Republican News · Thursday 21 February 2002

Adams demands government u-turn on EU reps

Gerry Adams was this week highly critical of the Dublin government's plan not to nominate a representative of the No campaign to represent the state at the EU Convention - which is made up of representatives from all the member states - and which will begin work on 1 March to consider the next EU Treaty and the constitutional future of the EU.

The Sinn Féin President was addressing the Institute of European Affairs in Dublin on Tuesday, 19 February. The following is an edited version of his text.

"This State has to nominate two members from the Dáil and two alternates," he said. "A number of weeks ago Sinn Féin TD Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin called on the government to ensure that the No side in the Nice referendum campaign is represented. He made the call because we believe that it would be a mockery of the democratic process if the Irish delegation at the Convention consisted only of representatives of the parties who supported the Nice Treaty and lost the referendum. I would be concerned therefore at media reports this weekend, which indicate that the government intend to nominate somebody from the No campaign but only as an alternate rather than a full member. I would call on the government to revisit this decision and ensure that the views of those who voted no to the referendum are fully represented."

Addressing the wider issue of the European project, Adams said: "Sinn Féin believes that there must be real choices for EU citizens about the direction the EU is taking. There is a clear sense of disenchantment and disapproval throughout the member states of the EU about the direction of the union.

"The choice is clear. Do we want to see a partnership of member states proceeding together on the basis of agreement or an EU superstate with its own constitution or indeed any other formulation?

"At the heart of all of these discussions is one central issue - democracy and the need for voters to have their say and for their decision to be respected. That is the basis on which we must proceed."

Unfair Trade

In a wide-tranging speech, Adams also addressed the issue of fair trade. "We cannot talk of the EU in purely selfish and indeed isolationist terms," he said. "Decisions taken at EU level effect not only member states but people throughout the world and in particular the developing world in terms of trade. We in Sinn Féin believe that the Irish people do not want to be part of a European superstate. The people of this island have a special understanding of imperialism and how large states can trample the rights of smaller ones.

"Ireland does not and cannot stand alone. Neither can the European Union. It too has a responsibility to the rest of the world particularly the Third World. In this regard the European Union is long on rhetoric and short on delivery.

"EU policies on trade and development are not consistent. Article 130 of the Amsterdam Treaty obliges the EU to consider development objectives in the design of all policy but what is the practice.

"For example, one EU initiative proposed duty and quota free access for goods from the world's Least Developed Countries (LDCs). It became known as the 'Everything but Arms' initiative, insofar as it promoted the import of everything but weapons from the developing world. However, it ran into stiff resistance from the EU's own well-financed lobbies. As a result, key agricultural goods - sugar, rice and beef - were excluded from the proposal.

"From the 1980s, for the underdeveloped and poor, the demand from the EU and others has been unceasing: open up your economies to (our) goods; cut tariffs and other protectionist measures; cut social spending on health and education.

"And so, during the 1980s, the world's poorest countries duly opened up their markets/ economies - under IMF driven Structural Adjustment Programmes - and waited for the promised boom. It never materialised.

"Equally, the rich economies of the northern hemisphere also reneged on repeated promises to allow free access to their own markets, to goods from the developing world.

"The impact of their failure to do so cannot be overstated. Trade plays a vital role in developing economies - they derive 42 percent of national income from trade.

"The result? Child mortality figures have risen, the numbers living in absolute poverty have risen and gains made in the areas of health and education during the 1960s, have been virtually reversed over the last two decades. Since 1980, Africa's per capita income has dropped by 25 percent.

"The fall in income has been mirrored by a fall in trade: in the last two decades Africa's least developed countries have seen their share of global trade fall from a pitiful 0.6 percent, to a miserable 0.3 percent. The same countries 'command' less than 0.5 percent of global investment.

"Trade barriers cost the developing world an estimated $700 billion every year - which is 14 times what they receive in development aid.

"Had the world's poorest countries been able to maintain their share of world markets at mid-1980s levels, their average per capita incomes today would be US$32 a year higher. Instead, the process has gone into reverse."