asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the topics covered in his discussions with President Mitterrand in Dublin on 20 October 1989; if any agreement was reached on joint measures to promote the proposed EC social charter; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

President Mitterrand's visit here was part of a series of working visits by him to EC capitals for discussions on current issues under the French EC Presidency, with particular reference to the meeting in December of the European Council in Strasbourg.

It is not the practice to reveal details of discussions which take place at working visits of this kind. I can, however, tell the House that we did discuss economic and monetary union and convergence, the social charter and other developments, both internally and externally, affecting or likely to affect the Community during the French and Irish Presidencies.

In relation specifically to the social charter, would the Taoiseach not agree that the Government are attempting to speak out of both sides of their mouths in saying that they support the idea of a social charter while, at the same time, seeking to ensure that the charter does not have any teeth, that it will not have any mandatory role in the various member states to ensure basic minimum rights for workers in the European Commuity?

That is not so. Like many other countries in the Community we favour a social dimension to economic and monetary union and we totally subscribe to the principle of a social charter, but there are individual aspects of the social charter on which we have reservations and about which we want to be satisfied. As my colleague the Minister for Labour said, we have no doubt that, as other countries, we will be able to reconcile our difficulties and find solutions to the problems that the draft charter might present for us. As President Mitterrand said, the position of the individual member states at this time is one which has emerged over a long period of growth and development and evolution of practices and institutes. There can be no question of putting the 12 member states into a strait-jacket in this regard but solutions have to be found in the case of individual member states who have built up different practices over the years. For instance, in our case we claim to have a better, more effective and more comprehensive system of free collective bargaining than many of the other member states and we want that taken into account when decisions are being taken. It is purely a matter of discussion, negotiation and finding solutions which are compatible with our system, traditions, attitudes and practices.

Will the Taoiseach not agree that there is a fundamental problem with regard to integration of the European Community where economic and monetary integration is obligatory on all states in various ways and will be imposed by various directives and regulations but in the area of the social dimension, of which the social charter is only one aspect, it would seem that Ireland, Britain, Portugal and Spain are seeking not to have a common social charter applied across Europe.

That is not so. We fully subscribe to a common social charter.

Without teeth.

The charter will cover many aspects of the position of workers in the workplace — health, safety, conditions, vocational training and so on. All these things have to be discussed and agreed between us in a significant and important social charter applicable right through Europe.

Arising out of the Taoiseach's substantial reply and having regard to the fact that last Monday for the first time the Government's divisions to their detailed position on the social charter became known to the Irish public, would he not agree that the reason the Government are in principle in favour of the charter, and in detail opposed to it, is due to the internal divisions in the new Coalition Government, on the one hand with the Department of Industry and Commerce and on the other hand the Department of Labour? If that is not the case — and I would invite him to so refute it — perhaps he would indicate how the Minister for Labour, as the incoming President of the Social Affairs Council, will be in a position over the next six months to give effective teeth to the charter, or does he believe it should remain forever simply an aspirational document.

The Deputy obviously has not been listening or taking account of what I said. The position of the Government is absolutely clear. In fact, before the Minister for Labour made any statement last Monday I, in a press interview which took place after President Mitterrand's visit, outlined quite clearly the position of the Government — that we very much favour a social charter and will work towards the achievement and the promulgation of such a social charter. As a small country with an economy which is still in the process of development, we have problems and difficulties with certain areas, as has practically every other member state. The practice of the Community on an occasion like this is to try to meet the difficulties which any particular proposal presents to any member state and in the end arrive at a good working agreement. That is what is going to happen on this occasion. There are no divisions in this Government on the matter. I think the Deputy must be suffering from a thought retrospection process in regard to the Government of which he was a member.

On a point of clarification——

Sorry, I want to bring in some other Deputies who are anxious to speak.

May I ask one point of clarification?

Certainly Deputy. I appeal for brevity and I will be glad to call two other Deputies.

Can I take it from the position enunciated formally by the Taoiseach on the floor of the House that he supports the position of the Federation of Irish Employers in relation to their reservations about the social charter?

I do not even know what they are.

The Taoiseach should.

Deputy John Bruton is offering.

I take my own decisions.

That is not apparent.

Order.

What about the Seanad decision?

Arising from the recent remark of the Taoiseach, may I ask if the full implementation of the social charter will, in his opinion, have any adverse effect on the competitiveness of Europe in international trade and if he has sought quantification of any such effects?

This is a difficult and fairly complex area. From our point of view, the primary social requirement is the provision of employment. We believe — and I think most Deputies in the House would agree — that the provision of an adequate level of sustainable viable employment is the solution to many of our social problems. Therefore, we would have to look carefully at the provisions of the social charter to make sure that they did not inhibit our capacity to create employment.

Will it?

On the other side of that fence, some commentators will point out that some of the member states which have the highest level of employment, at the same time have the most advanced social charters in operation. It is a question that has to be very carefully teased out and a balance found. That is our approach and that is fully understood by all the member states. That is the approach, I think, of most member states.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte.

Has the Taoiseach yet come to any conclusion on the matter?

I want to have finality on this question and proceed to deal with other questions.

I refer specifically to the Taoiseach's reference to free collective bargaining and the different practices in each country. Presumably this is a reference to the rejection by the Minister for Labour of the concept of a legal minimum wage. Would the Taoiseach not accept that the reference he is presumably making is to the joint labour committees which comprise in excess of 40,000 workers, many of whom are caught in the proverty trap? All the studies on poverty show that low pay is as much a factor in poverty in many cases as is unemployment.

Deputy Rabbitte, I did ask for brevity.

I am asking the Taoiseach whether, in the light of the ineffectiveness of the joint labour committees, the Government would consider the necessary establishment of a legal minimum wage, having regard to the fact that the joint labour committees require the consensus and agreement of employers, rates are set very low and enforced very badly and many people are caught in the low pay trap? I would like to hear the Taoiseach's comments on the legal minimum wage and why the Government have apparently decided to rule it out.

This is straying a long way from the original purpose of the question. As I said, we will endeavour to ensure that when the social charter is finally completed it will be in conformity, as much as possible, with our practices, traditions and safeguards. That will be our objective. We want a social charter, but we want one with which we can live. The Deputy may know that in one area there is a legal minimum — in the case of the agricultural worker. It is a complex situation but it is early days yet to say what the final outcome of our discussions and negotiations will be. We are approaching the matter in a co-operative and progressive spirit, one which is based on our wish to have a European Social Charter.

Perhaps Deputy De Rossa will be brief.

For the Taoiseach's information, the published position of the Federation of Irish Employers seems to be similar to that of the published position of the Irish Government. They support the charter in principle but object to having it become a mandatory imposition on member states. Can the Taoiseach clarify if he will, at the end of the discussions and particulary at the summit in Strasbourg, support the implementation of the charter as a mandatory piece of law in all member states, whatever shape it may have——

I think the Deputy has made his point.

——when it is finally negotiated?

The present position is that it is evolving towards a political declaration by the Heads of Governments of member states.