On a point of order - I know that there are new Standing Orders - some questions were sent for written answer and therefore transferred out. Under new Standing Orders, each leader is entitled to three oral questions, and it was understood that no Member may put down more than three questions to the Taoiseach for oral answer on any one day. I submitted at least three questions. Two were transferred out for reasons unknown to me and my office was only informed yesterday when it was too late to submit more questions. I understand that there is a transition period, but it is extremely important, in respect of the reforms we introduced, that there are at least three questions tabled by the Leader of the Opposition and that this is facilitated as far as is practicable. Even when questions are transferred out, it is essential that facilities are made available to the person to submit more questions within the required time. Otherwise, we are stifling debate, which is not what the reform was about. It aimed to facilitate more debate and allow more discussion, not less.
Ceisteanna - Questions
I thank the Deputy for making those points and I will have the matter investigated.
The two questions of mine that were transferred out related to the Taoiseach's letter to the President of the European Commission. If the Taoiseach writes to the President of the European Commission, the subject matter of that letter should be allowed as a question, but they were transferred out.
Authority to transfer questions is not vested in my office, but we will have the matter investigated. There is goodwill on all sides and we will try to resolve the matter. What would indicate that the process is working is the fact that we are here today talking about the Brexit debate rather than St. Patrick's Day visits, which is what has happened heretofore.
Was the question transferred from the Department of the Taoiseach? How did the transfer out occur?
It was transferred from the Department of the Taoiseach to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.
I will have that looked at.
It concerns the Taoiseach's letter to the President of the European Commission.
UK Referendum on EU Membership
Niall Collins
Question:1. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Taoiseach the contingencies he has in place to protect Irish jobs and trade should the United Kingdom vote to exit the European Union in its upcoming referendum. [16123/16]
Gerry Adams
Question:2. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach his plans for visits to Britain. [16858/16]
Micheál Martin
Question:3. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the status of his visit to the United Kingdom to ask Irish persons there to vote for it to remain in the European Union. [16954/16]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:4. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach his plans to campaign in Britain on the referendum on a British exit from the European Union. [17144/16]
Micheál Martin
Question:5. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach his plans regarding the Irish response to the British referendum vote. [17338/16]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, together.
The UK's decision on EU membership later this week is solely a matter for UK voters. However, those voters include Irish citizens living in Great Britain, voters in Northern Ireland and UK citizens living here. As the UK's closest neighbour, Ireland has a unique perspective and interest in the outcome of the referendum. The Government has made clear our hope that the UK will decide to stay in the European Union.
I and other members of the Government have completed a targeted programme of outreach in Great Britain and Northern Ireland to Irish and Irish-connected citizens in the UK who have a vote. Last week, I had engagements in Belfast and a programme of events in Liverpool, Manchester and Glasgow, where I met with the Irish community. I also attended a summit meeting of the British-Irish Council in Glasgow. My programme coincided with the shocking death of Jo Cox, MP, in West Yorkshire, to whom we have just paid our respects. Out of respect for her and her family and in light of the suspension of the two official campaigns, I refrained from issuing any public statements about the referendum. I have no specific plans to visit Great Britain as of now.
Ireland will have a clear plan in place to deal with the implications of a UK vote to leave if that is the outcome, which I hope will not be the case. The key priority for Government would be to protect and promote Ireland's interests to the greatest extent possible in the event that the UK votes to leave. We have a whole-of-Government contingency framework which maps the key issues that would be most important to Ireland, dealing with the economy, trade and spending power in the days, weeks and months following a "leave" vote. In the event of that becoming a reality, this would be the framework within which each Minister, Department and agency would manage the policy, operational and programmatic implications that could arise from a UK vote to leave the EU. It will be capable of adapting to changing circumstances, depending on developments in the context of ongoing EU-UK negotiations on new arrangements and bilateral discussions between the UK and Irish Governments.
A key priority would be to mitigate as far as possible any potential disruption to trade, investment and jobs. In this regard, many commentators have suggested a period of volatility in the markets and suggested that sterling would suffer losses against the euro. It remains to be seen if this is the case and the extent to which markets have already priced in any degree of risk. However, if a sustained decrease in the value of sterling did transpire, clearly this would have serious implications for our exports. Given the importance of the Irish enterprise sector, the enterprise agencies are factoring this issue into their own contingency planning and are tracking where potential impacts may arise. Enterprise Ireland already has a significant number of programmes available to companies who face competitive threats from various sources. In addition, a key policy priority in recent years for both the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and Enterprise Ireland has been to support geographic market diversification.
Our contingency framework also contains clear actions on communications and diplomatic contacts. In this regard, I will travel to Brussels next week for the European Council meeting where EU leaders will have a first opportunity to discuss the referendum result, to assess its implications and to begin to chart a way forward. I intend to make a more detailed statement on Ireland's position in my pre-Council statement to the House after the conclusion of these questions.
It is important to again put on the record of the House the enormity of the potential consequences for jobs, trade, travel, tourism and the agrifood sector in this country. Trade between here and the UK accounts for almost 400,000 direct jobs, and 43% of our exports go to the UK. We know that the ESRI has reported that there could be an immediate reduction in trade of up to 20% if the Brexit vote to leave is carried. Teagasc has also reported that there could be a huge reduction in the value of Irish agrifood exports, ranging from €150 million to almost €800 million. This puts it into context.
When I talk to people about this matter, such as people in the business or farming community or members of the general public, they feel that the Government does not have a handle on the plan we will deploy if the vote to leave passes. Have we a plan B? Has any scenario been planned in that instance? Are we hoping against hope that it will not happen?
Can the Taoiseach give us any kind of reassurance on the contingency planning that has happened? In his initial response he said that the Government has a clear plan in place but he has not given us any real detail. Who has been involved in drawing up this plan? How many Departments and State agencies have been involved? Can we get any kind of an insight into it? The campaign run by the Taoiseach and other political leaders was interrupted by the murder of Jo Cox, which we spoke about earlier, and I offer my condolences to her family and community. The European Movement office tells us of a huge British community here in Ireland that should have been influenced a little bit more. The Irish community in the UK could also have been influenced a little bit more. Will the Taoiseach comment on the contingency planning and give us a little more detail?
I agree with the Taoiseach that the issue of how people in Britain vote in the Brexit referendum is a matter for voters there but unfortunately, aside from all the other implications, it is a vote which will have a direct impact on the people in the North. Most opinion polls suggest that the vote to leave the EU remains very strong and that the two sides are almost evenly split. I spent Saturday in Belfast taking part in Sinn Féin's day of action across the North calling for a remain vote. The murder of Labour MP, Jo Cox, cast a shadow over this but the response from those I met was very positive. Sinn Féin has real concerns about some aspects of the European Union, particularly the democratic deficit in the decision-making processes. We want a more democratic and social European Union. Nevertheless, to have one part of this island inside the European Union and the other outside will not be good for the island. It is not in Ireland's interest to have border posts or trade barriers. It is also very much the case that the British Government wants either to do away with the human rights elements of the Good Friday Agreement or not to implement equality protocols which are central to it. They will find this much easier to do if they are not part of the EU. I do not know any more than anyone else what the outcome of the vote will be but if it is to leave, the two-year divorce period for the British to negotiate their withdrawal would also be hugely destabilising.
Last week, we received a confidential briefing from officials from the Taoiseach's Department on the Government's approach and preparations and I thank the Taoiseach for facilitating that. It emphasised the huge amount of confusion and uncertainty that exists around any process of Brexit. Others in the Chamber have a different view, but for those of us who even reluctantly want to see people remaining in the European Union, we should use this opportunity to express our support for the remain side in the referendum. It is well known that the only Brexit that Sinn Féin wants to see is a Brexit from Ireland of the British Government. I reiterate our strong support for a referendum on Irish unity and our appeal to the Government to support this as part of the Good Friday Agreement.
I have two Deputies to call. They will have to be brief if we are to have time to get an answer to these questions.
I was due in Belfast on Friday but because of the murder of Jo Cox, I had to curtail my canvassing, as did Deputy Adams. I am very concerned about the absence of contingency planning. In the discussions I had with the Independents on the formation of Government, it was very clear to us that very little scenario planning in terms of the economy or the impact on agriculture had been undertaken by Departments. There have been some academic papers published but there would appear to be a lot of prayer and hope that it goes the right way as opposed to any considered contingency planning.
In terms of the European Council meeting next week, there are two responses - one in the event of a "Yes" vote for Brexit and the second in the context of a "No" vote. If there is a "Yes" vote, it is extremely important that we have a prepared position as a country going into that council meeting. Cool heads should prevail. In the aftermath of Lisbon, we had to move in very quickly to the Foreign Affairs Council to make sure that hotheads did not get their day which would have set everybody back. Likewise, whatever the result, we need cool heads and a considered and reflective view by the European Union and by this Parliament. If a decision to break with the EU is taken, we need calm and cool heads in the aftermath of that and planning and proper preparation of the best strategy for Ireland. Ireland will face unique challenges as a member of the European Union and because of its historical special relationship with Britain in terms of the common travel area, trade and exports which have to be protected in any new scenario. If the vote is "No", which I hope it is, and Britain remains, I would equally suggest that we should seize the moment at the European Council meeting and say to our European colleagues that this is a moment for reflection and a moment when real lessons have to be learned about how Europe is going about its business. There is significant disconnect between the citizens of Europe and the European institutions.
I have been pointing at this over quite a number of years and there has been a lot of work and research done on this. There have been attempts in terms of the democratisation of the parliament to make it more connected. It is extremely important that the debate in Britain fuels a wider debate across Europe on how we can reconnect the values, principles and ideals of the European Union with citizens on the ground - in other words, the idealism and energy that led to the post-war leaders, the people who saw that nationalist or independent, isolationist pursuits led to conflict, coming together in international partnerships to prevent world wars and horrific consequences. In the bigger picture, Europe has succeeded in that respect. There is a lot of talk about subsidiarity in terms of decision making, but it has not happened.
In terms of the hierarchy of decision making, Europe is still involved too much at the lower level of minutiae and detail on the ground which should be left to national parliaments and national Governments. There is a lot of work to be done at the European Council meeting. Irrespective of the outcome, but particularly if it is a "No" to Brexit and Britain remains in the European Union, which is what I believe would be in the best interest of Britain, Ireland, Europe and the world, we should use it as an opportunity for really serious reflection by all across Europe to make sure that the idealism of the original concept is brought back to centre stage of European politics.
We in People Before Profit want absolutely nothing to do with some of the vile and racist forces that are campaigning for an exit from the European Union in Britain, some of whom have stoked up the sort of racist conditions and sentiment that took the life of Labour MP, Jo Cox. We must all dissociate ourselves from that. Having said that, I disagree with the consensus in the House that the way to deal with the virulent rise of racism, prejudice, islamophobia and the growth of far right forces in Europe is to stay in the European Union in the hope of reforming it. Is it not the case that the European Union is the architect of its own crisis and that it has caused the problems that have now produced such widespread disaffection? This is summed up by the comments by Jean-Claude Juncker in January 2015, when the Syriza government was first elected, that, "To suggest that everything is going to change because there is a new government in Athens is to mistake dreams for reality... There can be no democratic choice against the European treaties."
Is the problem not fundamentally that the leaders of the European Union are saying democracy has gone out the window with the European Union and that that has been compounded with the disgusting racist fortress-Europe policy that has led to the deaths of thousands of people trying to get into Europe? While Europe parades as a beacon of progress, in fact, its own racists policies vis-à-vis desperate people fleeing from Syria involves throwing them back to the Turkish Government, which is now shooting them. Last week, Syrian refugees were shot. Europe has signed an agreement with Turkey to allow that to happen and it is throwing those desperate people back to Turkey to allow it to shoot them. Is it those misguided undemocratic fortress-Europe policies and austerity policies that have created the crisis that is now consuming us? In that context, would we be better off supporting not Brexit but the left exit campaign of saying we want European internationalism - in fact, we want comprehensive internationalism that goes beyond the boundaries of Europe - if we are to undermine and defeat the dangerous forces of racism and the far right that the European Union itself has helped to stoke up?
In light of the importance and the currency of the issue, the Taoiseach may take two or three minutes.
Deputies Niall Collins, Martin, Adams and Boyd Barrett raised a number of important questions.
In response to Deputy Collins, there is a €60 billion trade across the Irish Sea every year and, obviously, as the Deputy pointed out, 400,000 jobs at stake here - 200,000 on this side and 200,000 in Britain. These are matters of great concern to Irish exporters, many of whom export heavy equipment to Britain and through Britain to other countries. They make the point that if the British electorate were to vote to leave, this would cause an imposition in terms of paperwork, customs or whatever which would lead to inefficiency, time wasting, a lack of competitiveness and probably a lack of jobs.
Another point is that while people might reflect between our position and Northern Ireland, it actually would be not an Irish border from Dundalk to Derry but a European border because we would be a member of the European Union and Britain would want to withdraw from it, if it made a decision to do so. Obviously, as has been pointed out, that would carry its own implications. It would be a European border as distinct from an Irish border. In respect of Deputy Adams's point, I take that on board.
Deputy Martin raised the question of contingency planning. I do not want to set out a strategy here that the Government or the people in Ireland believe that this will be a negative vote and that the British people will vote to leave the European Union because one must wait and see what the answer will be. However, it is important to state that voting takes place on Thursday and it goes on until 10 p.m. that night. The counting of votes starts immediately. By 3 a.m. or 4 a.m. on Friday, one should be in a position to get a prediction of what might happen here. There are no official exit polls being taken, although I understand many of the trading houses and financial institutions have been closely monitoring the situation. I suppose the movement of sterling in itself would be an indication of the way that they may be thinking. The announcement will be made from Manchester of the overall result. Suffice to say that we have been considering all of this and that from 5 a.m. on Friday, the contingency framework that Ireland would put in place here would be considered.
I want to make it clear again that I hope that the British electorate votes in favour of remaining as a member of the European Union. In the past 48 hours, I feel some sense of a different reflection about this vote from the British electorate and, as I say, I hope they vote to remain. I can assure the Deputies and the party leaders that there is a full-scale contingency programme in place which I hope that we do not have to use. That programme would deal with headline issues, such as the calling of a Government meeting, if that were deemed appropriate, and contact with other leaders in other cities in Europe. However, as Deputy Martin rightly pointed out, there is a need here for level-headedness and a measured response. If the vote were to be to leave, it would not mean that Britain is gone from the European Union on Friday. There is still a two-year window there of negotiations and complex discussions. In respect of our response to such a vote, it would be about the economy, trade, jobs and investment and about whether sterling would remain strong or whether it would collapse, and if so, for how long, what that would mean for Enterprise Ireland and for agencies dealing with small and medium-sized enterprises, and how they would support diversification into the market and beyond through Europe. These are issues that, obviously, would be considered as part of any contingency plan, were such to kick-in.
I agree completely with Deputy Martin on the following point. If this vote is to stay, and I hope it is, there is a lesson here for Europe too. One cannot have a situation where the President of the Commission, Mr. Jean-Claude Juncker, was found to have put in place an infrastructural fund of €400 billion for major projects across Europe and that countries would have the right to draw on that under certain conditions but have the imposition of particular conditions set by EUROSTAT, which is an independent entity, that would mean there would be restrictions on what countries could do, when one can borrow money at a negative or very low interest rate to provide services and facilities for people, such as housing. Approval for a case in Britain has been withdrawn. This does not help the situation. I agree that not everything about the European Union is perfect and that this is an opportunity, if the people in Britain vote to stay, to reflect on the structure of Europe and on when the European Council makes political decisions, how they should be implemented in the interests of their citizens. That is an issue about which I have already written to the President of the Commission and to the leaders, that others are now taking up and that will become an issue for reflection there.
Deputy Boyd Barrett quoted from a document. If I heard the Deputy correctly, I think he stated that there was no choice in respect of the European treaties. The treaties are approved or not by the people in the different countries. We had a number of referenda here where the people voted twice in order to have a deeper reflection on the issue, whether on the Nice treaty, the Lisbon treaty or whatever.
On the Turkish deal for migration, the problem here, to be quite straight with Deputy Boyd Barrett, was how was one to deal with the people smugglers who have inveigled people to pay serious sums to get on rubber rafts or rickety boats to attempt the crossing to Greece and inevitably end up in the water with many drowned. The intention was that people who would arrive as illegal asylum seekers or refugees would go back to camps in Turkey funded by the European Union but be replaced by legitimate asylum seekers who had moved to Turkey under the refugee or asylum programme. The intention genuinely was around how to deal with the people smugglers who have no care or interest in respect of the many thousands who have drowned in the Mediterranean. That was what the issue was about. I note Deputy Boyd Barrett disagrees with it.
They are now being shot.
In that sense, the focus of Europe was on how one deals with this when they are coming from the other side. There is a search and rescue mission led by NATO, of which Ireland is not part, off the Turkish coast in four different segments and people smugglers have been picked up to some extent in that quarter.
The Taoiseach must conclude because we must move on.
I will consult the leaders of the Opposition parties as this develops through Thursday night late-Friday morning and we can keep Members informed.
Northern Ireland
There appears to be slight confusion on the next batch of questions. It would seem to make sense to take Questions Nos. 6 to 10, inclusive, together, if that is possible.
I looked at this. I do not mind but the question in respect of the visit to Belfast is slightly different from the other four questions.
The Taoiseach could answer both of them and we could take them together then.
Gerry Adams
Question:6. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach to report on his visit to Belfast. [16859/16]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:7. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach the status of the next British-Irish Council meeting. [16863/16]
Ruth Coppinger
Question:8. Deputy Ruth Coppinger asked the Taoiseach to report on the meeting of the last British-Irish Council. [17154/16]
Paul Murphy
Question:9. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Taoiseach to report on the meeting of the last British-Irish Council. [17155/16]
Mick Barry
Question:10. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Taoiseach to report on the meeting of the last British-Irish Council. [17156/16]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 10, inclusive, together.
I last visited Belfast on Monday, 13 June, when I addressed a conference on "Working Together for Peace and Prosperity", organised by the University of Ulster. I took the opportunity in my remarks to outline the Irish Government’s position regarding the imminent UK referendum on European Union membership. I outlined our particular perspective on the issue, including the importance of avoiding any hardening of the Border in whatever form. Following my speech, I took part in a panel discussion on the issues raised.
While at the university I met the vice chancellor, Mr. Paddy Nixon, and a number of community and non-governmental organisation representatives attending the conference, including some of those currently involved with the "Stronger In" referendum campaign. I also visited the newly opened premises of CPL Recruitment at a networking event attended by business representatives. I also took the opportunity at that event to ensure that the Irish Government's position on the forthcoming referendum was understood.
I attended the 26th summit of the British-Irish Council on 17 June, hosted by the Scottish Government in Glasgow. The heads of delegation were welcomed by First Minister Sturgeon on behalf of the Scottish Government. She commenced the meeting with a minute's silence to mark the untimely death of Ms Jo Cox, MP. The council reflected on priorities for member administrations and discussed how the council could continue to promote co-operation on issues of common concern. The council also noted that there might be scope for new areas of co-operation based on emerging government and member administration priorities across these islands, many of which have had elections in recent times.
In the context of current issues, the forthcoming UK EU referendum was discussed. I clearly set out the Irish Government's position and our programme of outreach to Irish citizens in Britain who have a vote. The Minister of State, Deputy Helen McEntee, met counterparts with particular responsibility for unpaid carers in advance of the summit to consider a detailed paper prepared by the council’s social inclusion work sector. The discussion was then taken forward by heads of administration, where the council agreed that carers are an integral and vital part of society, caring for family, friends and neighbours affected by physical or mental illness, disability, frailty or substance misuse. It was agreed that further sharing of research and good practice in this important area will be pursued by member administrations.
The Scottish Government updated the council on the work done in advance of the summit to take forward work being undertaken to review the operation of the council. It also noted the secretariat's end of year report and agreed a new council communications plan for 2016 to 2018. The council also approved publication of the British-Irish Council annual report for 2015, and the next British-Irish Council summit is scheduled for Wales in November 2016.
I welcome very much the Taoiseach's visit to Belfast. It is really important that the Taoiseach and other Ministers visit the North often and regularly and that they meet people in all the sectors. During the Belfast visit, the Taoiseach went to the new Belfast office of CPL Recruitment and spoke to business leaders, among others, about the importance of encouraging economic growth on both sides of the Border. This is a very important area of potential for people, no matter what part of Ireland in which we live. I will concentrate, if I may, on that issue.
There are significant similarities between the two economies on the island and all of us, including Unionists, accept that we work best when we co-operate. They use the phrase, "to our mutual advantage". There are also differences, largely as a consequence of partition, which mean we have two different currencies, tax systems and laws impacting on business. There is a need to stimulate the economies of both parts of the island, which requires greater co-operation between the Northern Ireland Executive and the Government here. In this respect, the work of the North-South Ministerial Council is of particular importance.
I understand the last meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council was postponed. Will the Taoiseach confirm when the next meeting will take place? It was also agreed in December at a plenary session that a report would be prepared for the Narrow Water bridge project, to which the Acting Chairman has given his support. The project will significantly enhance business and tourism opportunities between Louth, south Down and south Armagh, as well as the wider Border region. Last week I visited the site of the proposed Narrow Water bridge with the Narrow Water Bridge Community Network, including Ms Caitríona Ruane, MLA, Councillor John Loughran and the Executive finance Minister, Mr. Máirtín Ó Muilleoir. I know the Taoiseach is aware there is very strong support for this on both sides of the Border and from all shades of political opinion. It is across the Border and across communities. It is also included in the Irish Government's capital investment plan for 2016 to 2021 and the Oireachtas committee for jobs, enterprise and innovation recently reported that the bridge is essential to the economic development of the region. Will the Taoiseach confirm if the report for the North-South Ministerial Council has been completed? Will it be published after the council meeting?
Will the Taoiseach give some indication of the work that has been done on the issue of target investment in cross-Border economic infrastructure agreed in the Fresh Start agreement? I will be as brief as possible but these include the M5, which will open the north west, including Donegal; the Ulster Canal project; and the north-west gateway. Has there been any progress on sourcing further investment either from the European Union or the private sector for all-island infrastructural projects that would be to the mutual benefit of both economies on the island? Is é sin an méid.
Ní aontaím leo siúd a mhol gur cheart na ceisteanna seo a ghlacadh le chéile. The Taoiseach was right and the question on Belfast is very specific. I have other questions on the other matters but I will leave it at that for now.
I note in the Taoiseach's comments on the British-Irish Council that he referred to the discussion on the referendum. Will the Taoiseach comment on the tenor of the debate? It has, rightly, come in for widespread criticism. It does not surprise me, given that one side is led by the leadership faction in the Conservative Party and the other side is led by the opposition faction in the Conservative Party, with the support of the UK Independence Party. Disgracefully, we have seen finger pointing and blame laid at the feet of immigrants; the most disgusting example is Nigel Farage's UKIP "Breaking Point" billboard. Both sides have framed the debate in such a way that they each speak of immigration and immigrants as though that were a problem.
Many community and trade union activists and socialists are campaigning for an exit, but for very different reasons to those I outlined earlier. Their motivation is to defend the welfare State and the National Health Service from the neoliberal drive being spearheaded by the EU, and to stand up against the race to the bottom in terms of wages and conditions in employment being promoted by the European Union elite. I share the disappointment of those activists that the Labour leader, Mr. Jeremy Corbyn, has not pitched in on their side as had he done so the debate would have been decisively won for a "leave" position and immigration would be pushed back and less of an issue. The "leave" side would win, first and foremost, on the basis of progressive politics. Additionally, the Tory Government would be facing a shattering defeat and the likelihood of being driven from office. Will the Taoiseach comment on the tenor of the debate to which I referred at the start?
We have a genuine interest in the development and stimulation of both economies, and that is why I am glad the Sinn Féin Party supports the opportunity for people to vote to stay as a member of the European Union. Deputy Adams is aware there is €3 billion on the table for peace and reconciliation and cross-Border activities for communities, etc.
No date has yet been fixed for the next meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council. The Minister, Deputy Flanagan, is going there in the next two weeks and I expect the date will be announced then. That meeting will be hosted in Dublin, as the Deputy knows. In regard to the infrastructure commitments under the Fresh Start agreement, the Irish Government reaffirmed in this agreement its existing commitment to providing £50 million for the A5 western transport corridor serving the north west. A further £25 million was committed to ensure that phase one of the project can commence as soon as the necessary planning issues have been resolved by the Northern Ireland authorities. The Government will provide this money in three tranches of £25 million in 2017, 2018 and 2019. The Government and the Northern Ireland Executive have agreed that construction on the first section of the A5 will commence in 2017, with a view to completion in 2019. The first section will be the route between Newbuildings outside Derry to north of Strabane.
In respect of the Narrow Water bridge, the Government and the Northern Ireland Executive agreed to undertake a review of the project, with a view to identifying options for its future development for consideration by the North-South Ministerial Council at its next meeting. Initial discussions by a group of officials, North and South, took place in December. Further meetings have taken place. A report will be provided to the next meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council. In addition, officials from North and South met with people in Newry in April with a view to feeding local proposals into the review of the project. I assure Deputy Adams that the Government remains committed to the concept of the Narrow Water bridge, which has the potential to create jobs on either side, but also to provide a real stimulus to both economies in terms of tourism and the opportunities that exist in that respect.
In respect of the Ulster Canal, the Government and the Northern Ireland Executive agreed to undertake a review with a view to looking at how this might progress. It is to be considered, again, by the North-South Ministerial Council at its meeting in Dublin. The Government will continue to explore the development of further cross-Border greenways and blueways, leisure routes, including the Ulster Canal as it is a matter of considerable interest to us.
Regarding the north-west gateway, the Government provided €2.5 million to support this initiative, which will be complemented by matching funding from the Executive in the North. A report on the north-west gateway will also be provided at the next meeting.
Deputy Barry raised the question of the tenor of the debate. At the debate of the British-Irish Council in Glasgow, people from Guernsey, Jersey and the Isle of Man were very concerned that the British electorate would vote to leave the European Union, because this would create real difficulties for them as small economic entities and islands. The debate in general was derailed in respect of the issues that were really at stake. All 27 members of the European Council, apart from Britain, agreed on a number of issues to deal with the question of in-work benefits, which was and is an issue for people in Britain in respect of immigrants. For years and years, Irish people who went to Britain began to work, paid their stamp and got their contribution. It was clocked up for them in Newcastle and when people reached pension age or came back to Ireland before then, they were able to avail of that element of contribution, added to what they had from Ireland, to draw a pension or a proportion of the pension under a bilateral agreement. However, in lower-paid jobs, immigrants were entitled to extra benefits from day one, which was a cause for concern among British people. It was conceded by the European Council that this matter could be tapered over a period of four years. Another question related to child benefit being paid at higher British rates than applied in many of the former eastern bloc countries, where children were not living in Britain but were living in their home country. This issue was also raised in this House on many occasions.
On the question of ever-closer union, I agree. I might not agree with everything that Deputy Barry and I have to talk about, but the debate in Britain was derailed. It became very personal, very vindictive and very inter-party. The debate should have focused on issues about the kind of Europe we want, who should constitute that, the potential of a market of 500 million and the potential for political decisions to be followed through to the benefit of the peoples of the 28 countries. I hope when people vote on Thursday that the decision will be to stay. I have seen a strong element of finger-pointing in some social media and in some of the print and spoken media. Until the people actually vote, their decision is not counted. I hope that by 5 a.m. we will have a pretty clear statement as to what they have decided on Thursday, 23 June.
In view of the fact that there is only short of three minutes left on this section, I propose to allow Deputies Adams and Murphy to conclude the debate. To give them justice, Questions Nos. 11 and 12 will come on the agenda again tomorrow.
The British-Irish Council is an integral part of the Good Friday Agreement architecture and it provides an opportunity for the eight administrations that participate to discuss issues of mutual importance and of relevance to the regions and states that make up its membership. I want to come back on the issue that was raised earlier regarding carers. The social inclusion sector of the British-Irish Council had prepared a detailed paper on carers, which was supposed to have been published on the council's website, but it has not appeared on that website so far. Could the Taoiseach either publish it or consider publishing it? It is Carers' Week, which is why the British-Irish Council discussed this matter. From our own experience in this State, the treatment of carers leaves much to be desired. Did the Government make any commitments to improving the situation here at the council meeting? For example, will it provide additional resources to ensure that waiting times for processing applications or appeals will be reduced? I will limit what I am saying just to allow my colleague to get in.
I appreciate that the establishment in this country is extremely nervous about the prospect of Brexit, as is the core part of the establishment in Britain. That is reflected in the desperation of the Government and its increasing intervention in the referendum. It is the Taoiseach's right to intervene in that debate and I would do likewise if I were in his position. Does the Taoiseach not agree at all that a Brexit vote could open up a significant question about what kind of Europe we have? Does he not agree that it could put into sharp relief the fundamentally undemocratic and antidemocratic nature of the European Union, could provoke a crisis for the Tory Government in Britain and could be an opening to the kind of discussion we need to have about building the kind of Europe that does not just operate for the bankers, the bondholders and big business? That is our concrete experience over the course of the crisis, as opposed to the abstract social Europe which we do not have but which people talk about. Does the Taoiseach not agree these potential outcomes from a Brexit vote would be good from the point of view of ordinary people in this country, in Britain and right across Europe, and would constitute a step towards building a Europe of the millions instead of the millionaires?
In respect of the discussion that took place at the British-Irish Council, elections had taken place in a number of administrations since the last meeting. Therefore, those who were representing the different areas gave an indication of the priorities of the new administrations and where they saw developments occurring. In our case, we made the point that Government wanted to learn lessons and understands that many people in this country are still very much challenged in terms of the economic situation. We are now trying to use the benefits of a strengthening economy to deal with social injustice, unfairness and disadvantage, as we have talked about in terms of inner cities and the requirement for infrastructure raised by Deputy Howlin in terms of capital investment. These are things that improve the quality of people's lives and make the country a stronger and a better place. At the meeting, I pointed out the priorities as we see them for the time ahead. Then there was a discussion about carers, the need for support and protection of carers and of those for whom they care and the question of mental health and the difficulties that are experienced in many places and across all ages in this respect.
The meeting took place against the background of a minute's silence in respect of the late Jo Cox, and this tempered it.
In answer to Deputy Paul Murphy's question, we will have to wait and see what is the outcome of the Brexit vote. As I said to Deputy Mick Barry, elements of the discussion were directed along the alleyways of vindictiveness and finger pointing and were not really relevant to the question we need to ask about the kind of Europe we need to have. Everything will depend on turnout and on whether people are sufficiently motivated to go and vote. It is important that they know what they are voting for and the consequences of their vote so we will wait and see.