Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 2 May 2017

Vol. 948 No. 1

European Council Meeting: Statements

The Taoiseach

I am pleased to address the House following the meeting of the European Council last Saturday, 29 April. This was the first meeting since the British Prime Minister, Theresa May, formally notified the European Union of the UK's intention to leave, thereby triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty of the European Union. It was therefore a meeting of the 27 remaining member states.

We adopted the EU negotiating guidelines and had a broad-ranging discussion about the process ahead. Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, and Jean-Claude Junker, President of the European Commission, also outlined the process and timelines around the relocation of the two EU agencies currently located in the UK. I am pleased with the outcome of the meeting, including the overall approach to the negotiations, and the acknowledgement of the need to address Ireland's unique concerns, as set out in the guidelines, as well as the declaration which provides reassurance around the provision on unity in the Good Friday Agreement.

The Government has been consistent and forthright in its view that the UK’s departure from the Union would have significant economic, political and social implications for Ireland. For over two years, we have been analysing the issues and engaging with sectors across the island of Ireland, including through the all-island dialogue, to identify our main areas of concern and to develop our priorities. These are to protect the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process, including by maintaining an open Border; to retain the common travel area; to minimise the impact on our economy; and to work for a positive future for the European Union. We have been extremely active at political and official level in engaging with our EU partners and the EU institutions. This has involved highlighting and explaining the significant implications for Ireland arising from Brexit and the need to take account of our particular concerns in the negotiations.

Since the UK referendum last June, we have had over 400 engagements on Brexit with our EU partners. Over the past ten months, as Taoiseach, I have had bilateral meetings with my counterparts in Germany, France, Spain, Belgium, Cyprus, Malta, Croatia, Poland, Denmark and the Netherlands, and with the Presidents of the European Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission and with the chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, whom I will meet again in Dublin next week. I also of course have spoken informally with all my EU counterparts in the margins of the European Council. Most recently, at the beginning of April, I had a second bilateral meeting with Chancellor Merkel in Berlin and just two weeks ago I travelled to The Hague to meet both my Dutch and Danish counterparts. In all these meetings, I explained the background and context of the Northern Ireland peace process and emphasised the need to avoid the re-imposition of a hard Border on the island of Ireland. As I have been saying for some time now, this is a political challenge and we will have to be flexible and imaginative in our efforts to find solutions.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs have both had extensive programmes of engagement, while other Ministers have been engaging with their EU counterparts. We have also been meeting regularly with our British friends within the structures of the Good Friday Agreement and the mechanisms flowing from the 2012 joint statement, while fully respecting the principle agreed with our EU partners of "no negotiation without notification". In addition to this, there has been deep engagement at senior official level, including through our permanent representation in Brussels and our network of embassies overseas. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the efforts and personal commitment of everyone involved who has worked so hard to achieve positive outcomes for our country.

It was by no means a given that Ireland’s position would be seen as a priority for the negotiations but, thanks to our strategic, persistent and patient work and the understanding and support of our European partners, I am pleased that Ireland’s specific concerns have been fully acknowledged in the guidelines. Supporting and protecting the achievements, benefits and commitments of the peace process, avoiding a hard Border and protecting the common travel area will now be addressed as priorities in the exit negotiations. I recall that the European Parliament adopted a resolution on 5 April last which also included strong references to our specific concerns. Prime Minister May's letter on 29 March triggering Article 50 and her statement to the House of Commons on the same day confirmed the British Government's objective of avoiding a return to a hard Border on the island of Ireland and its commitment to maintaining the common travel area. Clearly, our extensive campaign of strategic outreach at political, diplomatic and official level over recent months has been effective in ensuring that our unique circumstances and particular concerns are understood and acknowledged.

The extensive preparation by member states and the EU Institutions in advance of the European Council meant that the guidelines were agreed on Saturday without any major points of difference. In addition to the language reflecting our unique concerns, which provides an excellent basis on which to start the negotiations, we are also pleased with the tone of the text. It is open and constructive, while nevertheless clearly and firmly outlining the EU's objectives and principles. The approach to the question of the UK's financial liabilities is also welcome. This is, of course, a sensitive issue but it must be resolved in light of British commitments made as a member of the EU. It is sensible therefore, as agreed on Saturday, to focus first on the principles and methodology before considering the numbers or the structure of payments involved.

The text of the guidelines also highlights the importance of getting clarity regarding EU citizens' rights. This is a key issue across member states and I welcome the focus, which will help to provide certainty for people and families in many countries. Importantly from our perspective, the guidelines acknowledge the need for transitional arrangements, which will need to preserve the EU's legal order, and they underscore the need for a dispute resolution mechanism.

As Ireland stands to be more affected than any other member state by the UK's departure, it is crucial from our perspective that work begins as soon as possible on scoping out the future EU-UK relationship. We are pleased, therefore, that the guidelines acknowledge that the future relationship can be discussed once the European Council agrees that "sufficient progress" has been made on the exit issues. This means that the European Council - the Heads of State and Government of the 27 member states - will assess progress in the first phase of the negotiations. Assuming these are approached in good faith and sufficient progress has been made on the issues, it can agree to move onto the second phase, including consideration of the shape of the future relationship. Again in line with Ireland's interests, the language in the guidelines about the future relationship is generous. It indicates that the EU wants to have an ambitious agreement, not just in economic terms but also in areas such as security. It is very much our objective to have a close and positive relationship with the UK and we will continue to work with partners to achieve such an outcome.

I welcome the guidelines from a substantive perspective. I appreciate the thorough preparatory work carried out by the European Council team, the Commission task force and all our EU partners, whose willingness to listen to us and to acknowledge our unique concerns has brought us to this point.

The outcome is an endorsement of the Government’s approach and a clear recognition of the specific challenges we face.

The Government has robustly defended the Good Friday Agreement throughout the process so far, making clear to all concerned that, as a legally binding, international treaty registered with the United Nations, it provides a unique political and constitutional framework on the island of Ireland. We consider it important to provide reassurance that Brexit does not undermine any provision of the Good Friday Agreement and that, if the provision on unity by peaceful and democratic means is invoked at some time in the future, EU membership is assured, which is an important point. This is not about triggering any mechanism. I have been consistent in my view that the conditions for a referendum do not currently exist. However, the declaration we agreed on Saturday which will be recorded in the minutes of the European Council was hugely important in order to dispel any doubt or uncertainty on that point.

As I noted, Presidents Tusk and Juncker also informed the European Council about the timing and process involved in relocating the two EU agencies currently situated in the United Kingdom, namely, the European Banking Authority and the European Medicines Agency. Ireland has put itself forward as a candidate to host both agencies and the Ministers, Deputies Michael Noonan and Simon Harris, and their Departments have been active in making our case and seeking support for the bids. There is, of course, intense competition, with almost all member states bidding to host one or both of the agencies, but we are continuing with our efforts. The final decision will be taken by the European Council, probably by the end of the year. In the interim, the matter will be raised at COREPER meetings and dealt with by the General Affairs Committee before returning in the autumn to the European Council for a decision.

With the EU guidelines now adopted, including the language about our unique concerns, the Government is publishing today a position paper for the negotiations ahead. It reflects the findings of the Government's extensive preparatory work and consultations on the island of Ireland and at EU level and outlines the positions and priorities that will underpin our engagement in the Brexit process as it unfolds in the next two years. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade will deliver a statement at the end of this session and speak further about the position paper. There is much work to be done. With the EU guidelines agreed, the Commission will adopt tomorrow its draft of the more detailed negotiating directives. They will then be considered at official and ministerial level, before coming to the General Affairs Council for agreement on 22 May.

From Ireland's perspective, we are committed to playing a strong role as a member of the EU 27. We will continue to engage to ensure our concerns and priorities will be reflected in the EU negotiating position as it evolves and that we work towards a strong and constructive future relationship with the United Kingdom. We will also focus on domestic policy to reinforce the competitiveness of the economy, protect it from the full impact of Brexit and pursue all possible opportunities that might arise. We are well prepared and will continue to work to protect and promote Ireland’s interests. I look forward to keeping the House fully informed of developments in regard to Brexit and hearing statements from Deputies.

Deputy Micheál Martin

It is unfortunate, to say the least, that the Taoiseach has yet again put media management ahead of serious policy discussions. The Government's decision to publish today a document on the Brexit negotiations without any advance notice and it being shared in time for us to consider it in this debate speaks volumes. The Government has scheduled a debate on the Article 50 negotiations for one hour and 45 minutes, while simultaneously launching its policy on the negotiations. Frankly, that is absurd. The Taoiseach has invited us to a meeting at 6.30 p.m., at which he will tell us about the Government's policy on the matter we are discussing. Yet again, the Government has shown that it has no real interest in having informed discussions or respecting its obligations to the House. My party has been addressing the issue of Brexit for longer and in greater detail than any other party in the House and constructive at all times. We have used opportunities in Britain and elsewhere in Europe to promote Ireland's position. This should not be a partisan issue, yet Fine Gael is acting as if it is. Frankly, we have run out of patience with the refusal of the Government to share even basic information and the offering of briefings which reveal less than what is found in the media. The Taoiseach must realise that, irrespective of how Fine Gael addresses its leadership issues, this arrogant behaviour cannot continue. The Government is either interested in a national consensus on Brexit or it is not. If it is, we need to start having real discussions with basic information and objectives, but so far we have not seen a single piece of paper from the Government on a wide range of fundamental issues concerning Brexit. Where are the sectoral economic studies? Where is the legal work on defining the common travel area? Where are the detailed options, not just for limiting border controls but for protecting highly integrated supply chains? Where are the options for aiding market diversification and innovation?

For six years we have had a stream of so-called game changers, spun within an inch of their lives, but time after time the hype has not been followed by substance. Remember when the Taoiseach came to the House, garlanded by editorials lauding his skill, to announce a €60 billion game changer on debt? When the spinning stopped, the reality was that not only had Ireland got nothing from that supposed victory but that it had not even asked for anything. Brexit is much more important. It is the defining economic and social challenge for more than a generation. It will determine basic fundamental things about our future, yet the Taoiseach keeps playing games and focusing on spin. It may well be the case that the document he is launching will answer every question and shows exactly what he thinks we can achieve, but none of the briefings we have received suggests this is the case and my comments are focused on what is known. It is time for us to receive some proper perspective. This week's Council meeting was short and formally signed off on guidelines agreed to in advance. The unanimity of the decision is welcome and the guidelines are fair. They represent a reasonable position by the European Union and a strong statement of a shared determination that the Union will protect its interests in the negotiations.

On the specific issues raised by different countries, the guidelines are very positive and there appears to be no area in which a national concern is being ignored. On the provisions concerning Ireland, the strong support for it which has been evident to all who have been lobbying has been reflected. A number of crucial concerns have not been explicitly addressed in the guidelines, but the leaked content of the European Commission's separate negotiating directives document suggests all specific requests have been responded to. We welcome the inclusion in the leaked directives that negotiators respect the continued European Union citizenship rights of those resident in Northern Ireland. This is a matter we have raised with the Government, the Commission and the Parliament since the middle of last year. We welcome the reaffirmation of the position that Northern Ireland will be a full part of our sovereign territory should the people vote for it. An integral part of this is that it will be part of the European Union. That the Secretary of State, Mr. David Davis, has said the British Government has no issue with this is welcome. It is to be hoped those who claim to be Irish republicans but who opposed our membership of the European Union will have the basic grace to admit their error in trying to stop what is now a strong argument for those of us who advocate national unity.

What the guidelines do not represent is any form of a major breakthrough. Much of the content reflects the inevitable or the obvious. Owing to the nature of the negotiations and the approach of the British Government, we are no clearer today than we were last June on how the economic, social and political impact of Brexit will be managed. As the negotiations head into what is expected to be an 18-month phase, we have not yet seen details from either Government of what they mean when they refer to a soft border. We need less hype and more substance. We need to move on from the broad generalities to hard specifics about the post-Brexit arrangements we want on the island and between Ireland and Britain. Most important, we need to identify what form of relations fit within existing European Union law and whether we will seek changes in that law.

Since the Brexit vote, Fianna Fáil has been proactive in addressing in detail the issues which we see as central to mitigating some of the damage caused by Brexit. We strongly agree with the reported comments of President Juncker that there is no way of making a success out of Brexit and that all that can be done is to limit the harm. While we support the basic thrust of the negotiating guidelines, we are concerned about the impact of the sequencing if too inflexible an approach is taken. If we are to prevent a hard border or to properly address the unique concerns of Ireland, we need special arrangements which will be defined in terms of how they differ from the trade and personal rights provisions of the overall treaty. If there is no rapid progress on the financial settlement or no serious discussion of trade until after March 2019, this will cause serious issues for Ireland.

Clearly, if we are to avoid facing a cliff edge, we must be in a position to have what are close to final proposals ready for rapid negotiation. How are we to do this? There are many complex issues but the core two are North-South arrangements and the common travel area. Broader east-west arrangements are of serious concern also and I will return to them on another occasion. There are mechanisms for discussion of detailed North-South arrangements, but, unfortunately, these are currently stuck in a political road block. For nearly six months, Northern Ireland has had nobody at the table to represent its interests in Brexit discussions. Its political leaders have done nothing in terms of the hard work of producing detailed studies of Brexit issues and coming up with concrete proposals. Incredibly, the political institutions in Northern Ireland have failed to even publish an up-to-date analysis of the economic impact of Brexit there. The continued failure to establish a working Executive and to allow the assembly to get on with its business is causing real harm which goes beyond the cutbacks being implemented in health and education services. As a result of the recent assembly election, the DUP cannot secure a petition of concern, even with TUV support. The assembly could be doing a great deal at the moment on Brexit, in particular given the helpful comments of the DUP leader that the party also opposes a hard Border. I spoke about that earlier.

We need to know what the two Governments understand as the legal position on the common travel area in regard not only to work but also to full social and political rights. Until we see this, we can have no idea of what remains to be done and what resources are required. The guidelines and the directive state that everything agreed for Ireland must respect the European Union legal order and conform with European Union law. As there are no proposals, we have no idea whether this is a major or minor limit on what is possible. Given the refusal of the Government to make its plans available prior to the debate, there is little more of substance for us to discuss. There is no point producing a document after a debate. As such, we need to schedule a proper debate for next week. Hopefully, the Government will approach that in a more constructive spirit and in recognition that, in facing this national challenge, a bit less spin and a great deal more engagement is what is needed. The Minister is looking at me but it would have been reasonable for Deputies to have got this document yesterday or this morning.

The Taoiseach

There is no problem in having a debate.

Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade (Deputy Charles Flanagan)

Of course, we can have a debate.

Deputy Micheál Martin

We should have had it in advance of this coming after the summit.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

To structure a briefing after a debate on it is bizarre.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There will be a questions and answers session after this. Deputy Martin, without interruption.

Deputy Micheál Martin

This is not good enough and there is no point in pretending it is.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Saturday's extraordinary meeting of the European Council was very important for the people of Ireland, North and South. Several weeks ago, the EU set out its draft guidelines for the Brexit negotiations and I expressed at the time my concern that the Irish Government had failed to ensure that the interests of all the people of the island were sufficiently reflected in them. I understand there were some efforts to have this corrected with only limited success. The minutes of the summit now state that in the event of Irish unity, which was not even mentioned in the initial draft guidelines but is now in the minutes of the summit, and in accordance with international law, the entire territory of such a united Ireland would be part of the European Union. That is a welcome development even though it is not part of the guidelines. However, I noted earlier that it is hardly the coup that some claimed. I was bemused by the Taoiseach's claim that he had heard no such claims. Modesty suits and becomes him.

The Taoiseach

I know of others who would take a different view.

Deputy Gerry Adams

The Taoiseach failed to get this clause included as part of the EU negotiating guidelines. In the four weeks since the publication of the draft guidelines, the Taoiseach succeeding in achieving one minor amendment to Article 11 dealing with Ireland which involved the addition of the words "in all its parts", a reference to the Good Friday Agreement. The Government failed to secure a commitment that no agreement on the Border or the status of the North could be achieved between the European Union and Britain without a separate and binding agreement between the Irish Government and Britain. This would have provided the Irish Government with a veto similar to that secured by Spain in respect of Gibraltar. I suspect we did not get that because we did not ask for it. In all my questioning of him the Taoiseach has refused to either confirm or deny this. Instead, he has achieved a commitment to flexible and imaginative solutions with the aim of avoiding a hard Border. This is aspirational, wishy-washy rhetoric in a world of substantive and difficult negotiations and it is not good enough.

The Taoiseach cites the hard work done by our public officials and I agree with him absolutely and commend them all. Officials act, however, on the political direction they are given by the Government. The visionary direction the challenges of these times demand is not being provided. Among our partners in the EU, there is solid support for the island of Ireland, the peace process and the unique and special circumstances faced by Ireland as a result of Brexit. In case people do not know, I remind the House, in particular the leader of Fianna Fáil and the Taoiseach, that the Democratic Unionist Party and the Ulster Unionist Party are for Brexit. There is no possibility of getting them to change their position nor, perhaps, should we ask them to do so. What was achieved, which was significant, was the letter signed by the late Martin McGuinness and Arlene Foster which set out a good piece of common ground on the practical realities of the consequences of Brexit. We have support or at least sympathy in the EU. I spoke to the President of the Bundestag recently and he told me that while there was support for Ireland, unless we put forward our ambitious positions, we should not expect anybody else to do it for us. That is very good advice indeed. The Taoiseach has failed to put forward the ambitious vision required and he has failed to harness the potential support and sympathy that is there.

The Taoiseach has also broken the commitment he gave two months ago to publish a consolidated paper on the Irish Government's negotiation priorities in advance of last weekend's summit. What influence on the outcome or on the Government's position does it give the House to be briefed and given a paper after the event? I am sure the Taoiseach will concede that he might get the odd good idea from this side of the Chamber which could be used in the national interest.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

There are questions every day.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I am sorry, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Adams, without interruption. Other Members will have an opportunity to speak. There will be questions to the Minister for the last 20 minutes or so.

Deputy Gerry Adams

There was a high level of media spin that the Government was going to deliver big time. However, it is disappointing that at the first hurdle the Government has fallen short again. The record of this and the last Government in dealing with our European partners is not a good one. The European Council guidelines could have gone considerably further. We have all acknowledged the recognition of the special, unique circumstances faced by Ireland as a result of Brexit but a stronger approach by the Government could have achieved a great deal more at the weekend. It means there will now be a huge amount to do in the coming negotiations. I do not know if the Taoiseach will be around to follow that through or whether he will hand it to someone else, but this is only the beginning of the process.

The Government cannot do the lifting for the British Government. That is its business albeit we have, of course, many mutual interests and concerns and should try to get as much of this developed and built on in the time ahead.

Something I find a lot coming from the North, particularly in these unique times and since the Good Friday Agreement, is the responsibility of an Irish Government to act for all of the people of the island, and not just for the interests of this State but for everyone, particularly given the fact the people of the North voted to remain. This seems to be ignored. The people of the North had a choice. They could have voted to leave but they voted to stay. There are diplomatic and other challenges in how we go forward in this regard, and sensitivities within unionism and, perhaps, sensitivities in the British Government. However, this has to be the focus and vision of any Government worth its day.

I make the case again that the best way to secure our future is through designated special status for the North within the European Union. This can still be achieved, but only if it becomes the priority and objective of the Government. So far the Government has resisted this. What needs to be discussed with our European partners is how all of Ireland can remain part of the Single Market and the common travel area, how our EU funding streams can continue to be assessed and how the rights of Irish citizens in the North-----

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Two minutes. Dhá bhomaite.

Deputy Gerry Adams

-----will be delivered on. An bhfuil mé críochnaithe anois nó an bhfuil dhá bhomaite fágtha?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Bhuel, má tá tú ag roinnt do chuid ama leis an Teachta Crowe-----

Deputy Gerry Adams

Tá dhá bhomaite fágtha agamsa.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Níl. Tá bomaite go leith fágtha.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Gabh mo leithscéal. Stadfaidh mé anois.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

One and a half minutes total.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Okay. Go raibh míle maith agat. Gabh mo leithscéal. We will continue with our modest efforts. We wish the Government well, but it needs to stand up for all of the people of this island.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Crowe has just over one minute.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I do not know what I am going to say in a minute.

Deputy Mick Wallace

He is not very generous.

Deputy Seán Crowe

We would all accept this was probably one of the most important meetings of recent years. As Deputy Adams said on the talks themselves, much was made out of the statement on going into a united Ireland. We are aware of the precedent created by German reunification and we know about the situation in Cyprus. While welcoming the fact there is recognition, and it is written down, the message is that we probably could have adopted a much stronger approach. The clock is clearly ticking for this process. The EU has shown itself to be flexible in dealing with various forms of integration and relationship for member states. We argue the British Government clearly has no strategic or economic interest in the North of Ireland and little regard for the consequences of the decision on the people of the North of Ireland after triggering Article 50. It has ignored the view of the North of Ireland and also Scotland.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

In recent weeks and months I have been critical of the Government with regard to its approach to Brexit. It has been my consistent view that whatever about behind the scenes work, and we cannot obviously know exactly what is going on, there is a need for the Government to expand the concrete visible actions to be taken to protect our nation from the known fall-out of Brexit and do the proper analysis to ascertain the unknown. This remains the case and I will come back to this point.

It is worth acknowledging one of the successes of the behind the scenes work. Others may be a bit more mealy-mouthed, and we all recognise the precedent the Good Friday Agreement created in this area. Despite all of this, the agreement on the European future of this island, that in the event of a future vote for reunification the integrated entity of Ireland would be a formal part of the European Union, was a diplomatic success. The work of our diplomats and Ministers in achieving this deserves recognition and acknowledgement here and I give it.

Much more concerning is the continued assertion from Downing Street that no deal is better than a bad deal. In truth, no deal is the worst possible deal. In the event of such an outcome the island of Ireland will suffer significant collateral damage. It has been my view for some time that Brexit is likely to have a transformative impact on the island, and will have as great an impact as the Anglo-Irish Agreement or the Good Friday Agreement were in their time. One of the factors in ensuring both these Agreements were positive was the intellectual engagement between political parties North and South in advance of them actually being finalised. The New Ireland Forum and the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation were both imperfect but both allowed for the type of detailed engagement between parties on this island that could begin to point towards productive avenues for engagement in renegotiation. The Labour Party believes now is an opportune time to create a new forum or a new convention on the future of this island. I will write to the Taoiseach this week with further details on my thoughts in this area.

I heard the Taoiseach's answer today that the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement is the appropriate forum to consider these issues. It is not because it is confined to the Houses. It is confined to the parties represented in these Houses. We need a much more open and broader forum to signal our openness to hearing views which are not captured by the representatives in the House.

I said I would return to the need for more concrete action by the Government to protect all of us from the potential impact of Brexit. In recent months I have said repeatedly in the Chamber that every party has been speaking about Brexit, but the Labour Party has put forward concrete tangible specific enumerated actions which would protect Ireland against a hard Brexit. Brexit will impact every sector in ways that cannot yet be fully determined. It will dominate public discourse for the next decade and present numerous challenges for the State. Many problems will be addressed as they arise, but there are practical steps Ireland could take now and things we can do in advance of any actual impact, and we need to set about doing them now. Nine months on from the referendum we should have seen some detail on the practical steps the Government will take, and perhaps in the coming hours we will see them. As other Deputies have said, it is indicative of a lack of thought that we are having this debate before we will be briefed on the constructive proposals of the Government. It seems to be a case of putting the cart before the horse.

That we still have only broad policy objectives on the common travel area, the prevention of a hard Border and protecting the peace process is not good enough. Perhaps in the next hour or two when we are briefed directly we will see more concrete proposals. The Labour Party has been calling for a Brexit early warning system to be put in place. Such an all-island system would bring together trade unions, employers and specific stakeholders in each sector. It would help identify not only the sectors but the individual firms and companies at risk as market conditions change and help them to adapt. We also call for state aid rules to be suspended for two years from the date of Brexit. This should be negotiated and accepted by our EU colleagues. With this, a €250 million Brexit trade adjustment fund should be specifically established to directly support businesses suffering from trade upheavals with the dislodgement of markets within the United Kingdom. Regional fora need to be established to help foster and create new jobs and support current ones. As we have said repeatedly, the impact of Brexit will not be uniform. Those of us who have been briefed by the ESRI on its detailed analysis know some geographical sectors as well as business sectors in our country will be badly impacted and we need to be ahead of the curve in protecting them.

These fora could work in tandem with the early warning system in order to Brexit-proof our regions.

The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation needs to re-examine the regional action plan for jobs, because Brexit has changed things. These plans were drawn up in 2015 and 2016, and they will already be redundant in many aspects. We need a full analysis of the potential and the risk to employment in our regions. In the worst-case scenario, were a hard Border to come into being between the North and the South, an arsenal of funding must be available to protect those worst-affected. As I have pointed out in Taoiseach's Questions, we also need new transport connections to Europe and a major investment programme in our ports would be needed to deal with the issue of landbridge services and to have alternative direct market access. Ports needing investment include Rosslare Europort, which is in my own constituency, and also in Dublin, Cork, Foynes and elsewhere.

I repeatedly called for the rules on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, EGAF, to be amended and made available to re-skill those workers who will be impacted. We can identify them now. The current EGAF programme is undergoing a mid-term evaluation, so the rules can change, but we need to engage with the Commission now to deal with that. We also believe that the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Union Affairs should hold public hearings. The Seanad has now set up the Seanad Special Committee on the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. While Taoiseach's Questions has functioned as our way to tease out things over the last year or so, the Oireachtas now needs to speak with one voice rather than through a multiplicity of voices.

We are also concerned at the prospect of the status of the English language being used as a possible negotiating point. It sounds impossible, but the head of the European Parliament's constitutional affairs committee, Ms Danuta Hübner, with whom I worked very closely when she was chair of the regional affairs committee and with whom I negotiated the cohesion funding, has said that English will not be one of the European Union's official languages once the UK leaves. We need to remove all doubt, and the Irish Government should inform the EU that it intends to notify English as well as Irish as an official EU language, so there should be no problem about that.

The Taoiseach

Of course. Absolutely.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Beyond this, I have also consistently said that Europe must adapt. We have proposed changes to the Stability and Growth Pact and to the fiscal rules, along with the implementation of a European pillar of social rights. It is interesting that there are now voices, even from those who are very pro-European, like Mr. Macron - I see our Minister for Social Protection supporting his campaign over the weekend - seeking to change the direction of Europe and re-engage it. We need to be to the forefront not only in talking about mitigating Brexit, but in imagining, envisaging and arguing for a social Europe that meets the needs of all our people.

I do not believe we have heard from Government on these issues. We have heard over recent months about the importance of our experience of the EU, but it is understood that we are going to be the most impacted country after Brexit. That is a leverage we have as well as a challenge. We can argue for the type of Europe the people of Ireland want, which is based on social rights, on prosperity and on solidarity in a way that has been absent over the last decade. I look forward to playing a constructive role for my party in those discussions.

Deputy Mick Wallace

I realise the Taoiseach is departing the scene, or the Chamber, as of now-----

The Taoiseach

No, not yet.

Deputy Mick Wallace

I have a couple of points before he goes. I know Brexit has many different implications for the State. There are obviously many different concerns for Ireland. I know the nature of the Border is a huge factor. Exports to Britain are a huge factor. It changes things with regard to Ireland's relationship with Europe because we are so strongly linked to the UK.

There is an effort to attract companies from London to Ireland. That is not easily done. I am sure many will head for Frankfurt and Paris, but there is potential for Ireland to attract people. There is a need for long-term thinking on it. We need some serious infrastructure investment to attract more of them. The housing issue is a big player. It would be difficult to house a serious number of people moving from a city like London to Ireland if we managed to attract them. I am sure that they will not all move in the next year or two or three. People could be moving in the next ten years.

Another important factor that we discussed before the break is that Ireland is a strongly developed economy in the western world, and we should be seen to do business properly here. The commission of investigation into NAMA is important in this area. We cannot be perceived as being some sort of banana republic with regard to business. It is important that we insist on things being done well in how we do big business. I do not know what the timeline is for the commission of investigation into NAMA. Is it being discussed this evening? I do not know. The Taoiseach might let me know.

The Taoiseach

Yes. We have got two observations from parties. I intend to bring an amendment to Government next week, but I will talk to Deputy Wallace about it this evening if he attends the briefing session.

Deputy Mick Wallace

I will do that. Another thing I would like to air with the Taoiseach is that, if he is departing the scene as Taoiseach in 2017, he might consider reopening the Iranian embassy. I do not think it would be a bad idea. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Charles Flanagan, who is in the Chamber, mentioned something of that nature last year. Iran has the second-largest economy in the Middle East. It has a population of 80 million. There is incredible potential for growth in Iran.

There is a very interesting article about Iran in The Guardian today. A Houses of Parliament committee in the UK, the Lords international relations select committee, has been looking at Britain's Middle Eastern policy. The article quotes its report as concluding that "The UK must fundamentally rethink its approach to the Middle East and potentially distance itself from the “mercurial and unpredictable” leadership of Donald Trump". The article continues, "Former cabinet ministers, senior foreign policy advisers and diplomats warned the Foreign Office against relying too heavily on the US President and urged the UK to completely redraw its approach to the region". The article also states, "The report concluded Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, should support the Iran nuclear deal." President Mr. Trump may undermine the deal. It also states:

The group is chaired by the former Conservative cabinet minister Lord Howell and includes former foreign policy advisers to William Hague and Gordon Brown, the former UK ambassador to the UN, Lord Hannay, and the former Labour Defence Secretary, Lord Reid.

“In a world less automatically dominated by the US underpinning security in the region, it is no longer right to have a stance at every stage of ‘if we just get on with the US everything will be alright’, Howell said.

We, too, should have a more independent line in how we deal with countries like Iran. At European level, we should be arguing for a more open approach. We do business with Saudi Arabia. I do not think one would have to be a rocket scientist to say that Iran is more transparent than Saudi Arabia in how it does business. Some sanctions have been lifted but because our banks still refuse to do financial transactions with Iran, because of pressure from American financial institutions, we are falling behind other Europeans. Many Europeans are back to doing plenty of business with Iran. Considering that there are 80 million people in Iran, it is still going to be playing catch-up in the next few years.

There is huge potential for a country like Ireland, especially in the dairy products sector, to have an impact there. Refusing to do so is shooting ourselves in the foot.

On the issue of the Middle East, it might be time, given that many Europeans are questioning following the diktat of the United States 100%, to rethink the role of Shannon. We have had this argument many times here. It is time to rethink our facilitation of the US military which has caused such destruction in the Middle East. It might be interesting if the UK takes a more singular line in the area. It might be an opportunity for Ireland to do likewise. Moving to a position where we are a much more neutral country, prepared to make decisions based on what is best for the people of Ireland, and not to follow the diktat of the US military would be a very positive position to take. I am an optimist, but I do not expect the Taoiseach to close Shannon to the US military just before he steps down. It is the direction we should be going.

The Taoiseach might have a think about opening the Iranian embassy. It is common sense.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

The Taoiseach is leaving the Chamber as I speak but I want to compliment him for once. He is doing such a good job that he might not stand down at all.

I note that on 29 April the European Council issued its guidelines following the United Kingdom's notification under Article 50 to withdraw from the Union. The guidelines rightly note that European integration has brought peace to Europe and allowed for an unprecedented level and scope of cooperation on matters of common interest in a rapidly changing world. It also says that the Union's overall objective in the forthcoming negotiations will be to preserve its interests, those of its citizens, its businesses and its member states.

I am certainly heartened to hear that those at the top of the European Union intend to put the interests of citizens first. That will definitely be a first. It is this kind of language that we have become unaccustomed to of late. We hear and have heard much about the importance of maintaining economic stability and of how important institutions like the so-called pillar banks are. It seems, however, that less and less time has been devoted to talking about the real interests of real citizens in each of the member states. I am talking about families in Ireland who we are elected to represent.

However, the distance between the institutions of Europe and the people they are supposed to represent is a well-worn theme at this point. That is why we have had Brexit, and why we can see something strange happening in France and in other places. Needless to say it contributed significantly to the Brexit vote, and might contribute to a Frexit if the French people choose to put their faith in Madame Marine le Pen. We will see how that vote turns out shortly. For the moment the fortunes of Mr. Macron seem good, and it looks likely that he will ascend to the French presidency and bring about some kind of stability. That is certainly what he would have us believe at any rate.

To return to the recent Council statements on Brexit and the triggering of Article 50, I am deeply concerned that part of the statement issued by the Council is that, "The United Kingdom's decision to leave the Union creates significant uncertainties that have the potential to cause disruption, in particular in the United Kingdom but also, to a lesser extent, in other member states". The word potential is used - it might happen or it might not happen. What on earth are these people talking about? This is an utterly bizarre statement to make, and seems to give the lie to the belief that those in the EU top brass have a clear sense of the impact of Brexit. Either they do not have it or they want to cod us all and let us eat cake. Who said that?

Deputy Seán Haughey

Marie Antoinette.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

In this case we will have nothing to eat. We will be choked with food because we cannot export our agricultural produce. I do not like this language. The statement also says, "Brexit may cause disruption to a lesser extent in other member states". The arrogance of that. Are they sleepwalking? What planet are these geniuses on? The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Flanagan, deals with them on a regular basis, so perhaps he can reply to them at his point in the debate. This is bizarre. It is complete madness. If anything Brexit will have a greater impact on other member states, such as this country. That is as clear as the nose on my own face. There is no "may" about it. There is Theresa May alright, and this is the month of May, but there is no maybe about this. There is no potential disruption, but actual severe disruption occurring here in almost every agricultural sector - dairy, corn, equine, mushrooms, pigs and poultry - not to mention the political instability with respect to the North and the issue of the Border. I listed that in the pre-European Council statements, as we all did. It has a huge impact, and could have massive a impact if we are not careful.

I have memories of travelling the Border when it was a hard Border. There were armed checkpoints and customs on both sides of it. They had to be there as there was a war going on, but there was disruption. It was brought home to me only last year when I was on the way to Medjugorje - this is on the record of the House - on a bus on a motorway, a new development from the last five or six years. We stopped at a hard checkpoint on the motorway, which is a completely different experience. We now have a motorway between Dublin and Belfast. One can meander along the road to Aughnacloy, or the road to Donegal going to Belleek or around the Armagh Border in south Armagh. I was stopped many times on both sides of it. Now we have a motorway, and how on earth can we envisage lorries, buses and cars being backed up? On the way to Medjugorje, 52 passports on the bus had to be taken out and had to be gone through one by one. We were held up for 40 minutes, not to mention all the cars behind us. I have a real sense of fear of seeing that on our Border again. It would be totally unacceptable, totally unworkable and a total turn off for people travelling between the North and South, not only our own workers but also tourists and everybody else.

Part of the statement of the European Council also mentions the core principles which will guide the negotiating process. It mentions that any agreement with the United Kingdom will have to be based on a balance of rights and obligations to ensure a level playing field and that negotiations under Article 50 will be conducted with transparency and as a single package. If this occurs it will certainly be a novel practice for the EU. It will be a best seller. Terms like balance of rights and transparency are not words that automatically jump to mind when one thinks about the EU. We saw that with the banks, and how the European banks shovelled their money in here, bulldozed it in when our banks were bust, and then sought retribution. We started paying, and we are still seeing it, and my grandchildren will be seeing and feeling it. We saw the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, come back and talk about the €62 billion that was going to be written off for us. We did not get that, but we got plenty of threats and demands to pay up and shut up, and arrogance from the heads of the EU, and little empathy. The bondholders, many of them European, were let off scot free even though the bonds were insured. They were laughing at us, calling us silly, stupid Paddies who paid even though the bonds were insured.

People have been subjected to penury and have suffered the trauma of waiting on trolleys or going blind from want of an operation, and there are countless examples of these. I see references to balance of rights and transparency but these do not automatically come to mind when talking about the head honchos in Europe. They have handled this appallingly. The Minister is launching a document this evening, if it has not already been launched, and the Taoiseach is briefing some Members, myself included, about it. I do not want a fanfare, however, but real efforts to reassure people in the Border counties. I want real efforts to protect and support farmers and our flagship industry.

The Taoiseach announced that he might have a united Ireland in his bag before he retired and I would welcome that. It would be great and it has always been said that unionists would join us if we showed them the benefits of doing so in their pockets, and that they would be better off in this country. Maybe they would but there are many "maybes", and a lot of issues to be thrashed out. There were people who tried to force a united Ireland with the bomb and the bullet and they were also opposed to the EU, as they were to everything. If it happens, I do not know what they will be able to oppose. They will be naked before us all and will have no tangible issues on which to fight, only water and abortion.

It is more likely the interests of the big players such as Germany and France will continue to be prioritised and that small peripheral countries such as ours will receive the crumbs that fall from the table, even if they insist on calling it a feast. We have to be careful with language and optics. We have real friends in Europe and we have been good Europeans. We have been good classmates and supporters and now is the time for some payback for our people, for our business interests to be protected and for there to be no hard Border between the Twenty-six Counties and the Six Counties. We do not want the crumbs from the table in these negotiations because if we get them, it will have serious repercussions for future generations of people in this country.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

I am glad to return to the issue of Brexit, which dominated the European Council at the weekend. I found the questions to the Taoiseach very useful and I wish to tease out what is happening. Those of us not in the mind of the British Prime Minister have to guess if we want to understand what is happening. To some extent we are seeing an unravelling of the British Government position. The Prime Minister made a mistake after the referendum last summer and in the run-up to her party conference in October. When she said "Brexit means Brexit", she was like a card player who played a bluff which was very exposed. What does it mean? By taking a strong line and a hard Brexit position she attempted to give the UK Government some negotiating position in what were always going to be difficult and complicated talks.

She also said no deal was better than a bad deal but it is becoming increasingly apparent, even to her own Government, that this is not true and it is especially not be true for this island. No deal and a chaotic crash-out would be disastrous not just for the UK economy but for the Irish economy, North and South. I have a sense that the Prime Minister has developed an understanding of this in recent weeks and the letter triggering Article 50 was far more conciliatory in its tone and in the way it sought openly to look for a deal that made sure the UK stayed as close as possible to the European Union in whatever arrangement was agreed. History will parse the information and will come to its conclusions but I surmise that there was a sense in the UK Cabinet and the Prime Minister's office that they were being steered to the edge of the cliff by some 50 who made up what might be called the "charge of the light-head brigade" - the Tory MPs who, on a purely ideological basis, thought a harsh, immediate Brexit would serve their purposes. One of the main motivations for the recently-called UK election must have been to give the Prime Minister a negotiating position within her own party so that she could avoid being controlled by those MPs who seem to be set on this reckless course.

No one knows what will happen in the election campaign of the next four or five weeks but the return of a larger Tory majority may be of benefit to us in that a Government with a fixed five-year term, a concept which is much weakened in recent weeks, will give us a transition period after the two years of negotiations in which we can try to work out solutions to what will be a very messy situation. I do not think five years is enough and it may take ten or 15 years but the transition period will be slightly easier than if it were to be interrupted midstream by a further UK election.

I was concerned as to why the European Union was taking such a strong position by insisting on the second stream of talks coming after the first round is completed, which will deal with EU citizens' rights, the Brexit bill and resolving border questions, particularly that of the Irish Border. I was taken by what the Taoiseach said in response to my question. I can see the sense of putting our case first. It is not a bad idea to get our issues dealt with and off the table as, in negotiations, it is generally advisable to get in early, get the deal done and get it off the table before it becomes contentious. However, I still have concerns as to whether it is in out interests to take such a hard line position with the UK as it is in an immensely weak position. It is like playing a game of Texas hold'em poker and seeing the UK's hand as well as the flop, and that it has nothing in its hands, which I think it is starting to realise.

The history, purpose and peaceful intent of our Union is to promote collaboration, even in the most difficult of circumstances, which will apply in this case. Our interest is in being collaborative with the UK Government and this should be our approach as now is not the time to rub its nose in the difficult decisions it has to make. I might be missing something and the UK may have an ace in the hole that no one has seen but I am concerned that the tough negotiation, via newspaper leaks, is not clever. No matter how good a deal we get in the early stages of the process it will not envelope all the concerns we have and even if we deal with movement of citizens, there are 1,000 other issues around fisheries, agricultural standards, digital matters, energy trading, etc. It is in our interests to get all the details right and we should avoid playing all our cards in the first round to get a deal on movement of people and the Border. These are important but are not the only issues on which we should negotiate. We have a particular role and capability to act as a slightly different interlocutor. We are not going to go in as the hard guy, leaking to the rest of Europe. The Minister is in the middle of this and has to make the call but I am giving him advice from my perspective. I have a sense that hitting them when they are down, and in a vulnerable position in the middle of an election process, is wrong if it does not lead to a discernible change in their tactics and I am nervous about it.

At the weekend, Cliff Taylor wrote that big countries tended to win. When big countries make calls based on their own national interest, and without checking with the other 27 countries, as happened in recent years in middle of the crisis, mistakes are made. We should stick to a community method. The instinct of Europe has been to be a champion for a different way of doing politics from the big-gain, old-world power rules that used to apply.

Europe has been bedevilled for centuries by this game between France, Germany, Britain and others as to who is up and down and who is kicking whom when they are down. That will not be good for Europe regardless of what the British people have decided. It is not in our interest to go back to that 19th and early 20th century view of the world and type of politics. That is my one piece of advice to the Government today.

I congratulate the Government; it is good that we got the statement on the future unified Ireland as a possibility. If I correctly understand what the Taoiseach said, it is good that we will get many of the issues of Irish interest agreed in advance of the wider negotiations starting. However, we should think broader and beyond that, and have a calming role within the Union saying, "Let us not just run away with this here." We should play our cards strongly and stick to the principles, but be careful in doing that, that we are not seen as bullies and using the power imbalance that exists. We need to work in collaboration on what Europe is about, including protecting environmental standards.

I agree with what the leader of the Labour Party said earlier. The Taoiseach cited many market gains we get from Europe. We get social policy and environmental policy from Europe. We get standards on market regulation. We actually challenge the market in Europe; it has been too much of a market-led project. We need to stand up for those values in a collaborative way with the UK, to encourage it to stick with environmental regulation and social policy. We should get those into the negotiations earlier, rather than just presenting a bill for €60 billion and sorting out the Clones Border issue. Otherwise it will crash out leaving us in deep trouble. The "what else" here is the problem. We need to avoid the risk of a crash. That is why it is in our strategic interest to maintain friendship, keep working collaboratively and stand up for that tradition in the European Union, which is what we need to maintain.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We now have 20 minutes for questions and answers. I ask the Deputies to ask questions and not make statements. They should have enough time in 30 seconds or so to pose the question and then the Minister will answer. After that the Minister will have five minutes to conclude. The first Deputy offering is Deputy Haughey.

Deputy Seán Haughey

The negotiation guidelines have been agreed, starting with the rights of EU citizens in Britain, the rights of British citizens in the EU, the UK’s financial obligations and the issues surrounding Ireland and the Border. We also have commitment regarding the reintegration of Northern Ireland into the EU in the event of Irish unity.

We now move on to the negotiating directives. I understand the Minister hopes to agree those on 22 May at the General Affairs Council. Is he looking for anything in particular in those negotiating directives? Does he want to say anything about them? Are we looking for additional input into those?

Regarding the UK check, they are obviously upfront in the negotiations. Various figures have been mentioned, including €50 billion and other figures. The Taoiseach talked about the principles and the methodologies involved in that. As this has the potential to derail the entire process, I would be interested in the Minister's views on that. Are we likely to get agreement on that? What figures are being discussed?

Obviously, we are talking about flexible and imaginative solutions. There will be a political decision about the Irish situation at the end of all this. However, the solution must be compatible with EU law, as Deputy Micheál Martin mentioned earlier. Is there any discussion about treaty change arising from all this or is it too early to discuss such an eventuality?

Deputy Charles Flanagan

On the last question, it is too early to pre-empt the final decision. Certainly it is the Irish Government's desire that these matters can be completed by means of an orderly process without any requirement for treaty change at the end of the process.

There was criticism earlier about the debate. It is important for this House to debate the matter. I request the Business Committee give favourable consideration to returning to this matter whenever required. Certainly in the context of the publication of today’s document, I think we should have a debate on this issue next week, but I will be guided by the Business Committee. Of course, if we had published the document last week, we would stand accused of publishing a document prior to the process having been agreed. I ask Deputies to respect the fact that with so many different interested parties around the House, it is difficult to achieve consensus on this. In future we need to do so, as a national Parliament. In that regard, I will certainly be guided by the advice and guidance I receive from time to time, not only from the plenary session of the House, but also by the various committees.

I agree with Deputy Haughey on the UK's financial liabilities. Unless they raise an element of flexibility on the amount, we run the risk of having matters stalled early on. I would like to see a form of constructive negotiation on a settlement of the commitments in principle, leading ultimately to a fair and balanced outcome. It would not be helpful or productive to focus on actual figures prior to the commencement of the negotiations. We establish the principle of financial liabilities and then move on to discuss other issues in parallel.

I accept what Deputy Haughey and others have said on the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland, which will form a very sensitive but critical part of the negotiated framework between the UK and the European Union. We are dealing with an EU frontier. We are dealing with a land Border; unless that Border is carefully managed and remains open, it will give rise to very serious challenges. Our priorities are the maintenance of the open Border. It is important that in the negotiations we move pretty quickly to agree a common position on the matter of the Border with the UK Government. I think that is possible, having regard to statements of encouragement that I have seen from the British Prime Minister, Mrs. May; the Secretary of State, Mr. Davis; the Secretary of State, Mr. Brokenshire; and other UK Ministers.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I call Deputy-----

Deputy Charles Flanagan

The object of the exercise will be to find common ground on the maintenance of that open Border, common ground with our UK colleagues-----

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister will have further opportunities.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

----- and also with the European Union 26.

Deputy Seán Crowe

It is not a statement. I think the consolidated paper was badly handled. There was a commitment at one stage that we would get a briefing in the AV room by departmental officials; that was pulled at the last minute. There was a commitment to meet with party leaders; that did not happen. There was a commitment regarding Opposition spokespeople; none of that happened. Strategically it is a bad idea and the Government is going in a bad direction in this regard.

People from different embassies have asked me about the Irish position on the special designated status within the EU. I do not know the position, which is crazy. Earlier Deputy Adams asked if the Irish Government raised it at the pre-Council meeting. The Taoiseach did not reply. I ask the Minister to reply to that question.

The President of the Commission, Mr. Juncker, has been quoted as having the impression that sometimes our British friends underestimate the technical difficulties to be faced. Is that the view of the Irish Government? My impression from some of the people who have come over for various meetings is that they do not believe there will be a divorce settlement. Some of them have said that if they paid that out, they would lose the election. We can now understand why the UK general election has been called before it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I call the Minister and I ask him to confine his answer to a minute or so.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

The issue of the special status is repeatedly raised by Sinn Féin spokespersons. The object of our engagement, prior to reaching agreement on the guidelines, was that the unique and special circumstances on the island of Ireland would be fully recognised, appreciated and acknowledged by our colleagues. I believe we have achieved that in the context of the guidelines. I have been asked why we did not get a veto for Northern Ireland in the same way as the Spanish got for Gibraltar. I will say yet again that the legal situation is totally different. There is no comparison between references to Gibraltar and references to Northern Ireland. The unique circumstances on the island of Ireland have been recognised in the context of the Good Friday Agreement. That is why it was important that we received an acknowledgement in the guidelines as agreed on the part of EU 27 of the legal status of the Good Friday Agreement, an internationally-recognised and legally-binding document. That makes quite clear the constitutional status of Northern Ireland. Indeed, it makes quite clear the constitutional status on the island of Ireland. It is important to remember that in the future relationship agreement, the Good Friday Agreement will have paramount importance in the context of these negotiations.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

It is slightly surreal that we are asking questions that might be fully addressed in the briefing we are going to have in an hour's time.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

I should have referred to that in my previous response. I will deal with it in my response to Deputy Howlin.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

In my questions, I want to deal with what we can do pro-actively, as I did in my own contribution earlier. I have one observation. I am a little intrigued by the Minister's comment that he expects the UK to accept a liability without quantification.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

Accept the principle of liability.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

That is the same thing. I cannot imagine any sovereign government accepting liability without quantification. Having been the man responsible for the money for five years, I could not see myself going into any negotiation and saying that the UK will accept the liability, although we will not tell it how much it is until the end of the process. It would be interesting to hear the Minister's thoughts on that.

I wish to refer specifically to points by which we can prepare ourselves for what might come down the track. Has the issue of state aid rules been addressed? Is there a demand or requirement on the table that we can for a period of two years exempt Brexit-proof investment from State aid rules in order to ensure that communities, regions and industries that are impacted can be protected for a finite period? Would the Minister look at the early warning system that I set out? It involves re-fashioning the globalisation fund to upskill workers that are going to be impacted. As I said, the mid-term review of the European globalisation fund is ongoing at the moment and it is therefore opportune to do so now.

I will make my final point as I am very conscious of the restricted time. We seem to be taking a very negative approach of mitigating and stopping the worst impacts of Brexit. Are we putting forward Ireland's positive vision of a social Europe, a Europe of the people, that our own people can look at positively? We must put forward our vision of a European 27 that emerges from this debacle and at least reconnects with people who are disconnected from the European project that has been so important for our continent over the last number of decades.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

Notwithstanding the process of the UK withdrawal from the EU, Europe will continue apace-----

Deputy Brendan Howlin

We do not hear that.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

-----in terms of its own engagement. Ireland is committed to remaining a constructive and active member and will engage in that regard, as we have done in the past. We have considered ourselves over the years to be an Ireland at the heart of Europe. We value our membership of the EU. In the context of the forthcoming negotiations, it is important that the process of ongoing development of policy in Europe along the social and other agendas does not become derailed and that other work continues, notwithstanding the important work of negotiating the withdrawal of one of our most influential members.

With regard to the matter of the document being discussed this evening and its publication, I believe it is important that the Dáil does engage. I hope that we can have a meaningful debate on the document, perhaps in this House next week. I hope the business committee would look favourably on that.

I agree with much of what Deputy Howlin said in terms of issues that will arise in the context of the negotiations. The publication of this document today is part of an ongoing process. I would expect that the Government will now proceed to prepare further documents, one for example on the economic impact-----

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister will have another chance to conclude.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

-----and how that might be mitigated.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am conscious of the time.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

When Deputy Howlin said that much of the debate has been negative, I acknowledge that because I do not see any good news on the matter of the withdrawal of the UK from the EU. I believe it was a bad decision and is a difficult issue.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Europe cannot be about Brexit and nothing else.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

I wish to ask the Minister a tactical question. On certain issues, such as environmental standards and social standards - not necessarily difficult issues such as trade or other issues - why is it in our interest that they be delayed three months, six months, or whatever period of time? Does the Minister not agree with me that it is not all negative and that playing a zero-sum or winner-versus-loser game is not sensible? Commissioner Juncker said that Brexit has to be bad, and it probably will be. However, do we have to push that? Why is it we are pushing it to the extent that we are not agreeing to talk about certain issues, which could be somewhat positive, about future collaboration on the likes of digital issues, social rules and environmental rules? We could then watch the UK argue with its own population on why it refuses to accept some of the good standards that come from the EU. Why is it in our interest not to bring that in early and not to give it the time and attention it should be given? Tactically, why is the EU playing such a tough game in that regard? It does not make sense.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

The answer to that question is that it is possible to do that once an element of progress is made early on in the negotiations on the issues that the EU has prioritised. I am very pleased and make no apologies for the fact that Ireland has been prioritised in that regard in respect of our Border, citizenship and the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland, which is something we sought at the outset. I agree with Deputy Ryan that there are and will be areas upon which agreement will be reached rather easily with the UK. During the negotiations, we need to bank these as we proceed. We have abided by the principle of no negotiation without notification. In that regard, we have not been negotiating or finding common ground with the UK over a range of issues on which I think it would be possible to find in the course of the negotiations.

Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly

I echo Deputy Howlin's point on the strategy. I was handed the strategy about 15 minutes ago.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Deputy Donnelly is ahead of the rest of us then.

Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly

The document lays out the Government's objectives for what it wanted to secure in the European Commission guidelines. None of us will be surprised to find that having been published after the guidelines, it would appear that the Minister has gotten everything he was looking for. That is interesting timing.

There has been much talk on the veto for Gibraltar. I accept that the legal situation is different, but the political situation is much more pressing in Northern Ireland than it is in Gibraltar. I will ask a straight question. Did the Irish Government seek a veto? Accepting that they are different legal situations, was a veto on Northern Ireland sought by the Irish Government as part of the negotiations?

In the just-published Government strategy on Brexit, the Government still refers to the common travel area existing in conformity with EU law. I have only had a chance to skim the document.

It is welcome that the document explains that the common travel area involves more than travel; it concerns access to public services and social protection. What I did not see was a reference to the right to work. I apologise if it is included, but I have not seen it. The reciprocity of rights that Irish and UK citizens enjoy is comprehensive. They include the right to travel, the right to access social protection and public services, the right to vote and also the right to work. Will the Minister explain to the House whether it is his objective and within his strategy to include in the ongoing recognition of the common travel area the right for Irish citizens to work in the United Kingdom and the right of UK citizens to work in Ireland? It is not included in the strategy, but it is referenced in it by the line "in conformity with UK law". In the UK commission guidelines the sentiment that the relationship between Ireland and the United Kingdom will be respected in EU law comes up again. Is the Government doing any work and will the Minister share with the House any Government positions on what is and is not in conformity with EU law when it comes to Northern Ireland and the common travel area?

Deputy Charles Flanagan

We did not get a veto as the Spanish did in the case of Gibraltar because the situation is entirely different. We acknowledge that under the Good Friday Agreement, Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. It was voted on by the people of Ireland, North and South, in 1998. We are satisfied that the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland have been fully recognised as part of the negotiations from the very outset. That was our objective and it was achieved. It is important to remember the future relationship agreement will ultimately require ratification by all EU member states, including Ireland.

Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly

Did the Minister seek a veto - yes or no?

Deputy Charles Flanagan

Ireland was anxious from day one that its unique circumstances would be fully recognised in the context of the Good Friday Agreement and the legal and constitutional configuration on the island of Ireland with reference to Northern Ireland and that has been achieved.

Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly

Was a veto sought?

Deputy Charles Flanagan

We are satisfied to move forward in the negotiations with that being an important part of the process. On the common travel area-----

Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly

Will the Minister give a yes or no answer to the question on a veto?

Deputy Charles Flanagan

On the common travel area, I take very much the point raised by the Deputy. It is very much welcome that the guidelines provide that existing bilateral arrangements and agreements between the United Kingdom and Ireland which are compatible with EU law should and will be recognised. This will be an issue to dealt with in the negotiations. I am encouraged by a commitment on the part of the European Union and the United Kingdom to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland. I acknowledge that the common travel agreement involves much more than just travel and freedom of movement and the right and entitlement to safe passage. It also involves a right to welfare, benefits, a pension and work. We are anxious that it be fully acknowledged, appreciated and recognised in the context of the negotiations. The legal concept of the bilateral arrangement which is, in effect, the common travel area between the United Kingdom and Ireland has been recognised.

On the other aspects of the Good Friday Agreement, we will be pressing our EU colleagues to ensure this internationally recognised and legally binding agreement will be in a position of prominence throughout the negotiations.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard J. Durkan)

The Minister has five minutes in which to wrap up.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

I will underline the importance of this debate and what Deputies have said about future arrangements. I am anxious that we all work together on this issue. To Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly I say the Government will ensure all parties represented in the House are fully involved in the process. I acknowledge the attendance and contributions of many Members of the House in, for example, the national civic dialogue which will continue throughout the process of the negotiations. I am anxious to ensure the Government will be guided by the committees of this parliament and by parliament in plenary session. The Government remains committed to the protection of Ireland's interests, ensuring we will be fully prepared for the future at national level as a committed member of the European Union. This assembly has an important role to play in that regard. As the Taoiseach has set out, the outcome of Saturday's European Council meeting clearly demonstrates that the efforts so far are very much delivering for Ireland. It must continue. There is no question of anybody sitting back on the basis of what has been achieved. We are merely commencing what will be a very challenging period. We are undertaking a comprehensive programme of engagement with our EU partners. Over 400 engagements across government have taken place, either at political or senior official level. Through this engagement we have successfully ensured our unique concerns are reflected in the negotiating guidelines. Our concerns are to protect the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement, to seek flexible solutions aimed at ensuring the maintenance of the open border and to recognise existing bilateral arrangements and agreements between the United Kingdom and Ireland such as the common travel area mentioned by Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly.

I acknowledge the work of our officials, in particular those in the Department of the Taoiseach and my Department and our diplomats in Dublin, London, Brussels and every EU capital city. It is important to secure the recognition of the European Council that the Good Friday Agreement expressly provides for an agreed mechanism whereby a united Ireland may be brought about through democratic and peaceful means and in accordance with international law and that in such a case the entire territory of Ireland would thus be part of the European Union.

I acknowledge the willingness of our EU partners to take on board our concerns. The fact that they did so demonstrates that as a member of the European Union, Ireland is among friends. Friendships need to be nourished, built on and nurtured. Since the referendum in the United Kingdom I have been in frequent contact with all of my EU counterparts around the table. There have been almost 80 engagements in the past ten months. These engagements and exchanges have fostered a thorough understanding of our unique concerns among our EU partners. They have also been a listening exercise in raising my awareness of the challenges Brexit poses for them and identifying common ground. It is my intention and that of my many Government colleagues to continue this intensive programme of engagement to ensure our voice will continue to be heard clearly. The guidelines adopted by the European Council represent a strong and pragmatic political framework on which we base our approach to the negotiations. The next step at EU level will be to agree a more detailed set of negotiating directives which will provide a mandate for the European Commission to formally commence the negotiations with the United Kingdom.

The UK general election does not change, in any way, Ireland's commitment to pursuing the best possible outcome for the island of the entire Brexit process. We will continue to work tirelessly to that end. While the talks process in Belfast has had to be paused during the election campaign, we will continue to support and facilitate the parties in their efforts to reach agreement on the new Executive. It is important for Northern Ireland that the power sharing institutions of the Good Friday Agreement operate on a sustainable basis.

This is really important in the context of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. Given that the opening of the negotiations is only a matter of weeks away, the restoration of the power-sharing Executive in Northern Ireland is essential.

The outcome of Saturday's European Council meeting was an important milestone in what is a monumental challenge. It marks the beginning rather than the end of what will be a lengthy, complex and challenging process. It is a positive beginning and a good foundation on which the United Kingdom and the European Union can work to ensure an orderly exit and build towards a positive and close relationship into the future. This is in the interests of Ireland, the United Kingdm and the entire European Union.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard J. Durkan)

That concludes statements on the European Council meeting.