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

Question 31: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs if the recently agreed numerical targets in Europe 2020 will be binding; the way that they will be monitored; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30200/10]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The European Council at its meeting in June adopted the European strategy for jobs and growth, Europe 2020. This includes EU headline targets in the five areas of employment, research and development, climate change, education and social inclusion. The targets represent shared objectives covering the action of the member States and the Union. Some, notably those on greenhouse gas emissions, have a basis in EU legislation. The majority are not binding in the regulatory sense, but they constitute a common aim and the combination of monitoring, reporting, scoreboards and peer pressure should contribute to their realisation.

The focus has now shifted to the work which must be undertaken, at both national and EU level, to ensure the strategy is successfully implemented. Essentially this means translating all EU headline targets into national targets. Member states, including Ireland, must now work over the coming months to agree national targets and identify potential bottlenecksI might mention here that we have already exceeded the target of 40% of 30 to 40 year-olds having completed tertiary or equivalent levels of education and our school drop-out rate at 11.3% is close to the set target of 10%.

A series of bilateral dialogues organised by the Presidency and the Commission with each member state has taken place to discuss with member states how they intend to translate these targets and identify national specificities. These meetings enabled member states to point to specific national situations influencing the national target-setting. This work is expected to be completed by member states in their national reform programmes this autumn which will see the strategy's translation into definitive commitments and national targets. Throughout this process, a co-operative approach will be taken between the Commission and the member states to ensure the targets which are set are both attainable and take into account the particular circumstances of each member state.

Both the European Council and the European Commission will play an important role in monitoring the implementation of the strategy. Effective monitoring of the strategy will be key to its successful implementation. The European Commission will monitor annually the situation on the basis of a set of indicators which will be developed to show overall progress towards the objective of a smart, green and inclusive economy delivering high levels of employment, productivity and social cohesion.

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

It is widely acknowledged that the Lisbon strategy, predecessor to Europe 2020, was a disaster in that its targets were not met with no mechanism in place to bring into line those member states which failed to achieve them. The Minister referred to the targets set by Europe 2020, such as an employment rate of 75% which is very ambitious. The target of 3% of GDP for investment in research and development is the same as the one set ten years ago which was not met then. It is difficult to identity what can give us confidence that this 3% target will be met by the Europe 2020 strategy.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

May we have a brief question please, Deputy.

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

The monitoring of the implementation of the Lisbon strategy through the open method of co-ordination was loose. There was no clear way of disciplining or responding to those member states which did not achieve their targets. Will this be different with the Europe 2020 policy? Does the Minister believe the implementation of a fines system is the way to deal with this, particularly considering the already enormous budgetary deficits in most member states?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would not favour financial fines for member states which do not reach their Europe 2020 targets. A different situation, however, pertains to financial governance and membership of the euro. I accept there is a need for measures to ensure compliance in this regard.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is merely aspirational.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The difference between the Europe 2020 and the Lisbon strategies is that the former is more sharply focussed with its narrowing down to five key objectives, namely employment, research and development, climate change, education and social inclusion. Not all of the Lisbon strategy was poor but much of it depended on the adherence to it by member states.

The fact that Ireland has a 46% participation level in tertiary education means that we took certain issues seriously. We worked to enhance our educational performance and achieved such a participation rate through significant investment in third level capacity over the past ten years. One does not get the extra numbers into third level if more places, seats, lecturers and education personnel are not provided.

Deputy Creighton is correct that many member states did not reach 3% of GDP on research and development. Ireland did transform its research and development landscape in the past decade so that it now stands at 1.5% of GDP. In 1997 when I became education Minister the departmental budget for research was nil with no programme for research in third-level institutions, PRTLI, or Science Foundation Ireland. While significant changes have occurred in this area, we must also focus in outcomes and intensity levels in research.

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

I have no doubt as to the achievements of the Minister when he was in the Department of Education and Skills. However, my question was referring to the whole of the European Union, not simply the Irish level of progress.

There is a concern that the Stability and Growth Pact has not been brought into the Europe 2020 strategy, meaning both still operate as parallel systems. Will the Minister agree it might be useful and logical if they were integrated so as to ensure they achieve a greater degree of competitiveness and economic growth but do not diverge on different policy paths?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand and see the merit in the Deputy's argument about integration but I am not sure one could achieve a Europe 2020 strategy if one followed that course of action.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is a neoliberal contradiction.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, the point is that one cannot divorce the obligations of member states under the Stability and Growth Pact and Europe 2020. The strategy tells member states the core areas of economic development on which they should be focussing as a priority. Member states do not want Europe telling them how to develop every single policy area in, say, health or education. Historically, the control of those two areas has been guarded for national parliaments and executives.

I support the idea of identifying five key strategic objectives for Europe and each individual member state. No one can argue with setting targets for employment, research and development, climate change, education and social inclusion, of which the most challenging climate change and energy.