Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 11 Apr 2017

Vol. 946 No. 2

Brexit: Statements (Resumed)

Deputy Tom Neville was in possession. Before he contributes, I wish to bring to the attention of the House a small housekeeping matter. After Deputy Neville, Deputy Ó Caoláin and Deputy Louise O'Reilly will be the next contributors. I understand they are amenable to allowing Deputy Michael Healy-Rae, who has a pressing engagement, to contribute between them. I do not mean between them but between their time slots.

We would never let him come between us. We are amenable to accommodating him all the same.

I thank the Deputies. If the House is amenable to that, we can proceed.

On the previous occasion, I was speaking about Asia and concentrating on the Asian market in light of the fact that there are 4.5 billion people living there. Sixty per cent of the world's population live in the region. There is a rising middle class with rising incomes and, therefore, a rising market. We must bear in mind that the United Kingdom is targeting Asia also, using a Singaporean model. I have seen this from some of the presentations. We could piggyback on this and work in conjunction with the United Kingdom with complementary industries going into Asia. We could use the UK network and its friends in Asia, such as Singapore, and obviously Oceania.

We want to maintain the Single Market, free trade and the common travel area. The Dublin-London route is the busiest international route in Europe. We need to maintain that. We have 23,000 to 30,000 cross-Border workers. That has a huge impact on Northern Ireland. According to estimates, there are 40,000 legal Acts and 15,000 court verdicts in the EU that are binding on EU citizens that must be dealt with in the context of Brexit. Therefore, it is going to be a long process. We need to attract the businesses that will pull out of the United Kingdom to Ireland, not only to Dublin but also to towns and cities - including mine, Limerick - throughout the regions. It is in the regions that we need to start working a lot more on our infrastructure. A Cork-Limerick motorway is required to generate 300,000 jobs in the area as a counterbalance.

I welcome the Government's movement on housing - the €5.5 billion over the next four years - and also the new movement on broadband, which involves getting the 300,000 houses connected as soon as possible. The workforce is needed, including in rural areas, because the latter will have the most impact in regard to Brexit given the food exports.

Two weeks ago, I met a number of MEPs from across Europe who were in Ireland on a fact-finding mission. They were here to meet with local communities, north and south of the Border, in order to establish the extent to which Brexit will affect them. They saw at first hand the hugely negative impact Brexit will have on Ireland, particularly the Border counties. There was no doubt but that they were unanimous in their belief that the only sensible and viable - and, yes, achievable - option in this situation is for special designated status for the North of Ireland within the European Union. The call for special status is supported by the majority of parties here too. Need I remind the House that in February this year a motion calling for the North to be given special designated status in the European Union was supported by the majority of Deputies?

Last week in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, a joint resolution was debated calling for the North to be protected from Brexit. Five hundred and sixteen MEPs supported it. That resolution is proof that we have the support of MEPs from across Europe and from across the political spectrum. Having that European support, and majority support here in the Dáil, why then is this Government not following through? Is it deliberately choosing to ignore the will of the Dáil and, more importantly, is it wilfully choosing to ignore the will of the majority of the people in the North who voted to remain? Is it ignoring the rights of all those Irish citizens in the Six Counties who are also European citizens? It is quite astonishing that Spain has been more successful on the issue of Gibraltar than our own Taoiseach has been on the North. Mór a náire.

In recent decades, the European Union has shown itself to be flexible in dealing with different forms of integration for member states within the Union and for non-member states with the Union. However, in the North's case, special designated status will not be achieved if the Taoiseach and this Government do not up the ante. They have a responsibility to stand up for the interest of Irish citizens. The Taoiseach must harness European and Irish support, stand up for Ireland and argue for designated status for the North within the European Union.

In previous contributions on this subject, I have made reference to the sense of foreboding and fear among people in Border communities, such as my own in Cavan and Monaghan, regarding the implications that all of this will have. I also made reference to and questioned the fact that this Government had begun to identify location points for full customs checkpoints along the Border with the North. What a disastrous prospect. Is there any update on all of this? Have the people tasked with this responsibility - whoever tasked them - reported back? If so, what have they recommended and what, if anything, has been decided?

It is now over nine months since the Brexit referendum took place. The result introduced a new and formidable element of uncertainty into the lives of so many. What will it mean for our communities? The answer at that point in time was, "We do not know". Nine months later, we are all still none the wiser, sadly. It is critical that the Government outline its Brexit negotiating position as soon as possible. It needs to be debated here in the Dáil. In addition, Article 11 of the European Council's draft guidelines for Brexit negotiations is extremely weak and needs to be amended to strengthen Ireland's position. I commend the proposal to address it to the Minister.

The next meeting of the European Council, on 29 April, will be critical. That will be the Taoiseach's opportunity to follow through on the wishes of the majority and fight for special designated status for the North. It is the only option and certainly the only sane and sensible approach that has been put on the table. It is the best negotiating position to have in order to minimise the consequences of Brexit for all the people of this island.

At the beginning, I thank Deputies O'Reilly and Ó Caoláin for kindly facilitating me.

Ever since I became Chairman of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs, the impact of the UK's decision to leave the European Union on Ireland and on the European Union as a whole has been clear. As a result, the annual work programme of the committee and the work we have done has placed the strategic impact of Brexit at the heart of what we are doing.

The committee has been serious and diligent in its work. There are Members with a lot of experience on the committee and we all are clear that this is likely to be the most important public policy issue for Ireland for the next few years. As the committee responsible for also looking to the impact on the European Union, the committee is also clear that there will be major consequences for the European Union. Early on, it was clear to members that it would be important to engage directly with those involved in the negotiations in Dublin, Brussels and in London. The committee met relevant senior officials and the Minister of State, Deputy Dara Murphy, in Dublin and was clear on the need to travel to Brussels before the negotiations began and meet key individuals who would be involved in the negotiations. Colleagues will have seen the committee's travel report and on behalf of the committee, I thank all the Members who have commented as part of this debate. It will only help us all to do our job better.

In order that Members have a sense of the work the delegation did, we had a total 12 meetings over the two days in Brussels. All of them were important and all gave us an opportunity to ensure that key individuals understood that there was a strong shared consensus across political opinion of the importance of the issue to Ireland. We were clear that we all shared concerns on the potential impact on the peace process, on the potential impact of an imposed land border, on the economic impact across a variety of sectors and the potential impact on the future of the European Union. For many of those we met, it was the first time they had met representatives from the Houses of the Oireachtas since the summer and it was the beginning of a longer-term engagement.

The committee met the key representatives for us from the three institutions: Mr. Michel Barnier, the European Commission's chief negotiator, and some of his team; Mr. Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament's representative on Brexit; and the ambassadors, Mr. Kelleher and Mr. Hackett, as well as some of their teams - the key Irish representatives in the Council. In addition, we met MEPs from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Cyprus and Malta, the European Commissioner, Mr. Phil Hogan, the European Ombudsman, Ms Emily O'Reilly, and representatives of the key Irish stakeholders based in Brussels.

In all of our meetings, the committee highlighted Ireland's commitment to the European project and was clear that Ireland's future is firmly within the European Union. In all of all our meetings, we were able to engage substantively on the concerns we have of the impact of Brexit on the peace process, the Border, our economy, the EU, ease of travel for Irish citizens relying on the common travel area and the challenges that we see to many other areas.

We found that most of the key stakeholders already had a general understanding of the unique Irish issues but they were interested in the detail on how it would impact on our constituencies. We found that they were well prepared for the task ahead and understood how challenging it would be. We found they were willing to engage, were interested in what we had to say and would be interested in continuing to engage with Irish parliamentarians. We ourselves improved our understanding of the concerns of others.

We came home with a few key learnings that might be of interest to the House. First, while many of our partners have a clear understanding of the issues facing Ireland and are working at solutions, those solutions to the challenges do not yet exist. There is a need for us to play our role in finding creative solutions. All parties we spoke to would be interested in hearing about solutions from those closest on the ground. These need to be European solutions that solve one challenge without having unintended consequences elsewhere. This will require real work.

Second, there is a need for us, as the Houses of the Oireachtas, to continue to engage directly with those involved in the negotiations. The Government is doing a good job at making sure that our partners understand our issues but we, as representatives of constituencies, can bring an important additional dimension to discussions. For example, the meeting we had with Mr. Barnier was frank - it was sincere on all sides and we dealt with substantive, complex issues - but it was only the start of a discussion. At that meeting, Mr. Barnier committed to coming to the Houses of the Oireachtas on a future trip to Ireland. This would be really useful for us, but also for him and his team. He is our lead negotiator and he will only do his job better if he fully understands our issues.

From meeting the Irish MEPs, it is clear that they all are working extremely diligently on our behalf and they are all involved in the European Parliament's work on Brexit. It is important for us to work with them; the joint committee hopes to do that at a dedicated meeting in late May. The European Parliament will play a vital role in this and is a key partner with which we all need to engage across the European political groups from all members states. Mr. Guy Verhofstadt, who is leading this for them, is an experienced and dedicated politician who is working with other MEPs from other parties, of course, as well as our own.

It is also clear how important Ireland's role is in all this. We joined the EEC in 1973 with the UK. They will leave in two years and we will remain a strong EU member state. In this negotiation, we will be negotiating with the 26 other remaining member states. We will need to work with all of those other member states to find solutions to all of the challenges that this untangling will raise but at the same time, the United Kingdom will remain a close partner for all of the European Union, especially for us. We share a long history. We share a Border and have many interests in common, including a significant number of citizens of each of our countries in each other's country. We need to think about those connections and make sure that we work on ensuring the right negotiated result, as well as the right investment in our future relationship. In playing our own role, the joint committee is planning a delegation visit to London before the summer.

Since the committee delegation travelled to Brussels, the British Prime Minister has sent the official letter to the European Union of the UK's intent to withdraw and the European Union is now considering draft guidelines. More than ten months since the referendum, the preparatory work is nearly finished on both sides and the negotiations are about to begin. We need to remain serious in our work and continue to engage with all partners.

I also thank the Minister of State, Deputy Dara Murphy, for his advice and guidance and the sincere way that he is negotiating with the committee. I came up with a small statistic the other day. Before chairing a meeting, I looked at the members of the committee. We had 226 years of experience on the committee. Eighty-six years of that is held by two of the esteemed members. I did not name them on the day and I will not name them now. My point is we are not that big a committee but in having that many years of experience, I believe we are well placed to do the job of work in conjunction with all of the other parties here to ensure that we make the most out of what is a damn fine awkward situation. At the same time, we have to look to the solutions.

I again thank the Sinn Féin Members for getting me out of a really tight corner this evening. I will not forget it.

I visited Sligo and Donegal for meetings recently and while I was there, I spoke to parents and families who are dependent on health services in the North. They are neighbours. It is very close. As we have said - I will not be the first or the last to say it - disease does not recognise a border. I do not either but certainly, disease definitely does not. These people are very dependent on the health services north of the Border. They cross it, on a daily or weekly basis, to get treatment that they cannot get in this State and they cannot get close to their own homes.

They were very concerned about the prospect of a hard Border. In fact, the day I was in Donegal was the day on which it was reported that a Department was sourcing portakabins or other likely facilities for the erection of a border.

That is probably what put it onto our agenda, as it is never far from their minds. They were very concerned about the impact of a hard Border on their health and the health of their families. They had no sense that day that the Government understands the extent to which they depend on the services of their near neighbour.

Equally, I spoke to a woman in Swords in my constituency when I was canvassing two or three weeks ago. She had waited years for a medical procedure. She did not have it done in this State but went to England to have the procedure performed there under the cross-border health directive. She had a simple question for me, which was whether, if she ended up in a situation where she requires the procedure again after Brexit, she will able to rely on the cross-border health directive. Experience has taught her that she clearly cannot rely on the State or the HSE to provide the procedure, as she was obliged to travel to England to avail of it there. As it happens, being a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health I knew I was due to meet senior officials from the Department of Health to discuss Brexit, so I told the lady with some confidence that I would come back to her with an answer in a matter of weeks.

When the senior officials from the Department of Health attended the meeting I asked them some relatively easy questions about the extent to which we rely not only on health services in the North but also on the NHS in England, Scotland and Wales. The answer I was given by these high powered members of the Department who are dealing with Brexit on our behalf was somewhat shocking, but quite instructive as to the Department's attitude. When I asked if they had quantified the extent to which we are reliant on the NHS for the provision of health care that is not provided in this State their answer was: "The HSE runs a national contact and reimbursement service for the directive. We have requested more detailed analysis and that is awaited." I was advised that it would not take long. I asked them when they had sought this. Obviously, they have had months to seek this information. Incidentally, I omitted to mention that the opening statement alluded to the fact that Brexit was a massive priority for the Department, that the Department was on top of it and that it was very confident - the officials used the word "confident" several times - about its ability to deal with it. However, when I asked when they had sought this important information for anybody considering Brexit and the health service, I was advised that the more detailed breakdown was requested in recent weeks "when we knew we were coming before the committee". That makes it clear that nobody was seeking this information and nobody was on top of this issue to any great extent. It was only at the prompting of an invitation to appear before the Joint Committee on Health that serious questions were asked.

I returned to my constituent and told her what had happened. She was not impressed and neither am I. People outside the Chamber will not be too impressed that it was only on the prompting of a committee that this information was sought. I am concerned that issues such as the service level agreement with Altnagelvin Area Hospital have not been Brexit-proofed. Nobody in the Department has taken responsibility for this issue. We will sleepwalk into a situation where vital services will be cut off unless the Government grasps this issue and instructs its officials to take it seriously. I believe the officials are taking their lead from the Ministers. They are not concerned about it. The Ministers are not concerned about it so why should they be?

Will the Deputy forward that correspondence to me?

It is already on the public record of the proceedings of the committee, but I will send it to the Minister of State.

Brexit has the potential to have serious adverse economic, transport and tourism impacts and as a result has been identified as the main strategic risk facing the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. As part of my Department’s preparations for Brexit, it has engaged widely with sectoral stakeholders and has established stakeholder fora in the tourism, aviation, maritime and road haulage-freight areas to consider the implications of Brexit for those sectors.

One of the main engagements with stakeholders was on 23 January 2017, when I, along with the Minister of State, Deputy Patrick O’Donovan, hosted an all-island dialogue on the impact of Brexit on the transport and logistics sector and on the tourism and hospitality sectors. Both dialogues were very well attended with some 200 delegates from public and private organisations, North and South, across all transport and tourism sectors and from civic society. Our engagement with stakeholders will continue throughout this process. One example is the workshop on Tuesday, 4 April last, hosted by my Department on the impact of the UK exit of the EU on maritime transport regulation and on the sectors which this impacts, including merchant shipping, national shipping, fishing vessels, recreational craft, ports, equipment suppliers, service providers and training providers.

There was no immediate impact on tourism from Great Britain to Ireland immediately following the June referendum. According to Central Statistics Office, CSO, figures, overall trips to Ireland from Great Britain for the six months of July to December 2016 following the referendum were up 6.4% when compared to the same six month period in 2015, with associated revenue up 6.1% for the same period. However, the visit numbers for the most recent three month period of December 2016 to February 2017 showed a decrease of 5.9% in visits from Great Britain. It is worth noting however that the figures were still up 14% on the same period two years earlier. Tourism Ireland’s most recent situation and outlook analysis report for March 2017 shows that some in the tourism industry reported a softening in the British market in the first two months of 2017, but website visits to Ireland.com have been strong for the first two months of this year.

Even prior to the UK referendum result, there was a commitment in the Government's tourism Policy statement, People, Place and Policy – Growing Tourism to 2025, to prioritising tourism marketing efforts towards those markets providing higher revenue returns. The programme for Government commits to implementing the policy objectives in the policy statement and achieving the targets for Irish tourism contained therein. The triggering of Article 50 does not change this. A key element of Tourism Ireland's strategy since 2014 has been market diversification. In 2017, Tourism Ireland will continue to implement its market diversification strategy and intends to maximise holiday revenue through investment in mainland Europe and North America. In addition, the depreciation of sterling against the euro since the UK referendum means that value for money will be a key message for Tourism Ireland in Britain this year. Restoring Ireland’s share of voice in the overseas market is within our control and the tourism action plan for 2016 to 2018 commits to restoring overseas tourism marketing funds to pre-recession levels on a phased basis. There is no doubt that the negotiations ahead will be very challenging. That said, Britain is our nearest market and will continue to be important for tourism to Ireland for a long time to come.

Access to and from the island of Ireland for trade and tourism is totally dependent on the ease of our maritime and air networks. Within the island, the ease of movement of trade and people between North and South cannot be understated. Disruption to current access arrangements or to movements between North and South will have major implications for Irish businesses and for the overall economy. There is general consensus across all transport operators and users that any additional barriers, be they physical, regulatory or technical, to the current access arrangements between the UK and Ireland, including North and South, will be detrimental to transport operators and to the overall economy. This means retaining the common travel area and access to the Single European Market, common visa arrangements and the single aviation area in so far as possible.

With regard to sector-specific concerns, the aviation sector is critical to Ireland. As an island with an open economy, it is essential for our trading relationships, for all of our industries, especially tourism, manufacturing and retail, and for our participation in the global economy generally. Aviation contributes more than €4.1 billion to our GDP, comprising €1.9 billion directly from aviation, €1.3 billion through the supply chain and €0.9 billion from associated spending by people employed in aviation. Tourism, which depends heavily on aviation, accounts for a further €5.3 billion contribution to GDP. The current extent of air traffic between the UK and Ireland is enormous, at approximately 11 million passengers and more than 100,000 aircraft movements per year. Initial analysis of the aviation related impacts of Brexit on the wider Irish economy indicates an effect of between 0.1% and 2%, depending on the severity of the disruption to traffic.

Brexit, unless accompanied by some form of agreement replacing the impacted traffic rights and associated regulations, will affect the existing rights of Irish licensed airlines to fly between the UK and the EU, within the UK, and between the UK and a range of other third countries, including the US and Morocco. Specific political consent will be required for existing traffic rights to remain available, and the desired end result is for an EU-UK comprehensive agreement to be agreed. Uncertainty regarding traffic rights is exacerbated by ownership rules affecting Irish airlines. To retain an EU airline licence and access to the EU aviation Single Market, an airline must be majority owned and effectively controlled by EU nationals.

In terms of the impact on airspace and the safety regulatory environment, virtually all regulations and procedures are currently developed either through the EU's Single Sky Committee, for airspace, or the European Aviation Safety Agency, for safety regulation. As regards aviation security, co-operation measures and regulatory developments are decided mainly at EU level through the AVSEC committee.

It is estimated that seaborne freight accounts for 84% of Ireland's trade in volume and 62% in value terms. The UK is Ireland's biggest trading partner and there has always been free movement of both goods and people between the two countries. Any negative impact on bilateral trade flows will impact on ports and shipping. Trade through the ports has been strong since the UK referendum due to the overall strength of the economy. Dublin Port handles 46% of all seaborne trade in volume on an all-island basis, playing a key role in facilitating trade in and out of Ireland. Approximately 60% of trade in and out of Dublin Port is going to and from the UK.

The UK has signalled it does not expect to be part of the EU customs union. Any additional levies or tariffs that may be introduced may divert goods to EU markets away from the UK and may depress Ireland's overall exports. The reintroduction of border controls for freight, together with additional administrative requirements, would have a significant negative impact on the efficiency of the transit of goods through the ports which in addition to having additional cost implications would also have a significant impact on the capacity of ports as a result of the likely negative impact on land utilisation and other port infrastructure. International Maritime Organization, IMO, and International Labour Organization, ILO, standards will continue to apply, but there is also considerable EU harmonisation legislation in the maritime area, including in issues such as EU recognition of various certificates. That raises concerns as to how these issues will be dealt with post Brexit.

The haulage and logistics industry is highly competitive and characterised by low margins. A significant proportion of Irish exports, particularly perishable goods, to mainland Europe use the UK as a landbridge, as it is deemed the most timely and efficient route compared with the alternative of direct sea routes. Brexit could impact on the efficiency of the landbridge routes particularly where there are increased border and customs procedures and delays or where the UK may subsequently apply differing standards, road charging or regulatory regimes. Current alternatives to the UK landbridge are regarded as slower and lacking capacity. That is a significant area of uncertainty for Ireland and one that could have a major impact on the capacity and efficiency of future trade routes to the Continent.

There is also considerable cross-Border traffic with hauliers operating on both sides of the Border. Such hauliers currently may make multiple Border crossings in a single day. Border controls could significantly disrupt these operations or render them unfeasible. In a similar vein, international haulage from Ireland to the Continent could have to cross the borders multiple times. For example, a journey from Donegal to France would involve four border crossings in each direction if using the UK landbridge. Employment issues and cabotage will also emerge as issues within road haulage. UK drivers will be considered to be non-EU so work permits may be required, leading to potential driver shortages.

Both the domestic and international road transport sectors are regulated by EU law. Irish bus and coach operators travelling to the UK, or transiting through the UK to access continental Europe, could be faced with restrictions, increases in costs and restrictions on carrying out public transport cabotage operations in the UK, for example, picking up and setting down passengers as part of a cross-border trip, which is especially an issue for services to and from Northern Ireland. As with road haulage, the issue arises as to whether the UK would agree to implement all EU transport rules.

The Road Safety Authority has advised that it and the respective road safety authorities in the UK, including Northern Ireland, have a close working relationship and, while it is too early to assess the possible impact that Brexit may have on that relationship, for the short term the RSA is continuing as normal with its co-ordinated enforcement controls, knowledge sharing, etc.

Article 50 has finally been triggered and we have since had Prime Minister, Theresa May's letter to President Tusk. The draft Brexit negotiating guidelines have been published by the European Council President and the European Parliament has published its response on the issue. The Taoiseach informed the House today that the Government will publish a consolidated policy paper for the negotiations, and it is important that the Dáil would debate that paper.

In general, the documents are not as encouraging as they first appeared as they only address one element of a much larger challenge for this country. It is disappointing that the special circumstances of Northern Ireland have not been properly acknowledged. Fianna Fáil calls on the Government to go back to President Tusk to seek the inclusion of a specific reference in the negotiating mandate to the fact the EU is conscious of the continued citizenship rights of Northern Ireland residents and will seek to underpin them in any exit treaties. Fianna Fáil also believes that a form of special status for Northern Ireland and the Border region remains possible. The deep interlinking of social, economic and cultural ties is unique across any border in Europe and it would be absurd and damaging if basic supply routes across short distances were to be undermined.

The draft proposals will be finalised at the EU summit to be held on 29 April. From Ireland's point of view, we should press for the separation negotiations and the future relationship negotiations to take place in parallel, as far as is practicable, to avoid damaging uncertainty for Irish businesses and Irish citizens generally. Preliminary discussions on the future relationship, including trade, must start as soon as possible once the separation talks are making progress. That is the view of the UK Government as well.

I wish to raise the position of Gibraltar. The guidelines indicate that Spain has obtained a commitment to an effective veto regarding negotiations on Gibraltar. Why has the Irish Government failed to secure a similar veto for Ireland on any deal for Northern Ireland? Northern Ireland has a much stronger case in the scale of things. Was such a veto sought by Ireland? Any future deals with the UK will be decided by qualified majority voting and that must be of concern to us. We need clarification from the Minister on that particular issue.

Dublin City Council has prepared a report on the potential challenges and opportunities facing Dublin city following Brexit. That follows the Dublin city Brexit summit. It has been suggested that the capital is not prepared for Brexit and that we will not be able to capitalise on the opportunities that may arise. Concerns have been expressed about pre-existing capacity and infrastructure deficits. In particular, we must examine if our transport infrastructure, office accommodation, education facilities and social amenities can cope with new employees arriving here to take up employment in financial services, for example, not to mention our lack of housing supply and overpriced accommodation. Increased investment is required in housing, transport and hotel and office space, and that must be provided by both central and local government.

The Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Union Affairs visited Brussels in February where we met the Minister of State, Deputy Dara Murphy. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae has given a very comprehensive report of the visit, which I found to be very useful and informative.

While there, we met Michel Barnier, the chief negotiator for the European Commission, Guy Verhofstadt, MEP, the European Parliament's representative on Brexit, Commissioner Phil Hogan, Declan Kelleher, Ireland's permanent representative to the EU, who is doing an excellent job over there. We also met many other MEPs from various countries. There is a clear understanding in Europe of the challenges faced by Ireland arising from Brexit and sympathy for the position in which we now find ourselves. However, the clear view expressed by everyone we met was that we have a crucial role to play in bringing forward creative solutions to the problems we will experience as a result of Brexit. So far, no practical solutions have been put on the table by anyone, which is a real worry.

The other matter of note is that there is huge interest in the ramifications for the Northern Ireland peace process. There are real concerns that Brexit will be bad for that process. The EU is proud of the role it has played in promoting the Northern Ireland peace process and it does not want to do anything which might damage that.

Every effort should be made to attract the European Medicines Agency to Ireland. I understand it employs up to 800 people. When members of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs visited Brussels in February we were told that 20 countries were interested, but that only 15 of those bids were serious. At the end of the day, only six to eight of the bids will be credible. How stand our efforts to attract this agency to Ireland at this stage? What is our position regarding the European Banking Authority? Is there a possibility that this body could relocate here and what is being done in that regard?

It is important for Ireland to be clear about the consequences of Brexit for each sector of our economy. I was pleased to hear the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport outlining earlier what is being done in his Department in this regard. Other sectors affected include food and drink, fisheries, seafood, exports in the Border region, financial services, health, tourism, aviation, transport and haulage, as well as crime and policing issues. By now each Government Department and State agency must be fully apprised of the issues of concern for these sectors, and are bringing forward policy solutions which can also feed into the negotiating process.

Fianna Fáil strongly believes that we need a Minister with responsibility for Brexit. There is political uncertainty at present and there is speculation about changes in Government personnel. There is also speculation about a Cabinet reshuffle in the coming weeks, although time will tell. I am not sure, however, that the Taoiseach is in the best position to co-ordinate Ireland's response to Brexit. He obviously has an important role to play but, for example, he was in Washington for several days during the St. Patrick's Day festivities. In view of the speculation over political uncertainty in the coming weeks, one wonders whether it would not be better to have a full Cabinet Minister for Brexit based in Government Buildings co-ordinating efforts on this matter. I know the Government does not agree with this and that Fianna Fáil keeps harping on about it, but I am obliged to do so. I am of the view that we need a designated Minister for Brexit.

When members of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs visited Brussels, we stressed that Ireland remains a fully committed member of the EU. We appreciate that the EU faces many problems at this time apart from Brexit. We are fully prepared to play our role in tackling the problems facing the EU as a whole, including the democratic deficit and the need to resell the European project to a new generation of Europeans. It must be pointed out that the EU is responsible for an unprecedented period of peace, prosperity and progress in Europe. Ireland will play its full role in that regard.

There is a lot of work to be done and the next issue is the forthcoming European Council summit. I wonder if there will be changes to the guidelines if member states are pressing for them. Perhaps the Minister could deal with that point in his response. Ireland should certainly be pressing for some more changes before the draft guidelines are finalised.

I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for this opportunity to address the House on what I think we all agree is the biggest challenge facing the agrifood sector in many years. The scale of the Brexit challenge is evident from our trade figures which illustrate our dependence on the UK market. According to the CSO, in 2016 we exported €4.8 billion worth of agricultural products to the UK, representing about 39% of our total agrifood exports. Our imports came to €3.7 billion which represented 47% of our total agrifood imports.

It is not just about the numbers, however, but also about the extensive and highly-integrated nature of the trading relationship between the UK and Ireland, and the need to protect this relationship to the maximum extent possible. Our priorities are clear - we want to ensure that we have continued unfettered access to the UK market, without tariffs, and with minimal additional customs and administrative procedures. In addition, we are asking that the UK market be kept viable for Irish producers by minimising the risk from UK trade agreements with third countries after Brexit.

In the short-term, our most immediate concerns have centred on the significant drop in the value of sterling against the euro. I have attempted to address these challenges primarily through the measures announced in budget 2017. These include further additional funding for Bord Bia, which now stands at €3.6 million since the decision of the UK to leave the EU, a new €150 million low-cost loan scheme, additional agri-taxation measures, and increased funding under the rural development programme and seafood development programme.

The more medium to long-term impacts of Brexit include the potential disruption that will arise from new trading arrangements and possible tariffs, changes to regulations and standards, Border controls and certification, and the related areas of veterinary and health certification. My Department and its agencies were giving careful consideration to these potential impacts, even before the referendum took place last June. In order to ensure that the process works well, I have put in place a number of practical steps, including: the establishment of a Brexit response committee and a dedicated Brexit unit in my Department; the creation of a stakeholder consultative committee, complemented by frequent contact with representative organisations and companies on an ongoing basis; close consultation with Bord Bia, Bord lascaigh Mhara and Enterprise Ireland; and the addition of Brexit as a standing item on the agenda of the Food Wise 2025 high-level implementation committee.

In addition to regular contacts at fora such as the Council of Ministers, I have also embarked on an extensive process of engagement with counterparts in Northern Ireland and the UK, and with other member states and EU institutions. I had meetings with my German, Dutch and Danish counterparts during the St. Patrick’s weekend, as well as with my colleagues from Estonia, Poland, Luxembourg and Austria. Most recently, I met the French Minister for Agriculture, Stéphane Le Foll. I intend to meet shortly with my Italian, Spanish and Belgian counterparts in this regard. I have also met the UK Secretary of State, Andrea Leadsom, on a number of occasions and have had a bilateral discussion with the Minister of State, George Eustice, in Luxembourg recently. I have also been in regular contact with Commissioner Hogan, and my officials have taken part in meetings with the Commission and the Barnier task force, most recently in March.

One of the biggest challenges ahead for us will be to reduce our dependence on the UK market. We have been putting considerable effort in recent years into opening new markets and building on existing potential. This work becomes all the more pressing in the light of Brexit. The Minister of State, Deputy Doyle, and I led successful trade missions to China, Singapore, Vietnam and South Korea in September, and to North Africa in November. I also led a successful mission to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates a few weeks ago. I am currently considering further potential destinations for later in 2017.

Notwithstanding all of the work done to date, and noting the important step taken recently in the form of the UK's article 50 notification, we are still at an early stage in the Brexit process. There are likely to be many twists and turns ahead but I will continue to work to achieve the best possible outcome for Ireland's agrifood and fisheries sectors.

One of the particular challenges, which was alluded to by previous speakers, relates to the trading relationship between the Republic and Northern Ireland. Nowhere else is the all-island nature of the agricultural economy more clearly manifested. Take the following statistics for example. Some 30% of the milk pool from Northern Ireland is processed in the Republic, particularly in dairy processing plants along the Border such as Lakelands and LacPatrick. Strathroy Dairy in County Tyrone in Northern Ireland collects a significant milk pool in the Republic, processes it is Strathroy and redistributes it in the liquid milk market all over the Republic. In 2015, 55,000 cattle were exported from the Republic to Northern Ireland. Approximately 400,000 sheep come South for slaughter annually. Pigs cross the Border in both directions on their way to slaughter plants.

There is clearly a highly-integrated all-island agrifood economy. I have had very significant engagement with various parties in Northern Ireland in that context. Indeed, in the sectoral dialogues which my Department organised, there was significant participation from the agrifood economy in Northern Ireland. Many of those participants would have been of the view that the United Kingdom should have remained within the European Union, but are now very anxious to deal with the reality with which they are confronted and to engage with our Government in an effort to ensure that the highly-integrated nature of that agrifood economy is reflected in the negotiations.

It is particularly disappointing that there is currently no Executive in Northern Ireland with which to engage. I had very useful engagement on up to a dozen occasions with Michelle McIlveen, the DUP Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, in which we addressed, in considerable detail, some of the issues to which I have already alluded. There is ongoing engagement at a technical level between officials in my Department and their counterparts in Northern Ireland, but ever since the collapse of the Executive in Northern Ireland there has been a vacuum in that area and the best interests of the entire island are done a disservice as long as that continues.

My colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Flanagan, is in Belfast and I know there are efforts under way to establish an Executive. I sincerely hope that all parties recognise, particularly in the context of Brexit, the bigger picture of the serious disservice being done, not just to the citizens of Northern Ireland but to the entire island and the Brexit endeavour by not having an Executive. Not having an Executive means, from a Dublin perspective, not having that critical voice with which to engage. It also means not having that critical voice whispering in the ear of the UK Government and bringing the concerns of the people of Northern Ireland to its attention, as the Executive's Welsh and Scottish counterparts do in specifically dedicated fora for the regional assemblies.

In concluding my remarks I urge all of those participants, representatives of the political parties and those of no political persuasion, to redouble their efforts as we approach Good Friday. It would be a fitting occasion on which to re-establish an Executive in Northern Ireland. It is a significant voice, which is presently absent from the stage, that is crucial to ensuring that the voice of Northern Ireland is heard loud and clear, particularly with regard to Border areas where there is a highly-integrated agrifood economy. It must be heard in Dublin, and we have had considerable and productive engagement with the Executive up to the point of its collapse, but it must also be heard in London because we need as many friends in court as possible in the UK.

I have had engagement with the food and drinks industry in the UK and with farming organisations in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and we share common ground in respect of Brexit. Although the UK is on the other side of the negotiating table as we are one of the 27 remaining member states, where we have common ground with UK interests it is important that we engage with all those friends in court, so that areas of common ground are clearly expressed in the corridors of power, not just in Dublin, but in Belfast, London and Brussels. Unfortunately, the lack of an Executive in Northern Ireland is a very significant impediment to progressing the all-island case in terms of the agrifood economy. I hope that all parties in the Assembly in Northern Ireland will redouble their efforts in that regard in the coming days.

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine's description of having friends in court and his comments on the importance of the UK market and what its approach might be are in stark contrast to some of the language being used by other European member states in respect of Britain. The Government should be encouraged to take the line that the Minister has outlined because Britain, as our largest trading partner, needs to be on our side in the context of the negotiations and in understanding Northern Ireland and the Irish position. It would be wrong of us to join with Europe in its condemnation of Britain or in the strong language that was used in the earlier part of the discussion regarding Brexit and the process.

If one goes back to the Brexit vote, the course of that campaign and the analysis afterwards clearly showed that people in Britain were fed up of Europe. They had a belief that there was too much interference from Europe, they wanted their own sovereignty to be front and centre and their own self-interest to be addressed. Essentially, that is what the UK is going to do. Britain is going to ignore most of the other countries and is going to look after its own self-interest. That is what this is about. It would seem that the political system in Ireland has not learned from that process.

I am in favour of Europe. I am in favour of most of what is done out there. I do not like, however, how it is being controlled from the centre. I do not like being told what we should and should not do. I believe that we are Irish people first - men and women. After that we are European. In order to be worthwhile in Europe, we should hold to the dynamic of defending the country, its heritage, traditions, trade and so on. At the same time, that does not mean that we are not good Europeans. I have to go back to being a good European to see what happened to us, because the late Brian Lenihan was a good European when he went out there to negotiate and was told that financial bombs would go off in Dublin if we were to burn the bondholders. This country had to take on a significant amount of debt because of the self-interest of the big players within Europe. French and German bondholders were interested in nothing else but their bonds and their financial input. Europe responded to that, and penalised a small country like ours by supporting their policy of not burning the bondholders and supporting the pillar banks. When we look back, we realise that we got very little - and very little support - for being good Europeans and swallowing that pill. I wonder how strong we will now be in the context of that conversation, or that analysis, with Europe in terms of either being good Europeans and defending our self-interest, or vice versa.

It is my strong belief that if we do not enter into these negotiations with a full understanding of the impact of Brexit on our economy and the need for Europe to support us, we will not get the best deal possible.

I have heard Ministers in the past outline how Brexit is going to impact their particular area, be it agriculture as the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Creed, outlined, tourism, transport or any other area. However, I am not convinced that work is being done. I understand groundwork has to be done first, foundations have to be laid and we build on that. Businesses want to know what the Government is doing about the worst case scenario for small businesses in this country. They have not heard a single word about that. Large and small businesses are going to be negatively impacted by Brexit. That negative impact will be far greater if we are not prepared.

The Government has said that we are prepared to canvass and take on the relocation of financial services from Britain to Ireland. That has not happened. The financial services are relocating to countries other than Ireland. We have so far failed the very first test in terms of benefiting from Brexit in the financial services sector.

That is not true.

It is true. If the Minister for State looks at the headlines he will see the financial services companies are going to Frankfurt and elsewhere and we are not at the races in terms of the forceful argument and position we need to take to get something out of this for this country.

I am not convinced that we are as well-prepared as we should be in terms of agriculture. I admire the Minister for seeking out his friends and having people, as he said, in court who will support our position. However, when a person is in business, he or she needs a plan. That person needs to know where he or she is going. Markets react to that. Small businesses react to that and they plan on the basis, in this case, of Government policy and what we believe will come out of Brexit and the supports that will be there for small businesses. Indigenous businesses, exporters and even those on the High Street need a plan. Financial services need a plan. As we go through the process, they need some sort of indicative position as to what that plan might look like.

I am not convinced that we know how to deal with the transport systems. What will happen if there are tariffs on transporting goods across our Border, through England and into Europe? What will happen if there is a hard Border? How will exporters and transporters, who are on a very low margin, be supported during the process of this discussion? How will they be supported if the agreement goes wrong for us? We have to plan for the worst case scenario and we have to be prepared to step in and support small businesses, those that export and those that transport those exports. I do not see that plan in place. Similar to other Departments, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine is describing the negative possibilities but we do not see them being addressed. There is an onus on this House to ensure there is an overall plan and to ensure that plan is supported financially by Government in terms of what we have to get from Europe. The decision that comes out of this will have a negative impact. We need to limit that negative impact as much as possible but the Government is not yet up to the game.

The Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, brought forward the welcome report on the cost of motor insurance. However, the issue of truck insurance being made available right across Europe so that those in the business can get the cheaper option needs to be explored. Even doing that much would instil some confidence in the industry that we recognise what is going on here and we are going to address it.

In recent weeks in this House, we have kicked the can down the road on issues such as water charges, the Garda Commissioner and so on. I do not want to see the same happen in regard to the Brexit issue and the hard questions that have to be answered.

We need to be good Europeans with a strong, hard edge. We must not be afraid to argue our case and look after our own self-interest. That is what other European countries will do. That is certainly what France and Germany will do.

Brexit raises significant challenges for the Government, the country and the people of Ireland. We have been undertaking contingency planning for this challenge since long before the Brexit referendum was held. The contingency planning began in the Department of Finance in 2015.

There will be certain opportunities for Ireland and other EU countries, particularly in regard to financial services. Those are opportunities for all of Ireland. One third of financial services sector jobs in this country are located outside Dublin, in places like Cork, Limerick, Galway, Letterkenny, Kilkenny and elsewhere. As we seek to grow our international financial services sector and take advantage of opportunities coming from Brexit, I will be doing my best to ensure those opportunities are available to the entire country.

As Minister of State at the Department of Finance, I have responsibility for financial services. As such, I participate in the Cabinet Brexit committee and also lead our international financial services IFS 2020 strategy. This is our five-year strategy for growing our financial services by 30%, which equates to creating roughly 10,000 more jobs in that sector. The strategy's vision is to make ourselves the global location of choice for specialisation and innovation in financial services. We look at the latest developments such as FinTech, RegTech, Insurtech, neo-banking and payments in those different sectors. We do that along with members of industry. I chair a quarterly committee where Government and industry can work together to ensure we are capitalising on the latest opportunities as they arise.

The strategy has been developed on a rolling one-year action plan basis. The plans are flexible and can be adapted depending on what is happening internationally. When the outcome of the referendum became clear in 2016, we adapted our plan and our communications so that we could be in the markets where this would be relevant and where the decision-makers were. We went there to talk about the opportunities of using Ireland as a gateway or bridge into the Single Market. We did so in China, North America and Europe.

The action plan was launched in January 2017. There are two parts to it. The first part deals with the context of Brexit and everything that is important in terms of our offering. This includes our contingency planning, communications plans, the Central Bank, the regulator and some other contextual pieces such as international baccalaureate education. The second part of the plan contains 40 action points across four key pillars that address exactly what we want to do with international financial services over the year ahead. It involves working with industry and looking at the key opportunities we have.

We launched the action plan at the European Financial Forum in Dublin Castle. In excess of 600 attendees from more than 300 companies came to talk about the future of financial services in Europe. It was very significant that they were doing so in Ireland. It gave us an opportunity to talk about our common law jurisdiction, our English-speaking population, our proximity and connectivity to the UK and the rest of Europe, our strengths and why we feel we are the natural location of choice for companies seeking to continue their access to the Single Market after the UK leave the EU. We also discussed the professionalism and expertise of our financial regulator.

One action point in the 40 point plan is to set up a public sector financial services subgroup to engage with the Cabinet committee on Brexit. That group has been formally established and last met on 1 March. It is led by the Department of Finance and is tasked with developing our strategic and prioritised approach to the implications of this referendum for Ireland and the EU. It does not look solely at the opportunities but also the potential risks in regard to consolidations and the future of our financial services in Europe.

We need to be across that to make sure we continue to pursue issues like a capital markets union without any unnecessary delays, but we can also protect the strong offering we have on how we believe financial services should develop into the future. That has been an important part of what we are doing.

In 2016, there were opportunities for outreach under the banner brand and they have continued in 2017 into Asia, North America and Europe to promote those aspects of our financial services and the opportunity we now present post-Brexit. In FinTech and payments in particular, in 2016 we developed two strategy papers with industry, and in 2017 they have become specific action points for this year. One quarter of our action plan for 2017 is dedicated to FinTech and payments.

We also sought in 2016, and we are continuing that work this year, to position ourselves as a gateway for financial services, in particular for the Asian economies. In December last year, we were granted a RQFII quota for the trading of Renminbi, which was a very positive development. We have applied for membership of the Asian Investment Infrastructure Bank. We hope to hear positively on that in the course of the coming year.

I have had a series of round-table discussions in 2016 and 2017 with industry. We are holding another one in Dublin Castle tomorrow to give people an opportunity to feed their input into what they believe is happening and the opportunities and risks as we look ahead as a result of Brexit but also on other areas as well. It is not just about Government but Government and industry working together.

Companies are making decisions to come to Ireland as a result of Brexit, not just to Dublin but also to Cork and other cities. Some of them will announce it publicly later in the course of this year. Others will not announce it publicly for their own reasons, be it to do with shareholders, customers, client base or political sensitivities. As we look across to the United Kingdom, UK, we see how certain companies have already been used as a political football and we completely respect the right of those companies not to make public their decisions or declarations in a Brexit context if they choose not to. We also recognise that not every company that needs to relocate itself or part of its entity out of the UK will come here. We understand already from the engagement we have had that companies will be relocating here across financial services from banking to insurance to payments, FinTech, fund management and fund administration as well as asset management.

The issue of the European Banking Authority was raised earlier. We have had a positive engagement with the head of the European Banking Authority. We have raised that with the Commission as well. I will conclude to allow my colleague, Deputy Fitzpatrick, contribute.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this very important subject. There is no doubt that the UK’s decision to leave the European Union will have major consequences for us here in Ireland and also for the rest of the EU. Representing the Border county of Louth, I am aware, more than most people, of the immediate challenges facing us. In recent months I have spoken to many constituents and business people who are concerned about the fallout of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. In the Border region of Louth and Border towns like Dundalk, the immediate danger is the fall in the value of sterling. That will affect the retailers and business people all along the Border in the short term, but let us be very clear. This is not the first time we in Dundalk have faced the challenges of a weak sterling. We survived a weak sterling before and we will survive a weak sterling in the future.

There is too much scaremongering and people playing political games for their own gain as a result of the UK triggering Article 50. We should be very clear. The UK has made its decision to leave the EU as a result of an internal Tory feud. The then UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, took a reckless decision and paid the ultimate price. We must not allow ourselves to become in any way uncertain about our future in the EU. We are proud members of the EU and that is where our future lies. We are committed to the EU, the Single Market, the euro and our low corporation tax rate. We must not forget that the UK will look after its own interests first and foremost. For our part, we must protect and secure ongoing free movement of people, trade and capital between our two countries. We must also protect the 200,000 jobs that directly rely on our trade with the UK. We must protect the Northern Ireland peace process and all the good work that has been achieved over the past two decades.

I believe that if the UK exit from the EU is handled properly, it will offer many long-term opportunities for Ireland. For example, the UK is currently the largest receiver of foreign direct investment in the EU. It currently receives more than £35 billion per year in foreign direct investment. To put that in context, Ireland receives just over €5 billion each year. We now have a fantastic opportunity to bring more foreign direct investment to Ireland. News reports are coming in already to the effect that many multinational companies are considering relocating their headquarters away from the UK. I urge IDA Ireland to continue the fine work it does in promoting Ireland abroad and to put in place immediately an action plan to contact every potential foreign direct investor and outline the advantages of investing in Ireland.

The weakening of sterling will pose many difficulties for us and our retailers and businesses. As I said, we overcame these challenges in the past and we will overcome them in the future. There will be new opportunities for us as a result of the new make-up of the EU. There will be new opportunities to entice international firms and businesses to relocate to Ireland and new opportunities to sell Ireland as a viable alternative to the UK. We must exploit these opportunities and ensure Ireland continues to prosper as a fully committed member of the EU.

Coming from a Border area like Dundalk, I know there is a lot of scaremongering going on, and people are panicking about what will happen in the coming months and years. I have full faith in our leader, the Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny. I hope that in the negotiations that will take place in April, May and June we will put our best foot forward. People are starting to panic but it is important that they do not. The opportunities are there for us. Multinational companies are already relocating in Ireland. I note that from Donegal all the way to Louth, companies are leaving Northern Ireland and relocating in the Border areas. We are part of a 27-man team. The Minister, Deputy Charlie Flanagan, has contacted the other 27 EU countries and it is very important that we look after Ireland first and the UK second.

Here we are nine months later. The letter is written but we are still very much in the dark as to the potential consequences of Brexit. I fear that it has not dawned on people what those consequences will be either in the case of a soft Brexit, a hard Brexit or in the nightmare scenario where there is no agreement and tariffs start to be imposed.

It is only fair to acknowledge that the Government has done a lot of good work in getting the Border issue and the issue of Northern Ireland recognised. Instead of rhetoric, we must acknowledge that there have been achievements. That was obvious in the European Commission paper that followed the British letter of exit. However, it is beyond me - I am not particularly technological - how a country where the biggest issue in the Brexit campaign was immigration will come up with a scenario that will result in a soft Border. We all want it but we need to start seeing models of what that will look like and the location of the Border because there will have to be some element of a border. It might be time to re-examine our notions of a border in the context of this but we have just about two years to do it.

I was in Brussels as part of a party delegation some weeks ago. There is no understanding in Brussels of the impact on the Irish economy and of the fact that we are specifically in the downstream of Brexit in a manner that other countries are not. When we raise the economic issue, there is ignorance as to our dependence on the UK market. The example they kept throwing back at us was France and the Netherlands. They, too, are dependent on the UK market, although not to the same extent as Ireland.

Bord Bia's report on the impact on food and agriculture spoke about increased trade costs, which are applicable all over the EU, the decline in the value of the Irish food industry as a consequence of the currency exchanges, and the potential of 25,000 redundancies. That should have been a wake-up call for everybody in terms of the potential impact of Brexit, but it was not. We are sauntering along. Even this evening there are only four Deputies in the Chamber talking about this impending tsunami that will come at us. That may be a failure of politics or everybody. We are all involved in Brexit issues. We are all having meetings and conferences. It is the old méar fhada, except this méar fhada will run out of fada very shortly.

I heard the Minister of State, Deputy Murphy, speak about an event for business tomorrow. It will be interesting to get their feedback from the past three weeks since the letter was lodged and this became very real in terms of UK business and UK inquiries. We will now begin to see the effect of it in terms of falls in inquiries. We can see it in the tourism industry, and that worries me. It worries me in the context of remarks made by the Minister, Deputy Noonan, earlier today around the stability programme update where he downplayed the initial impact of Brexit. It has not particularly hit our economy yet but it has the potential to do so, and we cannot downplay it.

What I would hold the Government to account for is the failure to ramp up investment significantly. I am not talking about one or two places. I am talking about significant investment in staff capability in Enterprise Ireland, IDA Ireland, Bord Bia and all our overseas promotional agencies. There is no sense in us talking up new markets if we are not putting the bodies into it. Putting two or three bodies into a market like India or China is irrelevant. We are lucky we have such an excellent spirit and cadre in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade that have built relationships but the Department cannot do it by itself. IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland need more resources to build the new markets and protect the ones we have so that we protect the jobs of people in this island who will be affected.

We must also become ambitious and serious about our capital investment programme. As a country we have failed to engage with the Juncker plan in a meaningful or ambitious manner. We have used it to build primary care centres. On the other hand, the Polish Government has used it to restock Poland's railway system, a proper investment with access around the country. We need to make a number of serious investments that Brexit-proof this economy. We need a north-west motorway, proper motorway connections and broadband that will enable various agencies to operate outside the capital. We need to become serious about this city. There is no sense in us trying to attract employers from the City of London when we cannot guarantee accommodation, transport and basic communications. This city must present itself as a Brexit location but it must make decisions about easing planning in the city if we are to be a venue of choice that is attractive to people who might leave the City of London. There is consultation around the national planning framework but that must also be Brexit-proofed. Where we make the investments through that and the capital review, which is also under way, we should do so in a manner that ensures the areas that will be hit hardest by Brexit, such as the Border, regional areas and areas furthest from this city, are given a basic level of infrastructure to allow them to fight and take this on.

Brexit is effectively a declaration of war against the Irish economy and we must fight back in the same way we would fight a declaration of war, and that is with might and a sense of purpose. This is not happening at the moment. A lot of good work is happening but there is no sense of the seriousness of this situation being put across. Deputy Fitzpatrick referred to people spreading panic. It is not panic. It is being real. When our biggest trading partner splits away from us for the first time in many decades, it is a real threat to every part of the island.

The EU needs to look in the mirror, so to speak. I have made criticisms, and since last June I have seen no sense that the EU establishment is looking at itself in the mirror and looking at why a country that had been in two world wars and did not have a third world war because of the impact of the EU decided to leave that body. The EU has not looked at the reasons it has moved away from the citizens of Europe whom it aims to bring together. There is no sense of modesty or fault being expressed on the part of those European leaders. Instead, we get this sense of them wanting to teach Great Britain a lesson and not hearing the lessons they should have learned. Unless the EU hears those lessons and makes changes to the institution, there is the possibility of further exits. An excellent idea that has left a most amazing legacy of peace, political stability and economic advancement in some cases will be left because of the folly and ego of some European leaders who do not see their role in Brexit and undermining the EU. The EU is supposed to be about people. It needs to remember that. As a small country, we should be leading an alliance of smaller nations in terms of resetting Europe back to basic principles, representing people, defending their rights and a Union of equals rather than some superpower that has everybody else dancing to its tune, because that is what we have had for the past number of years.

My party has made a commitment in terms of appointing a party spokesperson on Brexit. I look at the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. His focus is purely on Northern Ireland, where it should be, to try to bring about a resolution there. Other Ministers are running around doing their jobs but dealing with Brexit as an add-on. The Minister of State, Deputy Dara Murphy, is doing the job that every Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs has done since that portfolio was created. Deputies are right in that there are opportunities, but for us to maximise those opportunities we must invest. To address the threats, we must have some form of co-ordination rather than having 30 or possibly 40 Ministers being in charge of it. That is not going to work, particularly as 2019 approaches. In respect of the notion that the Taoiseach is the Minister for Brexit, I am afraid his attention is on exit, not on Brexit. Unless the Government wakes up, Brexit will be the worst possible outcome for Ireland.

We seem to be talking about nothing other than Brexit. Europe rather than Brexit is what we should be talking about. At some stage, we need to get sight of the fact that there are flaws in the European project. Europe is and has been very beneficial to the Continent, but it is unwieldy and certain things do not quite match up, for example, the German economy and structures compared with eastern European economies and structures. There are a few things we should remember. The UK is our closest friend and colleague. We speak the same language and have broadly the same mindset. Ireland will be somewhat isolated in Europe. We will become the only remaining English-speaking country in the EU. We must also understand what I describe as "Eurovision Song-ification" of Europe whereby as more European countries have entered the EU, power and the population base have transferred across.

There is a concern that some countries in the EU want to punish the UK. I do not believe the UK should be punished nor do I believe that it should be rewarded. Neither option should be chosen. We should be friends of the British people. I believe it was an error of judgment but this is what was voted for and we must get on with it. The EU has issues. It is too unwieldy. President Juncker is certainly a eurocrat but I was satisfied to hear Donald Tusk saying after the vote that perhaps the EU needs to take stock, have a look and see what direction Europe is going in. We must also remember that in the next number of weeks and months, about one third of the people of Europe will vote in elections. This will have a pretty significant impact on the direction Europe will take.

One crucial aspect of Brexit is money. Businesses all over Europe that trade with the UK or are likely to lose trade with the UK will require a funding stream to see them over the hump of potential loss of markets or the potential imposition of tariffs on goods entering the UK. For that to happen, we must ensure the European institutions have the funding streams and the ability to put in place a very low interest, long-term amount of money for which businesses can apply to allow them to get through a period of difficulty. A number of months ago, we saw the impact of a drop in the value of the pound on the mushroom industry, but businesses moved quickly. They are more capable of moving than any government. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine spoke previously about the €150 million fund for Irish agriculture. That needs to be multiplied by thousands. We need not billions but possibly up to a trillion or €2 trillion so that businesses in Europe have access at low rates over long periods and then business will be fine. We will then get over the hump and the potential difficulty that we could have if markets or goods tariffs are impacted.

I apologise, but I ask the Deputy to conclude as we must adjourn the debate. The Deputy will have the balance of his time when we return to the debate tomorrow. Sin deireadh le ráitis maidir le Brexit don tráthnóna seo. B'fhéidir go mbeimid ar ais leis an díospóireacht seo amárach.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share