I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and he is accompanied by his officials from his Department. They are all very welcome. I thank them for taking the time to join us today.

As members know, we will assume the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. The purpose of today's meeting is to discuss the priorities of the Irish Presidency and to allow members of the committee to engage with the Minister of State on issues of concern. The committee has had several of its own hearings on the Presidency, as members will know and probably the officials will know as well. Planning for the Presidency has been considered by us. We will produce a report on the key issues raised in the coming weeks.

Obviously this is the beginning of the end of this work. The Presidency also has a parliamentary dimension with seven meetings, including two COSAC meetings that will be the responsibility of this committee. The first one is a chairpersons' meeting, which will happen next month on 12 and 13 July, and a plenary session which will take place on 6 to 8 December.

Sula leanfaimid ar aghaidh, tá sé de dhualgas orm na rialacha agus na treoracha seo a leanas a leagan faoina mbráid. Tá an rogha ag comhaltaí freastal ar an gcruinniú go fisiciúil sa seomra coiste. Níl aon duine ar líne ar aon nós. Cuirim ar aird na bhfinnéithe go bhfuil, de bhua Bhunreacht na hÉireann agus reachtaíochta araon, finnéithe faoi chosaint ag lánphribhléid maidir leis an bhfianaise a thugann siad don chomhchoiste, fad is atá siad lonnaithe laistigh de phurláin Thithe an Oireachtais agus an fhianaise á tabhairt acu. Is fíric é nach féidir le finnéithe brath ar an gcosaint sin agus fianaise á tabhairt acu ó lasmuigh den Pharlaimint agus lasmuigh de phurláin Thithe an Oireachtais. Molaim d'fhinnéithe a bheith cúramach agus fianaise á tabhairt acu. Má ordaím dóibh éirí as fianaise a thabhairt i leith ní áirithe, ba chóir dóibh déanamh amhlaidh láithreach. Is dóigh liom go bhfuil na rialacha go léir ar eolas ag an Aire Stáit ar aon nós.

I gceann cúpla nóiméad, beidh orm dul go dtí an Dáil. Má tá mé as láthair nuair a chríochnaíonn an tAire Stáit a ráiteas, cuirfidh mé an Teachta Butterly sa Chathaoir. Is that agreed? Agreed. I will step out in a moment and I ask Deputy Butterly to take the Chair.

I thank the Cathaoirleach. There is interpretation. I think that the committee has my script in English and I will read the script in Irish.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach agus le baill an choiste as cuireadh a thabhairt dom anseo inniu chun labhairt libh go léir ar thairseach ár nUachtaránachta ar Chomhairle an Aontais Eorpaigh, a thosóidh i gceann seachtaine, ar éigean.

Tá gach gné den phleanáil oibríochtúil don Uachtaránacht forbartha go maith agus leanfaidh obair dhian sna laethanta agus sna huaireanta deiridh chun a chinntiú go mbeimid réidh don chlár de thart ar 270 cruinniú in Éirinn a thosóidh ón 1 Iúil. Beidh na himeachtaí seo ar siúl ar fud na tíre chun tacú le tosaíochtaí beartais Uachtaránacht na hÉireann a chur i gcrích. Beidh siad ina ndeis thábhachtach freisin chun Éire a chur i láthair do thart ar 30,000 toscaire ó gach cearn den Eoraip a thaistealóidh chuig cruinnithe le linn na sé mhí atá romhainn.

Ba mhaith linn a bheith inár n-óstaigh mhaithe, chun fáilte thraidisiúnta chroíúil Éireannach a chur roimh ár gcomhpháirtithe ar fud an Aontais Eorpaigh. Tá obair oibríochtúil shuntasach déanta ar fud an Rialtais chun seo a chinntiú, faoi stiúir na Roinne Gnóthaí Eachtracha agus Trádála, i gcomhar le gach Roinn Rialtais, le hOifig na nOibreacha Poiblí agus leis An nGarda Síochána.

Is cur chuige mór, comhtháite agus uile-rialtais é seo ar scála gan fasach agus táim muiníneach go gclaochlóidh an phleanáil a rinneadh go dtí seo ina cur i gcrích oibríochtúil éifeachtach.

Seoladh ár dtosaíochtaí agus ár gclár beartais don Uachtaránacht níos luaithe an mhí seo, an tseachtain seo caite. Tabharfaimid clár oibre uaillmhianach chun cinn atá dírithe ar thrí phríomhcholún théamacha: iomaíochas, luachanna agus slándáil. Oibreoimid freisin ar thosaíochtaí a chuimseoidh na trí cholún théamacha, lena n-áirítear tacaíocht leanúnach an Aontais Eorpaigh don Úcráin agus comhaontú a lorg ar bhuiséad an Aontais, an creat airgeadais ilbhliantúil, CAI, don tréimhse ó 2028 go 2034. Mar Aire Stáit ar a bhfuil freagracht as gnóthaí Eorpacha, beidh mé i mo chathaoirleach ar an gComhairle Gnóthaí Ginearálta don chéad sé mhí eile, le cúig chruinniú fhoirmiúla sa Bhruiséil agus i Lucsamburg chomh maith le cruinniú a bheidh á óstáil anseo i mBaile Átha Cliath i Meán Fómhair. Le linn ár nUachtaránachta, leanfaidh an Chomhairle Gnóthaí Ginearálta ag tabhairt obair thábhachtach chun cinn ar an gcreat airgeadais ilbhliantúil, iomaíochas, an treochlár Eoraip Amháin, Margadh Amháin, méadú an Aontais Eorpaigh, an smacht reachta, athléimneacht dhaonlathach agus caidreamh an Aontais Eorpaigh leis an Ríocht Aontaithe. Beidh simpliú ar chlár oibre gach cruinniú den chomhairle agam leis. Déanfaidh mé tagairt ghearr do gach ceann de na réimsí beartais seo.

Maidir le hiomaíochas, glacann Éire leis an Uachtaránacht ag tráth lárnach d’iomaíochas an Aontais Eorpaigh. Ní mór dúinn gníomhú go práinneach chun iomaíochas agus táirgiúlacht na hEorpa a fheabhsú. Is rudaí iad cuid mhaith de na tograí seo a bhfuilimid in Éirinn á moladh le blianta beaga anuas. Tacaímid go hiomlán leis an ngá atá le práinn agus aghaidh á thabhairt againn ar ár gceisteanna iomaíochais. Maidir le simpliú rialacha agus rialacháin an Aontais Eorpaigh, tá an treoir ó cheannairí an Aontais Eorpaigh soiléir: ní mór dúinn móiminteam agus uaillmhian leanúnach a fheiceáil, an t-ualach rialála do ghnólachtaí, go háirithe gnólachtaí beaga agus meánmhéide, a laghdú, agus ard-uaillmhian á coinneáil againn faoi chaighdeáin chomhshaoil agus eile. Tá fonn orm go mbeidh ról lárnach ag an gComhairle Gnóthaí Ginearálta i maoirseacht ar dhul chun cinn an chláir oibre shimpliúcháin sa Chomhairle agus clár straitéiseach a sholáthar chun an sruth oibre tábhachtach seo a chur chun tosaigh.

Trínár bhfócas ar luachanna, cothóimid bunús fíor-riachtanach ár nAontais agus leagfaimid béim ar thábhacht ról domhanda an Aontais Eorpaigh. Tacaíonn Éire go láidir le méadú an Aontais Eorpaigh, arb é an beartas is fearr san Aontas Eorpach é chun slándáil, rathúnas agus cobhsaíocht ár Mór-Roinne a chinntiú. Is eol dúinn go díreach an tionchar claochlaitheach a bhíonn ag méadú an Aontais Eorpaigh ar shochaí agus ar gheilleagar na hÉireann agus creidimid go bhfuil na deiseanna céanna tuillte ag gach tír Eorpach. Tá fúinn iarrthóireacht gach tír gur iarrthóir nó iarrthóir ionchasach í a chur chun cinn ar an gcoinníoll go gcuirfidh sí i bhfeidhm na hathchóirithe is gá. Go háirithe, beidh fúinn iarrthóireacht na gceithre thír cheannródaíocha a chur chun tosaigh: Montainéagró, an Albáin, an Úcráin agus an Mholdóiv. Is iad an daonlathas, an smacht reachta agus meas ar chearta an duine bunluachanna ár nAontais, a chumhdaítear in Airteagal 2 den Chonradh ar an Aontas Eorpach. Le linn ár nUachtaránachta, beidh Éire ina habhcóide láidir do na croíluachanna seo, ag obair le comhpháirtithe agus institiúidí araon chun an smacht reachta a chur chun cinn agus a dhearbhú.

I réimse na slándála, tá a fhios againn nach féidir le haon tír atá ag gníomhú ina haonar aghaidh a thabhairt ar iomlán na ndúshlán slándála atá ann agus atá ag teacht chun cinn. Cruthaíonn tírdhreach geopolaitiúil atá ag dul in olcas agus éabhlóid bagairtí nua dúshláin shuntasacha don Eoraip. Táimid tiomanta clár oibre slándála agus cosanta an Aontais Eorpaigh a neartú le linn ár nUachtaránachta, nuair a chuirfear straitéis slándála Eorpach nua chun cinn.

Maidir leis an gcreat airgeadais ilbhliantúil, is eol dúinn go léir anseo inniu an tionchar claochlaitheach a bhíonn ag buiséad an AE ar ár ndaoine agus ar ár sochaí, ónár bpobail talmhaíochta agus tuaithe, atá faoi bhláth, go dtí ár ndeiseanna iomadúla rochtana ar thaighde agus staidéar den scoth thar lear, an bonneagar a mbraithimid air agus an tiomantas leanúnach don tsíocháin agus don athmhuintearas ar ár n-oileán. Níl sé furasta teacht ar chomhaontú faoin gcreat airgeadais ilbhliantúil. Braithfidh sé ar go leor tosca nach bhfuil smacht againn orthu sa deireadh, lena n-áirítear toil chomhréitigh na mballstát. Mar sin féin, ní chuirfidh sé seo bac ar Uachtaránacht na hÉireann gach a bhfuil ar ár gcumas a dhéanamh chun an toradh a bhaint amach.

Maidir le caidreamh leis an Ríocht Aontaithe, ba chomóradh deich mbliana reifreann an Bhreatimeachta inné. Cé gur thugamar urraim iomlán do vóta mhuintir na Breataine, bhí aiféala orainn i gcónaí gur roghnaigh an Ríocht Aontaithe imeacht as an Aontas Eorpach. Mar is eol dúinn, bhí tionchar mór ag torthaí an vóta sin ar Éirinn, ar Thuaisceart Éireann agus ar an gcaidreamh Thuaidh-Theas. Ní raibh na deich mbliana seo caite gan dúshláin maidir le dul i ngleic le hiarmhairtí an Bhreatimeachta. Mar sin féin, deich mbliana ina dhiaidh sin, tá áthas orm go bhfuil an caidreamh idir an tAontas Eorpach agus an Ríocht Aontaithe anois i spás dearfach cuiditheach. Bhíomar ag ullmhú don chéad chruinniú mullaigh eile ar an 22 Iúil, ach tá sé seo curtha ar ceal anois toisc go mbeidh athrú Príomh-Aire ann. Beidh dualgas ar Uachtaránacht na hÉireann ullmhú don chruinniú mullaigh seo, nuair a tharlaíonn sé.

De réir mar a leanaimid leis na hullmhúcháin deiridh dár nUachtaránacht ar an AE, táimid tiomanta go hiomlán do luachanna na hÉireann a chur chun cinn agus ár leasanna eacnamaíocha agus taidhleoireachta a chosaint. Is deis iontach í seo d'Éirinn. Táim ag tnúth leis na sé mhí atá romhainn. Cuirim fáilte roimh cheisteanna agus roimh thuairimí na mball.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. Tá cúpla questions agam. The Minister of State can take them whatever way he likes. I have four questions and four or five minutes. The Minister of State has talked about the transformational impact of EU enlargement. He mentions the impact on Irish society and the Irish economy. What is the Irish Government's view of the impact enlargement could have on EU foreign policy? As the Minister of State will know, it can be quite difficult to come to a unified policy position between the 27 current members, before we add another four members or more. Does he have any concerns that this will hinder the EU's ability to come to consensus on matters in our sphere of influence?

The Minister of State has said that Ireland is committed to advancing the EU security and defence agenda. Will he go into some detail on what that actually means? His opening statements seems to suggest that it is based on the new European security strategy, which has not been published yet. Are we championing something without knowing what it might be?

With regard to Moldova's candidacy to join the EU, does the Irish Government have a view on the growing sentiment in Moldova in favour of unifying with Romania? Have there been any discussions with the Moldovan Government as we aim to advance the country's candidacy?

The last time the Minister of State was here, we were talking about plans for the EU Presidency. He said that there would be meetings across the State in that regard.

On the challenges, if there is a meeting in Donegal, will the members be travelling through the North? Are there challenges in that regard? I ask this because, particularly with regard to tourism, we are selling the island of Ireland on an all-Ireland basis. Will they be travelling North? Will they be paying £20 sterling for the electronic travel authorisation? I am told the EU is talking about that for British travellers. It is an opportunity to highlight one of the challenges that we are facing on the island of Ireland, which is a small island. We see it all the time. If anyone goes on the Belfast train, they will see Americans and everyone else, and probably half of them are not aware that they cannot travel North without this authorisation. It needs to be eliminated, particularly for those of us on this island. It is an opportunity, as well as a challenge. Perhaps they are not going to travel North but it would make sense if they are trying to get from A to B. It is a challenge facing tourism. I would be interested to hear the Minister of State's response.

Regarding the impact on foreign policy, that would not be my primary consideration here. The reality of foreign policy is that we have a unanimity requirement, and Ireland is not looking to change that. If we look back to the various referendums on Lisbon and Nice, one of the big issues was that we would keep the veto. We either want to have unanimity, which means we have a veto on foreign policy, or we are worried about other countries coming in and using the veto. It is not something that we have considered.

My point is that as the EU gets bigger and bigger, it is going to make it more and more difficult.

I am not advocating for a change, nor is the Government. Sinn Féin might be but we are not.

No. The point I am making is that it is going to make it more difficult, the larger we get.

There are some issues where we cannot get unanimity but we have achieved a huge amount with unanimity. It is unity in diversity, and diversity in unity. We are all different, and we have different perspectives. Yes, there are some big examples where we cannot get unanimity but unanimity has been achieved for a lot. There are some accession countries that have said this is not their main priority in joining the European Union but, as I understand it, there is no way of achieving that in practice. Some countries have said this but just to be clear, others have said the opposite, and have said that this is very important to them. It is not something that I am particularly concerned about. We all have that opportunity but it is rarely used in practice. Even if we look at a very common current issue where we cannot get unity, which is Israel, a lot of countries would agree with our position on that but if we are honest, a lot of countries do not agree with it, more than one or two. That is just the way it is. There are different views around the table, and we have to try our best to come to a common position.

The EU security strategy will be worked on during our Presidency and we will be helping to drive that forward. That will not be finished until after our Presidency. At the end of the day, the European Union is not a defence alliance, so we do not have spending targets on defence, and for any loan facilities that the EU has, for example, the SAFE loans, that is borrowing by member states. What the member states are looking for is solidarity and for European Union member states to work more closely together. It is their prerogative as individual countries to do their own thing on defence, and they just want some assistance from the European Union. The European Union is not really a player in the way that NATO is on defence issues. It is about co-operation. It is about added value. NATO has its own role. We are not part of NATO, and nobody is looking for us to join NATO. Questions could be asked as to where the EU can add value to the needs and requirements of member states.

With regard to Moldova and Romania, it is not a question that I have ever engaged in. I certainly heard some of the discussion on it but it is not something that we do. We are committed to the accession of Moldova to the European Union. I compliment the Moldovan Government on the work it is doing. It has been subject to a huge amount of interference from outside the country, particularly from Russia, and it is very difficult to overcome that.

I also pay tribute to the Irish Moldovan community, a number of whom have moved back to Moldova, to get elected, be in the Parliament and be Ministers in its Government because they are so passionate about the country and want it to succeed. They really see Ireland as an example they can follow. In fact, I believe one of them was from Deputy Crowe’s constituency and is now in the Government there. I am also aware of somebody from Dublin West. They have given up businesses here in Ireland - these are a pretty successful business people here in Ireland - to go back to Moldova to try to get it in shape for EU membership. I pay tribute to them.

On the electronic travel authorisation in the North of Ireland, it is an issue, and it is one that I have personally raised at various points in recent years. I have not been dealing with it in recent months, frankly, but there have been some improvements to what was originally proposed. We do not have a ministerial meeting in Donegal. There are other events there but not at the ministerial level. Ministers probably would not travel through the North of Ireland but officials can, subject to the rules.

Subject to the 20 quid.

Officials can certainly travel through the North of Ireland. During the run-up to the Presidency, I had an event at Queen’s University, where I was part of the public consultation on the Presidency. I am conscious, as we all are, that, unfortunately, the North of Ireland is not part of the European Union through no fault of its own. However, I was keen to hear the views of people in the North of Ireland on the Presidency. At the end of the day, a huge number of Irish and European citizens live in the North of Ireland, and it is highly connected to the European Union through various initiatives, including the protocol. I hope to be in the North of Ireland again during the Presidency. Unfortunately, we cannot have any official meetings in the North.

I thank the Minister for his presence and for his ongoing engagement with the committee. I also acknowledge his officials.

I have been reflecting on the Minister of State's April statement. He rightly identified the next multi-annual financial framework as a key flagship dossier. I am trying to fast-forward to 31 December in terms of what progress the Minister of State sees us making on that flagship dossier. Regarding our priorities, I am glad to see competitiveness at the heart of that. I sincerely hope that this reaches down to small, local, family-owned businesses and SMEs. For me, they are the real heroes at the local level. To fast-forward to 31 December, where would the Minister of State like to see some successes and progress, particularly as it applies to our key priorities, in particular the MFF?

I have a specific question. I read a report on Politico that the President of the European Parliament, Ms Metsola, who was here yesterday, has referred the child sexual abuse material, CSAM, legislation, and is asking the Council to override a decision taken by the Parliament at the end of March. It is quite an unprecedented step for the President of the Parliament to go to the Council, asking the Council's member states to approve legislation that has been voted down. This concerns the screening of social media platforms for child sexual abuse material. Is it something that the President has raised directly with the Irish Presidency yet? Did she raise it during her visit yesterday?

On the MFF, I thank the Cypriot Presidency for the work it has been doing on this. It is very difficult. I also thank my own officials, some of whom are here today. There are an incredible number of really talented people from the Department of foreign affairs, the Department of Finance, the Department of agriculture, the Department of higher education and others who are really in the basements in Brussels, working through all of this. It is very challenging.

It is going to be a big job for the Irish Presidency to bring these negotiations forward. It is fair to say, and people will see from the newspaper reports, that the budget discussions - the public discussions, at least - are framed by what others call the cohesion countries versus the frugal countries. I do not use these terms, although others do, and “versus” might be the wrong word, but there are definitely too broad positions. I was very careful not to align Ireland with either, or certainly not with the frugals.

We have always been pragmatic about it. We get a lot out of the European Union - our entire economy is based on membership. We do better than almost every other country out of the EU. It was also very important in the run-up to the Presidency not to be part of any group, so that we could be the honest broker. There are certainly challenges ahead. From a national point of view, one point of progress that we have achieved so far is that we have got the PEACEPLUS programme written into the MFF at a much earlier point than we expected. That is achieved although there is no number beside it yet. That is welcome and is very important for the Border counties and the North of Ireland as well, which benefits from that funding. It was a big priority of ours.

What happens now with the MFF is that we continue the negotiations after the Cyprus Presidency. They have put figures forward that member states have all said they are not happy with. That is to be expected; at least it moves the debate on. Our permanent representative in Brussels, Aingeal O'Donoghue, will meet her colleagues at the end of July on this, preparing the ground for one-on-one meetings that I will have with my counterparts on this in September, I expect. Then we have to work on a further proposal that we can give to the member states and then send up to the leaders. The leaders then have to negotiate. I am hoping they can do that in a meeting maybe in November and certainly in December. That is the ambition but again, it is not only in our hands, it is their hands as well. The multi-annual financial framework is a leaders' negotiation and has to get the consent of the European Parliament. There is also a lot of legislation that has to be implemented after the leaders agree that the European Parliament is a co-legislator on. I will be keeping very close to the Parliament in the coming months, as will all relevant Ministers, to make sure we engage with them as fully as possible. That is really important. It is important that we finish this before the end of the year because certain sectors of society, whether it is agriculture, the research community or projects in Northern Ireland, will be waiting on funding. We cannot afford to let this go by. It will take a long time to legislate for the multi-annual financial framework. That is the challenge that I see. We really need to finish it at the end of this year, or we might be in some difficulty actually putting it into place from 1 January 2028, because of the way the legislative process works. I would like to see the negotiation finish.

I will warn the committee members that when we publish a negotiating box, I would say nobody is going to be happy with it, whether it is in Europe or even here. We have to remember that we are the honest broker. We are trying to bring agreement around the table and we have to do that from the centre of the table. I reassure the committee that our priorities have been outlined very clearly, about a year ago. There are other member states that share those priorities. We are certainly not the only one pushing for these. The PEACEPLUS programme was already being brought in. When it gets to the leader negotiation at the leader level it is a little bit different, because that is chaired by the President of the European Council. We will have to see how that plays out. The legislation that was mentioned is with the Minister, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan. My understanding is that he agrees. We are examining the request made by President Metsola but the principle of the legislation is something that we support very strongly.

Deputy Scanlon is next. I remind members that the limit is five minutes. I will have to impose it in this meeting. Otherwise we will run out of time.

I thank the Minister of State for his presentation. Looking at the work that is going to be carried out over the next six months, there is to be 270 meetings. That is a phenomenal task, with 30,000 delegates. I wish the Minister of State and his officials the very best of luck in dealing with that. I am sure everything will go perfectly. I welcome that the Minister of State mentioned the simplification of EU rules to cut red tape, particularly for small and medium enterprises. That would be welcomed, quite honestly. He also mentioned enlargement and advance of potential candidate countries such as Montenegro and Albania and particularly Ukraine and Moldova. I welcome and recognise that. The Minister of State mentioned that PEACEPLUS has been included in the new proposals going forward. On the Common Agricultural Policy, will Ireland in its Presidency have any influence on that? We all know the benefit and how important it is to Ireland.

The 270 meetings and 30,000 delegates in Ireland is not including organisations outside of the government system that are coming to Ireland as well. It is actually quite difficult to keep track of them. There are lots of business groups coming over. I have met some of them. There are also some groups of non-governmental organisations, international charities and international advocacy bodies on various topics coming over. I met a man in the street today and he told me there was a lady whom he met last week who is on some environmental campaign, and they are bringing a delegation over. It is quite hard to keep track of all of that. Actually when we say 30,000, these are officially recognised government delegates. There is a huge industry outside of that coming to Ireland from all points of view. Yesterday we saw an example of that, where the leaders of the European Parliament groups were brought to Croke Park and given a taste of our national sports. It is an opportunity for us to do that. These meetings will take place all over Ireland. These are mostly informal get-togethers, where they discuss topics on an informal basis and try to drive things forward. In my own meeting, for example, we will be talking about the multi-annual financial framework, which includes the CAP, on an informal basis. It is also important to remember that there are many meetings, I think the number would be in the thousands, in Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg that will take place, with civil servants and Ministers conducting those. They will be the real engine rooms of getting laws changed, negotiating the budget and the Common Agricultural Policy. That is a huge amount of work and it is where we can show off that we can do a really good job.

The simplification agenda is about cutting red tape and is a bit part of my agenda. The Cyprus Presidency has done a lot on this. The European Commission is publishing a number of proposals today, I think, which I have not seen yet, on tax and energy products. We will examine them. We will have to drive them forward, some among the member states and some on behalf of the member states at the European Parliament as the negotiations progress. One of them today is tax, it is just member states and that is unanimity. Enlargement again is a big priority for us. We have seen Ireland do very well from joining the European Union so we feel it is right to extend that to others. I had the Croatian Minister in today. She is very interested in the countries of the former Yugoslavia who are looking to join. The Montenegrin European affairs minister is coming in tomorrow, the Albanian foreign minister was in a couple of weeks ago. President Zelenskyy was in before Christmas, President Sandu of Moldova - they have all been here because they know we are very strongly supportive of enlargement. Of course, enlargement can only happen when they do the work that makes them ready to become an EU member state. We are very clear about that. We do think we can make good progress. This month alone, we have managed to officially open the negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova. That was hanging over us for a long time. That happened really because of the change in the Hungarian Government. I want to thank the new Hungarian Government for facilitating that. We have to drive it forward even further. It is possible that Montenegro could finish their negotiations at the end of our term but we will see. They have a lot of work to do. It is something that we would be very excited about. Iceland is holding a referendum during our Presidency as well about whether to restart negotiations. Funnily enough, negotiations were suspended by them during our last Presidency when they just stopped. That is a matter for them and we will not get involved in their decision but certainly Iceland would be a very similar country with similar values.

The funding for the Common Agricultural Policy is an integral part of the multi-annual financial framework. We have set out our priorities in relation to it. We - it is on my desk before it gets to the Taoiseach - are responsible for negotiating the overall budget of the multi-annual financial framework, including the Common Agricultural Policy. It is challenging, if I just observe the different views around the table, views that countries like Ireland have put forward. We are in Presidency mode now and do not say too much about that. There are member states that do not believe this should be a priority and feel we need to move on to more modern priorities. That is the reality of European politics at the moment. We have to navigate that reality and try to bring consensus among all the member states on the Common Agricultural Policy.

I thank the Minister for being with us and for his comprehensive briefing on the priorities, one week out from the start of our Presidency. There is a feeling here and across the EU of large expectation for Ireland's Presidency to deliver and progress a lot of matters, particularly in relation to the MFF, which the Minister of State spoke about. Previously, he commented that Ireland and the EU might not be overly happy with our proposed negotiation box. The negotiation box that came from Cyprus proposed a 2% reduction to the initial Commission proposal. What are we looking at? There was a lot of disappointment with the Cypriot 2% reduction. As Deputy Scanlon mentioned, as I am sure other speakers did, the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, budget is important to us. I take the Minister of State's point that it is difficult to preserve and we have already seen a big reduction to it. However, there is an ongoing debate about resources. Net contributors do not want to pay more. That is the only way to get more money in. France is looking at new EU-wide corporation taxes. From an Irish point of view, how can we broker this deal as an honest broker and negotiate it without exposing our corporate tax rates to EU centralisation? How can we progress that?

On the EU-UK summit, will the Minister of State speak a bit more about what Ireland's red line is, what we want to achieve from it and what we hope the outcomes will be? Will we be looking at finally easing border checks for Irish businesses in light of the EU-UK summit for the sake of easing business relations? What would we consider a positive or productive result from it to be?

The Minister of State also spoke about simplification for SMEs and the implementation of the AI Act and the Digital Markets Act. How will we negotiate the implementation of this regulation-heavy legislation to achieve simplification for businesses? The digital decade report was published by the Commission on Friday. Businesses are not embracing digitisation as much as they should. With the way the EU is competing in AI, as we will never be China or America, is it time we look at picking areas to specialise within AI, such as health, for instance?

Again on the multi-annual financial framework, MFF, it is important to know the dynamics. We sit around a table like this with 27 seats, plus those of the Commission, some officials and sometimes MEPs when we are talking about the MFF. A group of member states thinks the budget is too big, even still, and another group of member states thinks it is not big enough. A group of member states thinks we should not be prioritising CAP, but should be looking at more modern priorities, as they call them. It is our job to bridge the gap and it is hard to do so when a group of countries says it does not want to pay more and in some cases, countries want to pay substantially less into the budget and other countries say more is needed because cohesion is essential to the Single Market and agriculture is essential to food supply and food security in Europe. How do we bridge the gap? It is challenging.

We could look at own resources, and we are doing so. It is probably fair to say the core proposal does not have widespread support among the member states. I am observing what people are saying, rather than starting the negotiation. Looking at own resources, for example EU taxes, one is the new parcels tax that is coming in on 1 July. There are various reasons for it, but it is a funding mechanism for the EU. There are proposals on own resources, such as gambling and cryptocurrency. The European Commission is doing a technical analysis of the various proposals. They are all challenging and the problem is that they never seem to raise much money. No one really wants them to be a replacement for what national Governments are already collecting. No one will agree to an EU income tax or anything like that. That will not happen. They bring in a small amount of money, but not a huge amount and there is always a member state with a strong reason to oppose a given own resource measure, if we are honest about it. I will not go through them all here. We often think we are the only one that has issues. Every member state has an issue with something. I sometimes feel in debates that people think Ireland has a particular position, but every country has particular positions on things. I would love if there were a pot of own resources that would solve all these problems.

The other possibility is to borrow, which is suggested by some, but certain member states are totally and utterly opposed to borrowing. That is just a political fact we have to accept.

The EU-UK summit has now been postponed because of the change of Government. Our position is that we want it to be held as soon as possible and that it is in everyone's interest. There are three main objectives. The first is to get agreement on border checks on animal and plant products. If we can, it will have huge benefits for us, Britain and the EU. The second is to get agreement on the emissions trading system, ETS, and the third is the youth experience scheme, which does not really affect Ireland because we have free movement of people to Britain, but it is the third leg of the stool. The way these summits work is that they are institutional. President Costa and President von der Leyen will represent the European Union. Ireland will not be at the summit - that is not how it works - but we will do the preparation for the summit. That will be done at the Committee of the Permanent Representatives of the European Union, COREPER. It will be overseen. President Costa and President von der Leyen do not go to these summits without having agreement from the member states about what the lines are. We are the ones that will prepare that and prepare the ground for it and we are excited about doing so. Our role in the Presidency is to take into account what the member states want.

On digital and AI, the MFF is an important part of it, in making sure we can be competitive in Europe. An AI summit will be hosted during our Presidency. I pay particular tribute to the Minister of State, Deputy Niamh Smyth, whose idea this is. It is no one else's. She put it forward even when there was some scepticism about holding it. It looks like it will be an incredibly important global event during our Presidency. A huge number of senior leaders from the technology industry and senior political figures will be at it to talk about the opportunities and risks of AI. It places this country in a big position. That will be a huge event.

On my side, we have simplification packages in the digital and artificial intelligence areas. We will move forward what remains to be moved forward in the simplification and those files.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, and all his officials for all the work they have been doing to get us to this point, seven days out from the Presidency. I know the work that will follow in the next months and after. There is no doubt that the MFF is hugely important - it needs to be pro-enterprise and pro-agriculture - as are the competitiveness and simplification agendas.

I will focus on values, under which the accession countries come. It is an exciting space to be in. Quite rightly, the Minister of State pointed out that the criteria are important, as regards the different milestones the accession countries have to meet to become members. I will particularly ask about the human rights and democracy elements of our values. There is no doubt we have to remain committed to strengthening European human rights architecture, including the long-standing goal of seeing the EU accede to the European Convention on Human Rights.

When Ireland held the Presidency of the Council of Europe, the Minister of State had responsibility for European affairs. He would have seen a lot of the debate in Strasbourg around this, and, indeed, it was reflected in the core summit we had in terms of the aspirations. That is something which needs to happen in order to reinforce accountability and coherence. I would be interested in the Minister of State's comments in that regard.

In relation to action that is required at EU level with regard to the EU-Israel Association Agreement, the value of imports and exports between the EU and Israel is about €45 billion per year. There is no doubt that sanctioning part or all of that would have a significant impact. In my view, it would have far more of an impact than the occupied territories Bill. The Taoiseach has led on this in the context of conversations with EU leaders. It would be really good if the Minister of State could offer any feedback.

In the context of the EU-UK summit, which will take place on 22 July, the reset of relationships is really important. We are going to be dealing with a new Prime Minister soon, but not before that summit. Does the Minister of State feel that is going to have an impact on relations?

The accession of the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights is something that we support very strongly and that we will work towards. We would like to see it happen. My understanding is that the European Court of Justice has to assess or decide whether it is legally possible for the European Union to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. It is certainly something Ireland supports. I want to pay tribute to the work of all the members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe for the work they do on promoting human rights and the rule of law. That is really important. It is something for which Ireland is known. It is really important that our parliamentarians make that case as part of the parliamentary assembly work there.

On the issue of taking action in relation to Israel, its activities in Gaza and, the illegal settlements that continue to be created, it is absolutely the case that Ireland has not stood by at European level. The Minister, Deputy McEntee, and I and the Taoiseach, in particular, have been very strong on this. More than two years ago, Ireland was the first member state to call for a review of Israel's compliance with the human rights obligations in Article 2 of the association agreement. We have repeatedly called for this. It is clear, and this was found, that Israel is in breach of those human rights obligations. We feel that this must carry consequences. In April, the Minister co-signed a letter with the foreign ministers of Spain and Slovenia to the High Representative, Kaja Kallas, seeking a discussion and for suspension of the association agreement. Since then, the Government of Slovenia has changed. One of its first actions was to reset relations with Israel. It is a new government and it has certainly changed position diametrically on these issues in the past few weeks.

At the Foreign Affairs Council and at the Trade Council on 22 May, the Minister reiterated Ireland's previous calls that the EU-Israel Association Agreement be suspended. The Commission has to come up with proposals to do facilitate that. The Taoiseach would like proposals to emerge in respect of both this matter and trade with illegal settlements, and member states could then make a decision. We feel that action in this regard has not been forthcoming. There have been various excuses offered. Some member states do not want to do it. It is very hard to stand by and look at what is happening. We feel the European Union has leverage and that it has to use it. Our view is that collective action at European level would be far preferable to individual action, because we are at least guaranteed legalities. We are guaranteed that we would be doing it in accordance with EU law. It is never clear when people start taking individual action on trade issues at national level. We even saw with the occupied territories Bill that it took an international judgment for the legal position to change because trade is a national competence. We believe that collective action at European level will have a greater impact on influencing Israel, and the Government continues to actively pursue this. The Taoiseach was extremely vocal about this at the summit of the European Council last week, and we will continue to be so. I was as well in my preparations for the summits relating to the General Affairs Council.

I thank the Minister of State and the officials for coming to meet us today. I appreciate the Minister of State's realism about the MFF. I do not think anyone is going to be happy either. We cannot get blood from a stone. I do not think political parties of all hues and independents are straight enough with people like that, so that was appreciated.

On a more fundamental issue, and this is going back to someone's question from earlier, there is one way we can devolve competencies and streamline the European institutions and that is to change treaties. For instance, the EU constitution, which became the Treaty of Lisbon, is over 20 years old. It began being drafted when social media was not a thing, when the US was a reliable trading partner and when people in Ireland could still smoke in pubs. Does the Minister of State think that, in terms of their functions, the institutions of the EU, in the context of a rapidly changing world, need to be updated in order that the Union can react to international challenges that we face? I know this is a politically unpalatable question, but I am trying to see whether the Minister of State thinks it is necessary.

On the question of whether the treaties need to be changed and updated, it is a difficult question for lots of member states, but particularly for us. If the treaties were to change, we would almost certainly need a referendum in this country. Referendums are difficult enough. I would also question at times whether we need to. As I said earlier, we have achieved a lot with unanimity. There are lots of things we can get done. In some ways, we have to accept that the EU is an international multilateral organisation and that it is just not going to get agreement on everything. We have brought in qualified majority voting for lots of issues. The truth is that even with that, the vast majority of proposals are well-negotiated and well-prepared and they go through on a compromise. A huge amount of compromise happens at EU level, and there are certain things we have not been able to do. However, the idea that if we were to change the treaties to make action easier and that would suit us is not necessarily the case either and individual member states would all think similarly. In general, it would not be our preference to have treaty change. The European Commission is to come with proposals on reform of the European Union, particularly in the context of enlargement. We have been waiting on it for quite some time and we will see what that brings.

I am delighted the Minister of State is here. He was very much to the fore in trying to explain to people the benefits of the Mercosur agreement. He did a good and fair job. No matter what, and after everything we have just been through, it is going to be implemented. I do not see it going any other way. I made a point the first week after all these guys were jumping up and down about it. I think the Minister of State was here on that occasion. I was in the Chair and I pointed out that it is going to be the same scenario and that the agreement is going to be rolled out anyway. We will take what happens after the court challenge, which is happening in respect of quite a number of parts of the agreement. The part I would like to the Minister of State to get to on our behalf lies in the very centre of it. He is dealing with European Ministers and leaders. He is around the table and he gets a sense of where we are going.

We pushed hard for and achieved a nitrates agreement for our farmers because that was what they had to get. I would have thought there was a sort of quid pro quo in relation to Mercosur but, of course, it did not end up being that way. I am curious about whether we are losing credibility at the table in respect of other, bigger issues. People are talking about the CAP here. The CAP is going to be on the horizon.

Is it too simple to say that some of these larger countries that are less agriculture-orientated are waiting to rebalance things? That is the nicest way I could put it, particularly in relation to defence, possibly, and AI as we are listening to, and all these things that are priorities of expense at present. It would be great to hear the Minister of State respond to this off the cuff. A couple of honest, frank answers might be no harm for a lot of these guys who are beating drums about wanting to get everything and asking what is the return on this. I am curious about the Minister of State's thoughts on it.

On the Mercosur agreement, obviously the Government took a position. While it recognised the trade benefits, it felt that the protections for farmers were not strong enough. As the Senator said, I subsequently spoke on a personal basis about the need to talk more openly about trade in general. It has been really good, including for farmers. We produce way too much food in this country to consume ourselves, so we have to export it, and we do very well when we export it. The Mercosur agreement has been in force since 1 May, so it is already in operation. My officials tell me they do not have any trade figures just yet. I would not be surprised if trade goes up, but let us see. There are protections there for farmers if prices somehow affect them.

Those protections were implemented after the Department did work on this and the Minister of State listened to what was being said around the table.

I pay tribute to the Taoiseach again. He played a key role, even though both Ireland and France voted against it. With President Macron, the Taoiseach played a key role in getting supports for beef farmers into the Mercosur agreement. If there is an impact on price because of the operation of the treaty, there are mechanisms there to provide protection. Notwithstanding that, the Government took a different decision. We voted against it and so did France, but it is still in force because of qualified majority voting. That is an example of a vote that took place where there was division and members did not agree, but we will work with it.

The Senator mentioned the nitrates regime. The Government, separately, did huge work to negotiate the derogation. I know the Taoiseach had conversations at a senior level because of the importance of this issue to the farming industry in Ireland. I pay tribute to him for his work on behalf of farmers on this. On the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, the Taoiseach, the Minister, Deputy Heydon, and I will be working hard to get as much as possible from that to support farmers. That is challenging in the context of the divisions, or differences of opinion, that are discussed on the multi-annual financial framework.

I would not worry too much about our credibility. There was a lot of talk about us losing credibility in Brussels. As I said earlier, every member state has some issue on which it has take a national position. There is always something. We are very co-operative around the European table, but there are certain issues where we take a national position. This year, the best known case of a country taking a national position was when Belgium did so on the seizure of Russian assets. A lot of people are giving out about Belgium, but I took the Belgians at their word when they said they had an issue of national importance with that. We had no objection to them using the veto because, quite frankly, we might at some time need to protect a serious national issue. Every country is in that position from time to time. People said Belgium is a trading country. They have said to me that they were surprised that we voted against the Mercosur agreement. However, I also think they know the circumstances of the decision.

On trade, trade deals with India, Indonesia and Australia have been agreed. These are huge trading opportunities. I have no doubt somebody will object to some of those when they come in. People seem to object to trade all the time. India is very important to Ireland, because the UK is there looking for agreements as well. The drinks industry has an importance in India too and it is very important that we have the benefit of this trade agreement. We could also have agreements with the Philippines, Malaysia and the United Arab Emirates.

Those have massive populations.

As a country on our own, we would not get these trade agreements. India would not be coming over to a small country like Ireland to negotiate a trade agreement. The reality is that when a group of countries such as the European Union, which is super-wealthy in global terms and of which we are part, negotiates with India it gets huge benefits that those countries simply would not get on their own. That the European Union has the full competence on trade is a serious advantage to a country like Ireland. We must remember that we benefit from this.

We need to continue to make the case for trade. In some quarters, "trade" has become a dirty word. There are some people who advocate for de-growth, that is, cutting economic growth. That can be done but people will not have the lifestyle they want. They will not have the good life. We will not be able to commit to Government priorities. I am a very strong advocate for trade, as I think we all should be. This is how we fund ourselves and create jobs. I have said to business groups that they need to be more active in this space.

It is really useful for us to be part of the EU system. The Minister, Deputy McEntee, will chair the Foreign Affairs Council during the Presidency, and we will be in a position to drive forward that agenda with the European Union. It is an agenda that suits us very well.

I welcome the Minister of State and his officials. The last time the Minister of State was with us he mentioned one of the domestic events he was organising. I was chatting to an ambassador this week whose country is paired with a particular county. They visited the county for a day and were very impressed with the way of doing things and the initiative itself. Perhaps the Minister of State could give some feedback to the officials for organising that.

This is a piece that intrigues me because we have all had different groups, countries, representatives, organisations. They have all come before the Department, parliamentarians and different committees saying what they need the Irish Presidency to prioritise. What is the filtering process? How is that managed administratively?

My impression is that defence is becoming key and very acute. How do we successfully manage our commitment to our military neutrality? How do we manage that particular debate in the European context?

In relation to the priorities, I am taken by the fact that child protection on social media seems to be a central piece of work that we might be considering over the next six months.

On 31 December, what does the Minister of State hope he will be able to look back on and say we set out to achieve this and, in achieving it, we made a substantial mark on the Presidency?

Child safety online is a big priority for us. The Taoiseach spoke well about the President of the European Parliament, Ms Metsola, and he is very much in tune with this issue. It is more an issue for the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport than it is for our end. We prioritise things by dividing them out by Department. An expert group is reporting back to the Commission in July and the Commission will have proposals in September. We will work through them at that point.

Filtering priorities is really challenging. We have a long list of priorities and we want to enact as many of them as possible. Our officials are ready, willing and able to do as much as they can. An example of an area where we now have deadlines is what is called the One Europe, One Market roadmap. This is essentially the reform of the Single Market. There are 42 deadlines in total, with 28 to be concluded during our Presidency. One of them is the simplification agenda, which is actually a load of files that are included in one line of the roadmap. We have this agenda, which is only on the competitiveness side, and it has been agreed at institutional level. The leaders of the European Council, the President of the European Parliament and the Commission have agreed this roadmap and they have given us all these deadlines. We are very excited about it and we agree with it all, basically. It is on us now to implement it but we cannot deliver it on our own. We will have to shepherd the member states to get agreement among them.

Then we will have to represent the member states and negotiate some of this with the European Parliament. In some cases, the European Commission has not even published its proposals in these areas and yet we are expected to finish this by the end of the year. I can tell the committee we will put every effort in. Our entire system, from the Taoiseach down, is determined to do as much of this as possible but there are other actors in this space that we depend on and we rely on. I have said to member states that some red lines will need to be undrawn if we are to reach these targets, but if we reach these targets, if we achieve the deadlines and if we pass the various pieces of legislation that are here, one of which, for example, is the "EU Inc." proposal of the Commissioner, Mr. McGrath, it will be transformative for the Single Market. That is an example of a long list of priorities, that, really, has been given to us by the leaders of the European Union and the Commission, and that we have to somehow work through and we are very excited about it. There are lots of other items and just to be clear, they are all driven by individual Ministers in their own area. Yesterday, we had a plenary meeting with the European Parliament leaders. Ministers certainly have an excellent handle on the files that they have that they want to get through and, obviously, they have officials working on their behalf in Brussels pushing the negotiations forward.

On military neutrality, to put it bluntly, no one really cares that we are neutral. They are quite happy that we are neutral. Sometimes the impression is given out that everybody is putting us under pressure to abandon our neutrality. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are quite happy that we are neutral. It is a matter for us. Every time there is a European document, European Council conclusions or anything related to defence, it always says this is without prejudice to the specific character of the defence policy of certain member states, and what they mean is the neutrality of Ireland, Malta, Cyprus and Austria. There is no pressure whatsoever in terms of our neutrality - none whatsoever.

What member states want is solidarity and an understanding of the threats they face and the pressures they are under. For member states that are part of NATO, that is the fundamental basis of their defence policy. When you go to a country such as Poland, the NATO flag is just as prominent as the Polish flag and the European Union flag. For them, it is existential. I would say the same for the Baltic countries. Committee members will have seen Finland and Sweden join NATO in recent years, but there was no pressure on Finland and Sweden to join NATO. What happened in those countries was that public opinion shifted overnight when Russia invaded Ukraine. There is no pressure on our neutrality.

We do not have defence spending targets, as the NATO member states have, but we are showing understanding and solidarity with other member states and showing where can the European Union add value to member states' individual defence policies, not to replicate what NATO does. There is lots of space there for cyber and maritime safety as well. In terms of financial support, that has been up to now mainly through the Security Action for Europe, SAFE, loan instruments, which is a loan programme where essentially member states effectively get the borrowing rate that the European Union would have, but they owe the money. We are not paying anything into it, but it allows member states to add to their defence capabilities at a cheaper rate and gives them opportunities to co-operate.

I should say that we in Ireland strongly believe in EU-NATO co-operation. The Irish Government, totally outside of the EU system, co-operates strongly with NATO through our membership of Partnership for Peace and through peacekeeping with the Kosovo Force, KFOR, in Kosovo. I am aware that some members of the defence committee visited there recently. We certainly want to support the continuation of that co-operation.

It is important to show solidarity with other member states because some of them are under unbelievable threats. That is the simple reality of the situation. There are people who deny all this and say that there are not threats. There is an invasion of Ukraine and lots of countries in that region feel very vulnerable. It is incumbent on us to show that solidarity.

We have been invaded. The HSE was attacked by Russia.

Exactly.

I thank the Minister of State and call Deputy Hayes.

I thank the Minister of State for taking questions and being so transparent about the Presidency of the European Union. Genuinely, I wish the Minister of State the best for it. It is a really important moment for Ireland and a really important moment for the European Union as well.

I will focus a lot of my comments on the multi-annual financial framework, MMF. The Minister of State is in a very tricky situation, as he has outlined. He has Chancellor Merz and the Russian Federation on one side saying they want to see reductions in the overall package of the MFF. There is a shift. The Minister of State highlighted the question of the frugal countries and the cohesion countries, for lack of a better term, I suppose, but there is a shift even within those cohesion countries of the proportions, where spending priorities should lie and what those should be. We had the Danish ambassador in here a year or two ago when the Danish Presidency was in full swing or coming to its close. The Danish ambassador said to us that Denmark does not need the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, as much as we do, its farmers are not as reliant on CAP as our farmers are and it is not a priority for them as it might be for us. That creates some difficulty for us, when the Minister of State talks about these.

I got a letter from the IFA a few weeks ago. They said that for Ireland, there is a potential cut of 24% in the next CAP - a direct hit to the economic viability of farms in Ireland. That is really problematic, if we are looking at those kinds of figures. I absolutely accept, as the chair of a group, that the Minister of State has to be that honest broker and he has to find consensus, but there are obviously Irish interests as well at play. I would like to hear from the Minister of State on how he will further the MFF priorities that he would like to see in terms of Irish interests, specifically for CAP. What are those priorities?

Second, there are lots of ways of tackling productivity and competitiveness. Some of the ways in that programme are very good but I would be quite concerned about how we are getting public finance for things such as research, energy, housing and industrial development. I would love to hear from the Minister of State on how he will approach that, beyond the capital markets union and all the private sector investment stuff he will be doing.

Lastly, on EU-US relations, there has been a decided shift in the American Administration's tone with respect to European institutions and European member states. That is regrettable. In that context of strengthening democracy and standing up for human rights, I would love to hear from the Minister of State on how he will challenge some of that tone and whether he will stand up for Europe.

On the MFF and the CAP, we are not there yet in the negotiations. We have to get through these negotiations and see where we land. Of course, farm organisations will advocate strongly.

In terms of Ireland's national position, we put that forward last summer. The first thing I did was send it out to all the other member states. I met the Commission about it and I met our MEPs as well. I may have come to this committee with the MFF priorities as well. That was a Government decision. We took that decision and published that document fairly early because we knew the Presidency was coming up. We would have gone into honest-broker mode and it was important to have the priorities out there. They have been set out. What we are looking for is a funded CAP. Let us see where the negotiations bring us.

Deputy Hayes is correct to highlight different views, and Denmark, as an example. Indeed, their Minister of European affairs at the time would have said similar to me. In fact, in the new Government, they do not have a Minister for agriculture. They are just in a different space to us on these issues and they are a very significant net contributor. We will have to deal with the different specificities in different countries. It is up to us to work through this.

In terms of public finance for research and competitiveness, there are huge opportunities in the MFF for Ireland here as well. We have always done well out of the Horizon programme. It is really important to us. Jobs have been created and innovation has happened because of it. There will be other opportunities as well under competitiveness, under Connecting Europe and under military mobility. There are big opportunities there for Ireland. We have to make sure we have some public finance for that but it will not all be financed by the public. We hope that if there is European Union investment, that can activate private investment. That is where some of the initiatives around the Single Market and the savings and investments union can help in making sure that some of that money stays in Europe, but we need to give opportunities for investment.

On EU-US relations, I always stand up for the European Union, maybe too much sometimes because I really believe in it as a peace project and as an economic engine. I hate when I hear people talking about turning it into a militarised organisation when nothing could be further from the truth.

It has been uniquely successful in keeping the peace and in improving the economies and the daily lives of people. It is why so many countries want to join the organisation. However, we also support very strong relations with the US. We have done that over many decades for various reasons, one of which is that we have 40 million people in the US who claim to be Irish. There are lots of business connections and interests on both sides. The US has been a big investor in Ireland and we welcome that.

The Minister of State has to admit that there is potential for conflicts on those two priorities. If the US Administration is consistently trying to undermine EU institutions and is taking a tone that is quite combative with EU institutions, it is incumbent upon the EU Presidency to challenge that. That would be my view.

I am not including the Deputy in this but I hear more combative talk against the EU from the Opposition in the Dáil Chamber than I do from the US Administration. I am not including the Deputy or his party in that but it is a fact. US Administrations will come and go. We have to deal with the one that is there. We have our own job to do. The fundamental job of any government is to protect its own people and territory and we will do that. The Deputy saw the Taoiseach in the White House very diplomatically support strong relations with the US but also very much stand up for Ireland, the EU and European leaders, including, famously, the UK's Prime Minister at the time. Ireland will continue to do that. We are very conscious that we have the Presidency of the Council of Ministers. We are not the only ones around that table who want to ensure good relations with the US. If we look at the Baltic states, for example, we can see that they have very close defence relationships with the US and that is very important to them. If we look at Italy, notwithstanding the recent disagreement between Prime Minister Meloni and President Trump, we can see that it is another country that wants very strong relations with the US, so we are not alone in that. We can be proud Europeans, stand up for the EU and put our people's interests first but we do that in a global context where we believe the interconnectedness with other like-minded countries and groups of countries benefits us all. We have an agreement now with the US on tariffs. We would rather they had not happened at the start but they did and we have got certainty there. We are also working with many other countries to ensure that we can get similar benefits from trade and interconnectedness for our people.

I agree with what the Minister of State said about being militarily non-aligned. It has been my experience as well that our colleagues do not have a difficulty with it but they do have a difficulty with the fact that there is a contradiction in taking billions of euro in corporate tax income from tech companies and then not having the resources to defend the lines that supply them with information, particularly from North America.

I also wanted to ask the Minister about the MFF, specifically the external action service and the budget for overseas development aid, ODA, at European level. Given that Ireland is one of only two EU countries that has actually increased overseas development aid, how are we approaching that, particularly in the context of those who wish to reduce the European budget? Are we going to or can we defend the position of ODA within the MMF?

I am also hopeful that we will progress things with regard to enlargement. As a country, we have a very particular connection with enlargement, particularly in 2004 when we had the Presidency during the last very big enlargement programme that took place, with ten central and eastern European countries. Does the Minister of State have anything to say about advancing that enlargement agenda, particularly in view of the progress that has been made by countries like Montenegro and Albania and the possibility of Iceland joining them?

My final question is about a logistical issue. I know for those delegates coming here, of whom there are over 30,000, there will be some kind of facility in Dublin Airport to speed their process through things like passport control. Will that apply equally to parliamentarians coming to our meetings and the parliamentary dimension?

Regarding what we have done in Dublin Airport, the first informal meeting is actually in Ballina. I do not know what happens in Knock but Knock will be only too delighted to have them. We have taken the old terminal in Dublin Airport for high-level guests. That is designed not only to facilitate their arrival in what is a very old and beautiful building but also to ensure the minimum of disruption for other people who are using the airport during the summer. I will come back to the Cathaoirleach about parliamentarians - not Irish parliamentarians. We are going to still-----

Visiting parliamentarians.

To be clear because this is the first question we will be asked by the media, Irish parliamentarians will not be getting any special treatment at Dublin Airport unless maybe they are travelling with the President of Ireland or something like that, but we will not be getting that special treatment. We do not want that and have not looked for it but for visiting parliamentarians, I would have no difficulty with allowing them through the old terminal that we are doing up for this but I will have to come back to the Cathaoirleach on that, particularly for the visiting Conference of Parliamentary Committees for Union Affairs, COSAC, delegation with the chairpersons of European affairs committees. When I look at the list of who is in COSAC, I can see that there are former prime ministers and probably future prime ministers. It is a high-level visit so we will certainly examine that and come back to the Cathaoirleach on that specific issue.

On tech and our contributions, yes we do get a lot of corporation tax because of successful Government policies over many years but that is now resulting in us becoming significant net contributors to the EU budget so I think there is an element of solidarity because we have not been ones to align ourselves with frugal countries. We certainly want value for money from the EU budget but that is a significant contribution coming from Ireland to the European Union and its member states.

We have been very strong in supporting the maintenance of ODA. It is a tool for the European Union. Within the context of the negotiations, it is something that we put forward. Our position has been that the next budget must maintain our leadership in providing development co-operation and assistance in a long-term manner. This is important for the EU's credibility. The proposal is that 90% of spending under the Global Europe instrument will be ODA in line with the EU's treaty obligations on poverty eradication. We are working with our partners to ensure dedicated funding for humanitarian assistance. This is something that is very important to us and the Irish Government has, on its own, led the way.

Enlargement of the European Union is very high on our agenda. As I said, all of the candidate countries for enlargement have met us with some regularity, including the Montenegrins, who have been over and back. Montenegro's Europe minister and chief negotiator will meet tomorrow. The Taoiseach has had serious engagement with lots of their leaders, including the Montenegrin President and Prime Minister, the Prime Minister of Serbia and others. We certainly will have an ambitious agenda on enlargement and we make no bones about that.

I thank the Minister of State for giving us over 90 minutes at this stage. I also thank his officials for their time and expertise. We all wish them the very best of luck with the work ahead. I have told people about just how much preparation has gone into this and how ready we are, so we look forward to some really good deliverables at the end of the Presidency.