Matt Carthy
Question:54. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if the Government intends to support the reappointment of European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, for a second term. [20781/24]
View answerThursday, 9 May 2024
Questions (54, 119)
Darren O'Rourke
Question:119. Deputy Darren O'Rourke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the position regarding the proposed reappointment of Ursula von der Leyen as President of the European Commission, considering her interventions in respect of Israel's aggression against the people of Palestine. [20813/24]
View answerOral answers (27 contributions)
We know that Ireland has worked with Ursula von der Leyen on a number of issues, particularly Brexit, in which regard she and her Commission have been commended. However, does the Tánaiste accept that, through her actions in respect of what Israel has done, she has not only undermined her own position, but also the credibility of everyone in the EU who ever wants to act as an advocate for peace, justice and international rule? She has never apologised or sought to atone for those actions. Does the Tánaiste accept that those actions have made her position untenable and made any prospect of a second term as Commission President unviable?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 54 and 119 together.
On 7 March at the European People's Party congress in Bucharest, Ursula von der Leyen was officially named her party’s candidate for a second term as President of the European Commission. In her first term, President von der Leyen has been a strong advocate for the protection of Irish interests, particularly throughout the Brexit process. The Sinn Féin Party was strongly supportive of President von der Leyen and her stance in respect of Brexit. She also provided important leadership in the EU and support to Ireland during the Covid-19 pandemic and has provided consistent leadership on the EU's multifaceted response to Russia's aggression in Ukraine.
Ireland is currently conducting extensive consultations, both internally and with our European partners, in order to decide which nominee to support in the European Council. There are still a number of factors that need to be taken into account before support for any one candidate can be announced. The outcome of the European Parliament elections at the beginning of June, for example, is a crucial factor for all member states in determining who to support for the role of President of the next European Commission. Following the elections, we must come together in the European Council and propose a nominee, who must then be approved by the European Parliament.
The Taoiseach underlined Ireland’s position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during his meeting with President von der Leyen on 11 April, including calling upon the Commission to respond to the request made by his predecessor, jointly with Prime Minister Sanchez of Spain, for an urgent review of Israel’s compliance with its human rights obligations under the EU-Israel Association Council. Since the Hamas attack on 7 October, we have worked to turn the EU's position on Gaza around. Along with others, we have been effective in broadening not just the Commission's response. In terms of the humanitarian response from the Commission, Commissioner Lenarcic has been an exceptional Commissioner who does not get acknowledged enough for his work on the Middle East. There is now a broader understanding across the Commission of our perspective and the perspective of others on the issues, including the violation of international humanitarian law that has occurred and the necessity for Israel to act within that law, which, in our view, it is not doing.
Likewise, we have been particularly effective in our support for UNRWA and other UN organisations. When Israel made allegations against a number of UNRWA staff, quite a number of countries immediately pressed the pause button on their aid to Gaza. We did the opposite and actually increased our aid, announcing a €20 million allocation to UNRWA. That was effective. With other EU member states and countries from outside Europe, we then advocated to restore funding to UNRWA. Many countries have acknowledged that, without UNRWA, we simply cannot reconstruct Gaza. The European Commission, including its President, communicated directly to me and to the then Taoiseach, Deputy Varadkar, the Commission's decision to change its perspective on this matter and restore funding to UNRWA following the report from Ms Catherine Colonna, which gave UNRWA a clean bill of health.
Regarding what transpires after the European elections, we will all be in a better position to assess the likely candidates for a number of positions across the European Parliament, the European Council and the European Commission.
This is not a time when we can engage in the usual political bartering for positions. I say this regardless of whether Ursula von der Leyen has been perfectly politically correct in everything else she has done. She has not, by the way. I have acknowledged that there are areas in which Ursula von der Leyen was of substantial assistance to Ireland, but on the humanitarian issue that will globally define the credibility and status of states and international organisations for generations to come, she has severely damaged the credibility of the EU's stated purpose to be a vehicle for peace, justice, human rights and the rule of law. When she stood in Tel Aviv the day after an Israeli minister announced to the world that it was Israel's intention to starve the people of Gaza of food, water, electricity and medical supplies and she said that Europe stood with Israel, she became an unviable voice for Europe. I do not know how the Government, which has been on the right page concerning many aspects of this conflict, has not said that clearly. If Europe is to have a role in international conflict resolution and peacebuilding, Ursula von der Leyen cannot be President of the Commission, as that would negate any prospect of us playing that role at global level.
Ursula von der Leyen damaged the credibility of the EU in her actions and utterances and through her partisan interventions in support of Israel during the onslaught on Gaza. In offering Netanyahu and his regime unconditional and unqualified support, she has effectively provided political cover for the genocidal destruction that is happening.
Ireland needs to take a stand on this. I do not think it is good enough for the Tánaiste to say that elections will be taking place and we will wait and see the outcome of that, with the normal business of negotiation, where we will support them and they will support us. We need to take a stand on this, as does the State, and EU election candidates need to take a stand on this issue.
There are clear rules and procedures governing how a President of the Commission is elected or appointed. They are tied up with the elections and there is a two-stage procedure. First, there is the appointment of the Commission by a qualified majority. The European Council will propose a candidate for President of the Commission but then that candidate has to be elected by a majority vote of the Parliament. The second stage then is the appointment of Commissioners and so forth. That is the reality of it. On whoever comes forward, there has to be a judgement on the broad range of issues which will confront the European Union.
On the humanitarian side, Europe is probably the largest contributor to humanitarian causes across the world, including the Middle East and Palestine and has been consistently so under successive presidents of the Commission. Sinn Féin never acknowledges this for whatever reason. That is why we have worked so hard to maintain both the development funding and the humanitarian funding from the European Union. The US is also actually a very big contributor to the Middle East on the humanitarian side.
Many who speak and who articulate loudly on the political elements are not as strong, at times, on the humanitarian dimension. All of the humanitarian supports which come from the European Union are just taken for granted and never get a mention from anyone in the Opposition. They are just dismissed. We should not underestimate and should have a balanced approach as to the positives.
I agree with the Deputy in that I did not agree with the initial response by the President of the European Commission. Equally, I have to acknowledge that the European Union, both Council and Commission, has probably been, beside the US, the largest provider of humanitarian support to both UN agencies but also to NGOs, to the humanitarian needs of the Palestinians, both in the West Bank and in Gaza, and to UNWRA in Lebanon, in Jordan and across the Middle East.
If it will provide any consolation to the Tánaiste, I will of course acknowledge that Europe has huge expenditure of humanitarian aid. Some states within the EU are much better than others and there is not a universal approach but I also acknowledge that the EU has funded very important projects in Palestine. It has funded schools, hospitals, healthcare centres, youth clubs and women's centres. In all instances it has watched as Israel has gone in and destroyed those very buildings which Europe has paid for. Europe shrugged and did not look for even a cent back from the Israeli regime. It is all right on the one hand if we say that we are actually providing humanitarian aid to a region such as Palestine, but if that humanitarian aid is being negated and completely countered by the actions of a state and that state bears no consequences for that, then I would argue the logic of that position.
If there was a single Commissioner who in any way equivocated on the Russian invasion of Ukraine, never mind giving carte blanche to Vladimir Putin to continue, the Tánaiste would have no difficulty in standing up in this Dáil and saying that person was inappropriate for this job, and he would be right. In this instance, Ursula von der Leyen did huge damage, particularly across the global south, to European efforts to secure international support to pressure Vladimir Putin to stop his illegal invasion of Ukraine. That one issue alone should be enough for us to have the courage and conviction to say that somebody who has undermined the European institutions, and certainly spoke without any authority on our behalf in a way which undermined our efforts at securing peace in the Middle East, should not be considered.
The problem is that what the Tánaiste is saying today is that as Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Green Party MEP candidates go around, no only knows for sure when it comes down to it in July whether they may actually put their lámha suas in support of that person for the position. That is not the way in which to conduct these elections. Every single Irish political party should say categorically that we will not support Ursula von der Leyen for Commission President because she has undermined everything we have set out to achieve in the Middle East peace process.
Regarding the Tánaiste's response, it is deflection to say let us look at this thing in the round and that we are not being fair and are not looking at the humanitarian contribution of the European Union. Ursula von der Leyen is not entirely responsible for the humanitarian contribution of the European Union. What she is responsible for is her own public utterances, which demonstrate clearly on her own behalf, and not on behalf of the people of the European Union, her unconditional and unqualified support for Israel in its actions. I believe the vast majority of Irish people were offended by that and by the public imagery and the articulation of that position. On that basis, with no apology and the consistent stand on that position, she is not fit for the role. I believe we need to take a stand and our MEP candidates need to take a stand. It is not enough to say we need to look at it in the round. We can look at it in the round, and if we look at it in the round, we come to the same conclusion: she is not fit for the role.
Ursula von der Leyen is directly complicit with the genocidal massacre that Israel has committed in Gaza over the past seven months. She greenlit the massacre and she should be unceremoniously sacked. People should state publicly that she should not remain as the President of the EU Commission. They should say publicly, "Ursula von der Leyen; sack her." Say publicly she should be sacked for her complicity with genocide.
Some of us warned the Government about this. When she came to this House in December 2022, most of this House stood and gave her a standing ovation. I was one of the few who did not and challenged her directly at that time about her cosy relationship with Benjamin Netanyahu because she visited Israel only a few months before, stood beside him, and said not a word about his Government's intention to effectively continue the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. The writing was on the wall for her role in encouraging and greenlighting Israel's crimes against the Palestinians. Had we called her out then, we might not be looking at the horror we are facing now.
The Deputy is correct in that the Ceann Comhairle, on behalf of this Parliament, invited President von der Leyen at the time, in acknowledgement of the role of the President of the Commission in respect of Brexit and of resolutely defending Ireland's situation vis-à-vis the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union.
Yes, many parties gave a very warm response, including Sinn Féin and others, to President von der Leyen at the time. We do not underestimate the role of the European Commission and of the European Union more generally, and all of the member states, in supporting Ireland's position in not having a hard border, in the peace process and continued support through the European Peace Facility. The European Union has been a very progressive force for peace in Ireland; do not forget that, and that is more generally.
I find it interesting that, in a classic populist approach, the entire European elections now seem to boil down just to one person. Of course, it is not about that at all. It is about how we believe the European Union should evolve into the future in the member states working together on social, economic, trade and public health policies. Those are the issues, together with whether we are pro-European Union or not.
Deputy Boyd Barrett is against the European Union and he always has been, so he uses every opportunity to have a cut.
I am not, actually.
You are. You are against the European Union.
I am against its current direction.
No, you are against it full stop, and you have always voted against it. Always. You have never had a good thing to say about it. There is a bit of hypocrisy going on here too.
It has good environmental directives.
Sinn Féin historically has been against the European Union. It is in its DNA to be against the European Union.
The Minister was asked three questions and he has not answered any of them.
I would genuinely like to see who is going forward after the elections and so forth. In any case, I am well used to it at this stage in terms of the flip-flopping and the perspectives. At one level, they will attack-----
This is too serious for the Minister's messing.
It is very serious. That is why the Deputy needs to get serious. I sometimes do not know whether it is the Davy Stockbrockers-----
Tá an t-am caite.
One second, please. The Chair allowed all of them to interrupt. I want to finish my comments with the following.
The Minister is over time.
Everyone has been over time. I want to make the point that we sometimes get a Davy Stockbrokers view of Sinn Féin policy, we sometimes get a kind of view from the Deputies in here but it depends on who they are talking to, and whether they are talking to the financiers or the developers. They change their tack all of the time.
I do not mind the Minister playing politics but on this issue, he should not.
The same applies to Europe. Sinn Féin spokespeople will sidle off to Europe and have their meetings with the Commission, have their meetings with civil servants and tell them all they have a different view from the one they articulate publicly in the House.
Tá an t-am caite.
That is what happens with Sinn Féin at the moment. They are talking to different people all of the time with different policies and different perspectives.