Do we really want the Agriculture portfolio in Brussels? No, says Ruairí Quinn, we should face forward not backwards. Technology is our future, as the Enterprise Strategy Group has argued.
While there was a lot of speculation about whether the Taoiseach might become the next president of the European Commission, no one seems to have questioned the desirability of acquiring the Agriculture portfolio for the next Irish commissioner. Is it merely a question of Joe Walsh being ready to leave the Cabinet voluntarily if he gets Franz Fischler's job in Brussels simply because he is familiar with the territory?
While that may be very convenient both for him and the Taoiseach, does Ireland really need another commissioner for agriculture?
In many respects the broad outline of the job has already been fixed by the deal on spending between France and Germany.
They have agreed, in advance of the new financial perspectives being negotiated under the Dutch presidency, on the amount of money to be spent on the Common Agricultural Policy, largely to the advantage of France.
In addition, Pascal Lamy, the outgoing commissioner for trade, has offered to abolish all EU agricultural subsidies in return for relaunching the Doha development round of trade talks. This, of course, is conditional on both the US and Japan doing likewise with their domestic agricultural subsidies.
The Department of Agriculture in Dublin is referred to as the down-town office of the IFA.
Joe Walsh has been imbued with that culture for so long that in Brussels he would be hostage to the farmers and unable to adequately serve the consumers of Europe. Agriculture is an important, but declining, sector of the Irish economy. Its contribution to our GDP amounts to €3.6 billion, or roughly 2.7 per cent.
If we had a coherent Government approach to the formation of the new commission and the post that Ireland's commissioner might obtain, we would be seeking the enterprise and information society portfolio or the research portfolio.
The Enterprise Strategy Group report is very clear in its recommendations. We have to give a much higher priority to research and development. While much of what it says has been heard before, like its predecessor, the Culliton Report, its strength is that it brings all these recommendations together and reinforces the central message.
We cannot be complacent about our continued economic progress. Investment in education, and training the existing workforce are a priority. Support for the labour force with affordable childcare and a better transport infrastructure are necessary secondary requirements, but also important as their provision will help to keep us competitive.
Low taxes may be the mantra of this right-of-centre Government, but, contrary to what my constituency colleague has recently asserted, they are not the engine of our economic success. Besides, some of the new member-states, such as Estonia, now have lower taxes than Ireland.
Elsewhere, the Government has recognised the central importance of investment in research.
Science Foundation Ireland was a bold and imaginative step taken by this Government. It plans to invest a staggering €646 million between 2000 and 2006, in research teams and academic research with the aim of generating new knowledge and leading-edge technologies.
But we need to go much further than the existing agenda. In particular, the capital spending programmes of the Higher Education Authority require to be fully integrated with the research focus developments in our universities.
The president of UCD, Hugh Brady, his colleague in Trinity and the five other university presidents have been clear about the future. They rightly focus on the need for research and development as the future lifeline of their institutions.
The Government must facilitate the availability of venture capital in a structured way for the researchers in our universities and for their infant campus companies.
Some of the massive amounts of Irish capital currently being invested in property in the UK, Hungary, Spain and Portugal should be creatively encouraged to invest in our third-level campus companies.
It is only a few weeks since the Tánaiste was rightly celebrating the decision by Bell Laboratories to establish its major research facility in Ireland. Some commentators likened it to the decision taken by Intel a generation ago to locate in Ireland. This is the direction that the country needs to go if the Government is serious about implementing the Enterprise Strategy report.
So why not be consistent on this front with our approach to the formation of the next EU commission?
It was not some personal whim or an act of political convenience that led Erkki Liikanen to seek, in his second term as the Finnish commissioner, the portfolio of enterprise and the information society in the Prodi commission.
The former Social Democratic minister for finance, before he became Finland's first commissioner with responsibility for the budget, knew what he was doing, and more importantly, why. He spoke to me about the importance of the sector, not just for Europe, but for Finland.
The land of Nokia knows a lot about innovation and the importance of continued investment in research and development.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, Finland lost overnight one-third of its export market. Imagine if the UK market disappeared for Ireland in the same manner.
That Finland recovered from that external shock more quickly than its Swedish neighbour was due, not only to clear political leadership, but the ability of its entrepreneurs and workforce rapidly to reposition itself. In so doing they availed of the substantial investment in education and training which is a hallmark of that particular society.
In my view, Ireland's preferred choice for its next commissioner should be responsibility for research and the information society. Not only can we bring something from our national experience to the European table, but we need to consolidate the progress made here in Ireland.
That means sending out a signal that reinforces the industrial and enterprise policy of the entire Union.
Managing a declining sector in a Europe that is committed, through the Lisbon process, to being the most advanced knowledge-based economy in the world is not the aspiration that this Government should have for this country or the Union.
• Ruairí Quinn TD is a former minister for finance and former leader of the Labour Party, and was recently elected chairman of the European Movement Ireland