations and urged Iran to co-operate with the IAEA, as well as addressing the human rights situation in the country and the situation of the British Embassy staff and of Ms Clotilde Reiss, whose futures remain uncertain.

The EU welcomed the opening of the dialogue with Iran in Geneva on 1 October but is anxious to see that engagement translate into practical actions on the key international concerns. The EU collectively, as well as the IAEA, the United States, Britain, France and Russia, have all called on Iran to respond positively and promptly on the uranium enrichment offer which has been on the table since the Geneva meeting of 1 October. It is necessary that delivery be a reality in that area.

A delegation of IAEA inspectors was invited to visit Iran's recently-revealed second uranium enrichment plant at Fordo, near Qom on 25 October, but it is noted that the data gathered has yet to be analysed. Nobody was happy at the fact that a second plant had been found or admitted to. A response on the enrichment proposal is still awaited from Iran and a date has yet to be set for the follow-up meeting on the Geneva dialogue, which was meant to have taken place at the end of October or by early November. Reports have also emerged recently that the IAEA has uncovered evidence of Iran's testing of an advanced nuclear warhead design, a troubling revelation which adds real urgency to the engagement process.

In considering Europe's role as a global actor, it is important to recall that the European Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. The EU has a global reach with more than 130 Commission delegations and offices. It has launched more than 20 overseas ESDP missions and has become the largest donor of development and humanitarian assistance in the world. As the report on the implementation of the European security strategy made clear last year, in order to ensure our security we must become, "more strategic in our thinking, and more effective and visible around the world". An important element in improving the EU's global effectiveness is allocating the EU's resources - people, structures, funding - in such a way as to match the EU's strategic foreign policy interests and priorities. The implementation of the Lisbon treaty and the new phase in the structural development of the European Union's foreign policy capability offers a unique opportunity to do this.

I refer to some of the specific issues raised by Deputies. Undoubtedly, the October council meeting was a watershed. It has prepared the European Union well for the global negotiations at the December Copenhagen conference. It is disappointing that it looks as if the conference will not reach specific final conclusions. The meeting also maintained the Union's attention to the economic and financial situation, addressing the need for co-ordinated action to generate new sources of growth and seeking thorough preparation of EU participation in future G20 meetings. In addition, the council meeting opened the way to completing the ratification process of the treaty and the date for it to come into force will be 1 December.

It has been said in media comment that the conclusions on climate change are insubstantial and have simply covered up internal EU disagreement on how to share the burden. On the contrary, I maintain that the climate change conclusions show the EU in a strong, committed and credible position going into the Copenhagen conference. Deputy Costello referred to paragraphs 4 to 25 in this regard. The readiness to move to a 30% reduction in emission levels from the 1990 level is clearly set out. It should be recalled this is a negotiation. We expect other developed countries to commit themselves in a comparable way and that developing countries contribute according to their capabilities.

A first step in grappling with challenges of this kind is to quantify the burden. The Council endorsed the estimate of €100 billion per annum by 2020 to mitigate and adapt to climate change. A substantial part - up to one half of the amount - may come from public finance but not all of it. The European Union has signalled its readiness to take on its fair share of this, connected to its recognition that a deal on financing will be central to the Copenhagen outcome.

The burden must be shared, internationally and internally and the key is that it should be based on equity. To answer Deputy Costello's question, the relevant quotation refers to emission levels and GDP, with a considerable weight on emission levels. How this will impact within the EU and between member states will be the subject of further work. Thus, it is not possible to be precise at this stage.

I refer to Ireland's contribution to these costs. Calculations have yet to be made and it would be misleading to suggest we have reached that level of precision because we have not. As the Taoiseach has said, this is a global threat of long-term implications and Ireland will take on its fair share of the effort but no more than that. Others have stressed that funding should be additional and not come from development aid. The European Council touched on this, emphasising that the effort should not undermine the fight against poverty and progress toward the millennium development goals. Mary Robinson made the same point in a speech last Friday. At the same time a certain part, although small as a proportion of overall development aid, could well be devoted to tasks and technology transfer that assist in reducing the effects of climate change. Technology transfer to some of the developing countries could result in a win-win situation for everyone.

Questions on so-called innovative financing have been mentioned on several occasions in the European Council outcome. This was raised by several delegations, recalling the Tobin tax idea of some years ago, a tax on international financial transactions. While we harbour some doubts about the feasibility of ensuring that such a tax could work and how it could be truly applied on a global basis, we await the examination by the Commission of the issue.

Problems in the milk sector are being addressed, not least through the release of €280 million in funding. The Council has sought a continuing response and the high level group set up by the Commission will be important in this regard.

The European Council also considered institutional issues related to the Lisbon treaty, as the Taoiseach has stated. The Council agreed to arrangements and satisfactorily resolved issues relating to the only outstanding ratification, that of the Czech Republic. Following the decision of the Czech Constitutional Court and the subsequent signature by President Klaus, the formalities of the ratification are moving ahead. My counterpart informed me it was his intention to carry the treaty by jet as fast as possible to Rome. It will be the final instrument of ratification deposited.

The European Council considered a progress report on work in preparation for entry into force of the Lisbon treaty. The European Council will formally become an EU institution. Institutional changes will apply and rules of procedure for the European Council are being prepared to respond to this. The European Council did not discuss appointments to the new high level posts, as the Taoiseach mentioned, but they will be discussed now and they would have been the subject of conversations in Berlin on Monday.

Deputies will be aware that the Taoiseach has welcomed the initiative of John Bruton which I, too, welcome. Mr. Bruton has expressed an interest and has completed his role with distinction.

It has been suggested that the appointment will depend on whether members states seek a chairman to manage the affairs of the Union or a charismatic chief. I believe it will lean towards the former. It is something of an oversimplification to say that is the sole issue, but it is an issue. We expect the EU Presidency will consult members of the European Council in the days ahead. The European Council will also appoint the new high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, as the Taoiseach mentioned. This will be a major innovation of the Lisbon treaty and it is important to find a candidate who will fulfil the role.

I refer to the role of the Oireachtas and the treaty has given a new mandate in this regard. The Union's member state parliaments will play a very significant role in the so-called yellow card, red card system in regard to subsidiarity. The administrative arrangements for this system are being put in place in liaison with the Department of Foreign Affairs which will co-ordinate with other Departments. There are broader issues regarding the role of the Oireachtas in respect of EU business. The report of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union includes a series of recommendations in this regard. Together we should resolve the role.

Some Deputies referred to the recent referendum on Lisbon and the lessons from the overall experience. Deputy Timmins stated that he hoped there would be no further referendums in his lifetime. I say amen to that and if there is one lesson from our two referenda, it is the significance, importance and vital nature of communicating Europe better to the citizens.

The October council was an occasion of substantial progress and a tribute to the preparations of the Swedish Presidency. The Swedish Presidency has done an extraordinary job and I refer especially to the work of my Swedish counterpart, Cecilia Malmström, in this regard. The EU is now well prepared to play its part at next month's Copenhagen conference on climate change. The European Union's focus on the economic and financial situation has been sustained, especially on the need for co-ordinated action to generate new sources of growth.

Perhaps above all, the October European Council overcame the final obstacle to the completion of the Lisbon treaty process, a process that has continued for too long. The European Union now stands on the threshold of a new phase in which it will be equipped with the instruments to respond more effectively to the global challenges. I refer back to the remarks of Deputy Timmins and we can now get away from the navel-gazing that went on for the best part of a decade and begin to look to the future and resolve the issues that really count for the citizens of Europe. The people have emphatically endorsed this new departure for the EU and the people of Europe look to the European Union to tackle the great issues of our day. Once again, Ireland has been tried and found not wanting.