Joan Burton
Question:1. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with Chancellor Merkel on 6 April 2017. [17713/17]
Ceisteanna - Questions
EU Meetings
Gerry Adams
Question:2. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the Chancellor of Germany, Ms Angela Merkel, on 6 April 2017. [17838/17]
Eamon Ryan
Question:3. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting with Chancellor Merkel. [17914/17]
Micheál Martin
Question:4. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with Chancellor Merkel on 6 April 2017; the issues that were discussed; if other bilateral meetings were held; and the other meetings he attended while in Germany. [18281/17]
Brendan Howlin
Question:5. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his engagements on his trade visit to Germany and his meeting with Chancellor Merkel. [18287/17]
Seán Haughey
Question:6. Deputy Seán Haughey asked the Taoiseach if he has spoken to or met Chancellor Merkel recently. [20411/17]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, together.
My visit to Germany from 5 to 7 April included a bilateral meeting with Chancellor Angela Merkel as well as extensive engagement with key trade, tourism and investment partners. The visit began in Frankfurt on the morning of Thursday, 6 April where I had a series of meetings with Irish State agency client companies based in Germany. I officially opened the offices of the Irish company, Collen Construction, before giving a keynote speech at an event attended by more than 150 guests. In my remarks, I emphasised the links between Ireland and Germany and our support for further strengthening investment, trade and tourism between our two countries. That afternoon, I travelled to Berlin where I had a very positive and constructive bilateral meeting with Chancellor Merkel in the Federal Chancellery. Our discussions included Brexit, the future direction of Europe and EU-US relations. On Brexit, we discussed the draft EU negotiating guidelines which were circulated on 31 March following Prime Minister May’s official notification on 29 March of the UK’s intention to leave the European Union. These guidelines were agreed by the European Council on Saturday and I will speak about them in more detail during my statement to the House later this afternoon. In my discussions with Chancellor Merkel about the Brexit negotiations, I said nothing should undermine peace and stability in Northern Ireland and that it is therefore crucial to avoid a return to a hard Border. This is a political challenge and we will need to be creative and imaginative in finding solutions, while respecting our EU obligations.
Chancellor Merkel acknowledged Ireland’s unique concerns and offered her strong support in ensuring that these were reflected in the guidelines. The language in the guidelines and, indeed, in the notification letter from Prime Minister May is a positive outcome of the Government’s approach and intensive programme of strategic engagement with EU partners and the EU institutions over recent months. Germany, like Ireland, has significant and complex trading links with the UK. We both agreed these should be maintained with minimum disruption and that we should work together to protect jobs, growth and investment. In exchanging views on the negotiations ahead, we agreed these should be approached in a calm and constructive manner with the aim of achieving a close and positive future relationship between the EU and the UK. More generally, on the future direction of Europe, I highlighted the importance we attach to maintaining EU 27 unity, based on our core values and the need for a balanced response to current challenges with a focus on better delivery for our citizens, particularly in jobs, growth and competitiveness. The following day, I participated in a round table event organised by the Association of German Chambers of Commerce, which facilitated a useful exchange about the impact of Brexit from the Irish and German business perspective. I also met with a group of German think tanks active on European, foreign and economic policy issues which enabled me to explain and discuss Ireland’s perspectives on Brexit and the future direction of Europe. Later that day, I launched the Bord Bia Irish beef food truck and met with a major premium wholesaler which supplies Irish-sourced products. In all my meetings, I highlighted and explained Ireland’s particular concerns arising from Brexit for our trade and economy; Northern Ireland and the peace process; the common travel area; Border and citizenship issues; and the future direction of the European Union. I placed particular emphasis on our strong ongoing commitment to EU membership and our intention to work constructively and calmly as part of the EU 27 team towards a close and positive future relationship with the United Kingdom.
Gabhaim mo bhuíochas leis an Taoiseach. It is interesting to hear the Taoiseach talk of the conversation with Chancellor Merkel and their discussions about the draft EU negotiations guidelines. The Taoiseach may recall when these were first drafted I warned that the interests of the people of the island, the stability of our political processes, the future of the Good Friday Agreement and the option of Irish unity were not sufficiently reflected in them. At the time, I urged the Taoiseach to ensure the final guidelines were amended to close the gap. That has not happened. Much has been made of the statement in the minutes of the summit that in the event of Irish unity, "in accordance with international law, the entire territory of such a united Ireland would thus be part of the European Union." It is welcome but it is not the coup that has been claimed in some media. It is a very common sense position. It reflects the position of the Good Friday Agreement and what happened with the reunification of Germany and a similar agreement in respect of Cyprus. The Government failed to secure designated special status for the North within the EU. Did the Taoiseach raise the issue? Has he ever asked for the North to be given special designated status within the European Union and that the vote of the people in that part of our island would be upheld? Will the Taoiseach give us a very direct answer to that question? Has he ever asked for special designated status for the North?
We need to stick to the time allocated because there are quite a number of questioners here.
Chancellor Merkel raised a number of questions specifically about the Border situation, given that we do not yet know the trading relationships that will apply between the UK and the EU and between ourselves and the UK. In so far as clarity was possible, we were very clear that the political principle here is not to return to the Border of the past.
The priorities for Ireland were mentioned specifically in the letter from the British Prime Minister triggering Article 50. They were also mentioned specifically in the document produced by the European Parliament and in the draft guidelines circulated by the European Council. I do not know of anybody who has claimed that this was some kind of coup. I would make the point that very dedicated public officials at COREPER and official levels have worked very assiduously and hard in Belfast, London, Brussels and here to bring about a realisation of the particular and special circumstances and the unique case of this country. Deputy Adams is well aware that the situation in so far as Northern Ireland is concerned is that this Republic voted in a referendum to remove Articles 2 and 3 from the Irish Constitution and in support of the Good Friday Agreement, which makes clear that the Six Counties are part of the United Kingdom until or unless the people of Northern Ireland decide to do something about that. In that respect, we have always discussed the question of the special status, the particular circumstances and the unique situation that applies in Northern Ireland. What is now written into the European Council's bedrock for negotiations is that if at some time in the future the people of Northern Ireland decide to do that, they will not have to apply to re-join the European Union.
I was glad that there was a unified, 27-country position on the Brexit talks at the weekend. However, I am somewhat concerned about what happened on the previous Wednesday when Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker met with the British Prime Minister, Theresa May. It seems to have been a disastrous meeting, according to leaks. Such leaks can only be seen to have been designed to humiliate the British Prime Minister. It is reported that the German Chancellor received a call from Mr. Juncker directly after the dinner. To a certain extent we see the messaging being managed in a German way through German newspapers. I am concerned that this is not unified. Did we get a call from Mr. Juncker straight after the dinner? Is that the way the talks are going to be conducted, with selective leaks through certain leaders? I do not think that will work.
I do not stand with the British position. I believe the Brexit process should be cancelled and the UK should continue to be a member of the EU. However, I am slightly concerned about the current position. What is the rationale behind arguing that we cannot have a two track approach? Why can we not start discussing with Britain some of the complex issues around regulations, trade, standards and so forth? Why are we insisting that we can only do that once the original Brexit bill negotiations have taken their course for a certain period of time? I think that may be a mistake and am concerned that it seems that the German Government is leading on this rather than a unified 27. What is our position on that twin track issue? Why did the Taoiseach not get a call from Mr. Juncker in the same way that the German Chancellor did?
I am not going to comment on leaks in newspapers or on what has been written about this. The situation in so far as the 27 members of the European Council is concerned is that there is a very clear position of not in any way wishing to punish the United Kingdom for a democratic decision that was made by its people and on which the British Government wishes to follow through. There is a realisation that it has now got to be dealt with in a respectful, understanding, constructive and positive way. I have always made that case, both to the Prime Minister and to the European Council.
Clearly the step by step approach that has been set out is critical from a European Union point of view. The Prime Minister has called an election in Great Britain. It is expected - although one can never pre-judge the outcome of an election - that she will receive an increased mandate. That allows her to do a few things, if she wishes, including making new appointments to Cabinet. It will also, from her point of view, give her a clearer hand in negotiating on Brexit. However, that does not change the issues that need to be dealt with in the negotiations. The first part is what is required under Article 50, namely to deal with the exit process and there are three particular items in that context. The first is the liability that arises from membership of the European Union, for past membership and requirements into the future by the United Kingdom. There was no discussion in Brussels on Saturday about the scale of that liability; nor were any figures mentioned. The discussion was about principles and methodologies to arrive at that.
The second issue is the rights of EU citizens who live in Great Britain and the rights of British citizens who live in other EU member states, including here in Ireland. Obviously, in our case it is understood and accepted that we have had a common travel area since 1922, with acquired rights not just to travel but to residency, work and opportunities in respect of social welfare. That is a matter of bilateral discussion between our two countries. Since other countries joined the EU, many of their citizens now live in Britain. What are their rights and what issues need to be dealt with in that context? Reciprocal to that is the question of the rights of citizens of Great Britain living in France, Spain or elsewhere in the EU.
The third issue, which interests us directly, is the question of borders. What do we do if we agree that there should not be a return to the hard Border which brought about sectarianism, violence, terrorism and all of that? These are three matters that the EU wishes to have dealt with very early on in the negotiations. We do not want a situation where, for instance, others might claim that Ireland has become a sort of bargaining chip because of an agreement in respect of the special circumstances that apply here because of the Border.
At the various meetings concerning the Article 50 negotiations, it has been very clear that other member states appreciate that Ireland is in a unique position and has unique concerns. The other two countries that have border related issues with the United Kingdom, Spain and Cyprus, also have their concerns addressed in the negotiating guidelines. We all welcome this fact as well as the separate support which Chancellor Merkel expressed for Ireland following the Taoiseach's bilateral meeting with her. What does all of this mean in practice? Over the next 18 months we need to set out and have agreed specific proposals on exactly what a soft Border means. May I say, in passing, that I welcome Ms Arlene Foster's comments on a soft Border which reveal that if the Executive had not collapsed we had a mechanism by which we could have achieved consensus in Northern Ireland and to some degree, a coherent voice on Brexit related matters. So far, no specifics have been set out and sources in the Commission have said that Ireland needs to come up with answers and not just point out problems.
The guidelines say that whatever is agreed relating to Ireland must respect the broad European Union legal order and conform with EU law. Does this imply that the Taoiseach will not be seeking any treaty or legal changes relating to Ireland? What if protecting the common travel area or dealing with cross-Border trade does not conform with EU law? Is the Taoiseach saying that we accept these two constraints? In a previous session of Taoiseach's questions, the Taoiseach appeared to commit to publishing a detailed Irish negotiating document but so far all we have seen is a broad statement of principles. We have not seen any specific proposals. Where is the promised detailed set of proposals to which the Taoiseach committed?
I have made it clear that Ireland always wishes to comply with EU law. That has been our position for quite a long time.
If the common travel area does not comply with it, what do we do then?
On the common travel area, we are very clear that the acquired rights of Irish and British people in Ireland and the UK have applied since 1922 and are very much-----
I am talking about the post-Brexit situation.
We expect to be able to preserve the common travel area. I have made that point very clearly, as has the British Prime Minister.
Will that necessitate a change to EU law?
The common travel area was in place long before the formation of the European Economic Community, EEC and the EU and long before Brexit.
We intend to be able to hold on to the common travel area between Ireland and Britain. On what it means in practice, I welcome the helpful statement from the former First Minister, Arlene Foster. We would like to be able to preserve the tariff-free arrangement that now applies. Clearly, the negotiations in this area could become quite complex, depending on the issues involved, but it is too early to say what its exact nature will be. A wealth of information will need to be teased out when we open the box dealing with trade issues and tariffs. We agree with the Prime Minister when she says she wants Great Britain to have as close as possible a working relationship with the European Union. If that implies tariff-free arrangements, so much the better. We agree with that sentiment and would like to see it continued in practice. The Deputy is right when he says I said we would publish a more detailed document. I considered doing so last week, but I thought it better to wait for the outcome of the European Council in order that its decision could be incorporated into the document. I will brief Opposition leaders later this evening. We will publish the much more detailed statement today and it will be available to Deputy Micheál Martin.
Today.
Yes, today.
We are having the debate first.
It is a little odd that we will not be briefed until after we have had the discussion and the statements.
That is right.
It seems to be putting the cart before the horse. It would have been nice to be briefed on the Irish Government's position in order that we could give our views from a more informed position. I am sure we will have other opportunities.
Whatever about the appropriateness of President Juncker's telephone call to the German Chancellor, it was very instructive. Those of us who have been engaged with British officials and Ministers believe there is a complete unreality about their approach. I think President Juncker has described it as a different constellation or galaxy. Perhaps that is a little extreme, but there is an expectation that somehow there will be bilateral formal arrangements between Britain and other individual member states. I think the United Kingdom was somewhat taken aback by the collective unity displayed in the decisions made over the weekend.
I would like to ask the Taoiseach about his discussions with Chancellor Merkel. Is there complete agreement that there will be no sectoral agreements between the United Kingdom and individual EU member states, on cars or anything else, outside the common negotiating position of the European Union? Is it perfectly understood by Britain that this is the position?
On the related but separate matter of the fiscal rules, Brexit demands that we address the requirement to invest in our infrastructure, including ports such as Rosslare, to ensure we will have improved direct bilateral links and that we will not need to depend on the UK landbridge for exports into the future. Is there an understanding that it would be acceptable to relax the fiscal rules to allow for additional infrastructural investment to Brexit-proof Ireland?
That is a good question. I did not want to call all of the Deputies together on a bank holiday Monday to give them a briefing on what had happened on Saturday or Sunday.
The Taoiseach was going to do it last week.
We did not know the outcome of the European Council meeting until Saturday.
The meeting lasted just two minutes.
I could have published a much broader document about where we were headed and briefed the Deputies on such a document. If I had done so, the Deputies would have argued that its contents could change, depending on the decision to be taken on Saturday by the European Council.
When was the last time the Taoiseach went to a Council meeting without a decision being made in advance?
We could have postponed this afternoon's debate until later in the week.
Now we have the same document, added to by the decision of the European Council. The Ceann Comhairle is familiar with what politicians do here. Deputy Gerry Adams was talking about coups and all the rest of it. Perhaps he knows something about that, but as far as I am concerned, this is work that was undertaken for the past 18 months.
Opinion had to be managed.
It is the Minister, Deputy Leo Varadkar, who needs to be converted in that regard.
I am glad that 26 members of the European Council agreed with Ireland on Northern Ireland becoming part of the European Union without having to reapply.
I think Mr. Juncker should ring the Taoiseach for some insight into management spin.
It should be noted here that Brexit is not the end of the line. The European Union has its own agenda which involves the Single Market, the digital single market, the capital markets and EMU. It wants a future of continued prosperity, peace and career and other opportunities for millions of people in a world that is changing rapidly as a result of digitisation which has been referred to as the fourth industrial revolution.
The Taoiseach should also mention the social Europe agenda.
We have to go beyond and through Brexit. The accident that has happened here has implications nationally, internationally and globally and we must deal with it. The agenda for the European Union is for the future beyond Brexit. While I respect the democratic decision of the United Kingdom, I genuinely regret that so much of the time of the leaders of 500 million people is being taken up in dealing with this situation.
I will respond to Deputy Brendan Howlin's question about sectoral issues by saying it has been made perfectly clear to the UK authorities that there will be no cherry-picking.
Do they understand that?
The EU 27 will negotiate as a bloc with the United Kingdom. Many theories are being put forward by academics and those who have worked in various sectors, but it is clear that the closest possible relationship we can have is the relationship we now have. How will we be able to get back to it if the United Kingdom leaves the Single Market and has a different position where trading, the customs union and the WTO rules are concerned? Deputy Brendan Howlin has made a valid point about ports. One of the opportunities the European Investment Bank will present relates to the capacity to invest in serious infrastructure here once there is a line of investment to actually repay those loans and have conditions set by which that would apply.
It is a question of having the fiscal space to do it.
Exactly. It is about having the opportunity to do so. As this argument continues, every country in Europe is quite well aware that Ireland, the Netherlands and Denmark would be most adversely affected by what is termed a "hard Brexit". When I discussed this issue in The Hague with Prime Minister Rutte and Prime Minister Rasmussen, we made it very clear that we understood the impact something like this would have on our small countries. The ground rules have now been set. They encompass all of Ireland's particular priorities. It is a case of moving on to economics and trade. That is the next step. I hope to come back to the Government within a month with propositions in that regard.
I thank the Taoiseach for briefing us on his meeting with Chancellor Merkel. He has mentioned that the Government's negotiating document will be published later today. I hope we can have a debate on it in the Dáil. That would be very important. It is certainly in the national interest for all of us to be involved in the discussion. I note that the summit attended by Chancellor Merkel lasted just four minutes. Can we read any significance into that? What is the Taoiseach's view? I would be interested to hear his perspective on why the summit lasted just four minutes.
The negotiating guidelines have been agreed. I understand negotiating directives now need to be put in place. Perhaps the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Charles Flanagan, might be very involved in that process. Are we seeking special arrangements on the negotiating directives? Perhaps the Taoiseach might comment on that issue. Are we looking for anything in particular in that regard? Are the negotiating directives a logical consequence of the negotiating guidelines?
While the statement that Northern Ireland will have full automatic reintegration into the European Union in the event that there is Irish unity is to be welcomed as a gesture of goodwill by the EU 27, I wonder about the status of that assurance. I do not doubt that the Taoiseach discussed with Chancellor Merkel the precedent set when East Germany was united with West Germany.
Obviously, there is a very difficult road ahead. The agreement of the negotiation guidelines is just the beginning of the process. The talks that lie ahead are going to be difficult, tough and confrontational. Is the Taoiseach confident of a satisfactory outcome for Ireland? He has mentioned that at the end of the day a political agreement will have to be reached. A political solution needs to be agreed to by the EU 27 in relation to Ireland. Is the Taoiseach confident that we can achieve our objectives in that regard?
The priorities have been agreed to by the EU 27 and in the letter sent from Prime Minister May to the President of the Council.
Yes, we can have a debate here, as we will have on numerous occasions about elements of Brexit.
On Saturday, the 27 were anxious not to have a long and acrimonious internal discussion which would send out a signal that Europe itself did not have the capacity to agree on a structure and guidelines with which to negotiate. Those guidelines in the discussion were intense, extensive and went on for a long period.
On behalf of Ireland, I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs who attend the General Affairs Council meetings, as well as our public servants, ambassadors and diplomats who have worked not just within Europe but beyond to get out Ireland's message. There was not anything further to discuss about the guidelines per se because they already have been discussed extensively and agreed. Accordingly, it was a matter of the Council President saying that these guidelines, which have already been discussed extensively, are agreed and we go on to have a discussion about them. This is what happened. It was the adoption of those guidelines early on which sent out its own message that there had been extensive discussion and agreement that these guidelines were a suitable basis for negotiation.
Thank you, Taoiseach.
There were some further elements under discussion which I raised myself in respect of Northern Ireland and its re-entry without having to re-apply in the event that, by consent and democratic means, a referendum is passed in Northern Ireland wishing to join the Republic as a united Ireland.
The Deputy's point about East Germany is true. However, Ireland is in a slightly different position in that Northern Ireland is currently a member of the European Union and is the subject of an international legally binding agreement which was not the case with East Germany. There is a clear case which I am glad was accepted by the other 26 member states.
I have to be optimistic that, despite the fact we did not want this and we did not cause this, it has happened and we must deal with it. Through these Brexit negotiations, complex and difficult that they may be, we have to move on with the agenda for the European Union of the Single Market, the digital Single Market and its potential in a changing world, along with the future for prosperity, investment and job opportunities.
Thank you, Taoiseach.
I remain focused and positive about the fact we can get the best outcome for our people, for our country, for our economy and jobs, as well as the issues I have identified as priorities.
We have gone badly over time on this group and we have only 16 minutes remaining for two other groups of questions. We will allow six minutes for the next group.
Departmental Administrative Arrangements
Micheál Martin
Question:7. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the role of the economic policy unit in his Department. [17832/17]
Gerry Adams
Question:8. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach the role of the economic policy section in his Department. [20718/17]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 8 together.
The economic division of my Department supports the Taoiseach and the Government in developing and implementing economic policy aimed at sustainable economic growth and development.
It has a particular focus on jobs, competitiveness, trade and investment, tourism and the economic impacts of Brexit, as well as other international developments. It is also responsible for housing matters and for economic infrastructure.
It supports the work of four Cabinet committees and related senior officials groups, seeking to maximise the effectiveness of their work. These are the Cabinet committees on economy, trade and jobs; housing; infrastructure, the environment and climate action; and regional and rural affairs.
It supports implementation of the Government’s Action Plans for Jobs, Housing and Homelessness, and Rural Development, and co-ordinates Ireland’s participation in the European semester process. Preparation of the national reform programme and the national risk assessment are also undertaken.
The division acts as my Department's liaison point with the Central Statistics Office, CSO, on certain administrative functions, and provides support, as required, to the Minister of State, Deputy Regina Doherty, who has been delegated responsibility for the CSO.
The division plays a role in supporting the Government in its approach to long-term challenges as set out in the programme for Government and in the delivery of key infrastructure including housing, broadband, transport, energy and water. The division works with relevant Departments to oversee Ireland's transition to a low-carbon economy.
The CSO is under the Department of the Taoiseach and the economic policy unit has traditionally been responsible for overseeing its work. The Taoiseach will have noticed two members of his Government have recently been caught out promoting misleading and potentially fake statistics. The Minister for Social Protection recently launched a national media campaign on a claim concerning welfare fraud which overstated savings by over 1,000%. The Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government has been promoting his record on the basis of a claim on new builds which inflates the true figure by 100%.
Clearly those Ministers are actively trying to promote their images and enhance their profiles. It is also fair to say, however, this type of behaviour is also seen elsewhere in government. In the hours before the budget was announced, €300 million suddenly appeared in spite of the insistence of Ministers that they had been fully transparent with the figures. Taken all together, one can only conclude that Ministers are deliberately using misleading and untrue statistics or they are failing to check their figures before issuing their various press releases.
Has the Taoiseach taken any action to stop this growing habit of making misleading false claims about official statistics?
Does, or will, the economic policy section play any role in influencing the Government’s policy on pensions? There are reports in the media that public servants will take a huge hit from pension reforms which will be part of the pay negotiations this summer. The Taoiseach knows the majority of public sector pensioners receive less than €19,721 a year. In other words, their pensions are less than the national minimum wage. The problem lies at the top scale where there are 500 public sector workers receiving collectively €5 million. Any time Sinn Féin calls for a curb on this, the Government is the first to rubbish what we are saying.
Given that we are going into budget 2018, having already spent €500 million of the fiscal space, and with this particular chicken coming home to roost, will the Government confirm whether it is planning to change the way public sector pensions are calculated? Will the Taoiseach give a commitment to protect the pensions of low to middle-income workers and curb the excess of the pensions of high earners? Will the Government remove all FEMPI, financial emergency measures in the public interest, cuts to low and middle-income pensioners? When does the Taoiseach expect the first report of the public service pay commission to be published?
In respect of the comment made by Deputy Micheál Martin about the CSO, the Department of Social Protection estimated savings from control and fraud, not just fraud. It was based on a model developed with the CSO and also used in Australia, as well as other OECD countries. The Department of Social Protection stands over this.
With regard to the CSO figures on house builds-----
It stated fraud.
It was control and fraud.
Come off it, Minister. You were caught out.
Deputies, please we are running out of time.
Even in the time of a former Government-----
The Minister said €500 million was saved on fraud. That was far ahead of any of the real figures. Then there were 8,000 new houses over five years.
-----of which Deputy Micheál Martin was a member, house builds were always determined on ESB house connections.
It was wrong, however. What is policy based on?
There is a different model with the CSO. The economic unit of the Department deals with certain administrative functions and supports the Minister of State, Deputy Regina Doherty.
It deals with regular parliamentary questions. The CSO is an independent national institute dealing with statistics. The Statistics Act 1993 underpins that. The Act provides the director general will have the sole responsibility for and be independent in the exercise of the functions of deciding the statistical methodology and professional statistical standards used by the office; the content of statistical releases and publications issued by the office; and the timing and methods of dissemination of statistics compiled by the office. The Minister of State, Deputy Regina Doherty and I have no role or function in that.
In that regard, it pointed out from its model that the issue, in so far as house builds are concerned, was that for years Governments have used electricity connections to determine the number.
The Minister will take note of the Central Statistics Office, CSO, figures. The action plan for housing, with the five designated pillars, has an unprecedented extent both of incentive, innovative opportunity and money available to it. We are trying to catch up from a position where the construction sector collapsed completely from building 90,000 houses per year to 9,000 houses per year.
Northern Ireland
Micheál Martin
Question:9. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the role of the British-Irish and Northern Ireland affairs section in his Department. [17833/17]
Brendan Howlin
Question:10. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if the officials in his Department with a senior role in Brexit negotiations will engage in public communications on their work over the course of the two-year process. [18288/17]
Joan Burton
Question:11. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on Brexit last met. [19865/17]
Gerry Adams
Question:12. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach the role of the British-Irish and Northern Ireland affairs section in his Department. [20719/17]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 to 12 inclusive. The British-Irish and Northern Ireland affairs section of the amalgamated international, European Union and Northern Ireland division supports the work of the Taoiseach and Government in helping maintain peace and manage relationships on the island of Ireland and between Britain and Ireland, particularly in the context of Brexit. The division deals with all aspects of British-Irish relations, including Northern Ireland affairs and North-South co-operation. It also deals with key policy issues in this context and is responsible for supporting the Taoiseach in co-ordinating a whole-of-government approach to Brexit.
My Department, as with the rest of Government, has operated a highly consultative approach on Brexit to date, during which we have engaged very extensively with stakeholders across all sectors of Irish society. This has included the all-island civic dialogue process that has, to date, held two major plenary sessions in Dublin Castle and 14 sectoral events examining specific policy areas in greater detail. In addition, nearly 300 separate meetings with industry and civic society have been held to deepen our analysis and research. At the civic dialogue events and a range of other events, senior civil servants in this Department have worked to communicate publicly the Government's work on Brexit in terms of the extensive planning undertaken, as well as to map the next stages to the Brexit process. It is envisaged this work will continue both in individual meetings when requested or speaking at events when appropriate.
As I have pointed out, the next stage after concluding last Saturday's meeting is to move to trade and economics, including the issues that will help to underpin the sustainability and stability of Irish firms in a vulnerable position. The public communications work is also supported by the larger Brexit communications work that the Government is undertaking, which is available for people to read at www.merrionstreet.ie/brexit. The Cabinet sub-committee on Brexit last met on 26 April.
The recent discussions about establishing an Executive and allowing the Assembly to do its job showed very little, if any, progress. When announcing his urgent priorities, the Taoiseach stated that ensuring the Northern Ireland institutions were up and running would be one of those two priorities. When he made the statement, the expectation was that he was about to launch into a major series of meetings in order to knock heads together and find a way forward. Will the Taoiseach explain why this has not happened?
To outside observers, the Taoiseach has maintained the policy of recent years in taking a hands-off approach. Neither the Taoiseach nor British Prime Minister May have thought it necessary to attend or host any negotiations. Neither have they tabled any proposals for overcoming the blockages. Will the Taoiseach explain how something can be both a priority and a hands-off policy at the same time? Will he outline what structures are in place for discussing the hard detail of post-Brexit North-South arrangements?
I referenced the recent speech and contribution of former First Minister Arlene Foster in this regard and there was some need for reflection in this respect. She supported the Brexit campaign in the North but, coming from a Border area, she said she was fully conversant with the comings and goings of goods and services across the Border and the need for some common sense and realistic outcomes. It was a helpful contribution, perhaps illustrating the need for the Executive and Assembly to be re-established, with the North-South Ministerial Council to be used as a conduit and mechanism to articulate a coherent and consensus approach from within the North. It was an awful pity and wrong that the Executive was collapsed. There was no need to collapse the Executive, and as a result we have lost a mechanism whereby that common sense approach spoken about by Ms Foster and others in terms of Brexit, whether people voted leave or remain in the North, could have existed. At least there was a mechanism to try to get some route through this on the Brexit issue.
What mechanisms are in place for proposing and agreeing specific approaches to avoiding a hard Border? Will the Taoiseach provide those specifics?
There are different questions in the group. My question relates to officials in the Taoiseach's Department with a senior role in Brexit and whether they will engage in public communications on their work over the next two years. The Taoiseach would be aware it is common practice for EU Commission officials to take a very public role in these matters. The Secretary General of his Department, other senior officials, diplomats in Brussels and, to use the European term, the "Sherpa", Mr. John Callinan, from the Taoiseach's Department, will all play pivotal roles. Will they be allowed to address public meetings, explain what they are doing as the work evolves and the position they are taking in negotiations, as well as how those negotiations are going? Will they have the freedom to do that so we can have real insight into what is happening over the next two years? Has the Taoiseach thought about how to ensure we are fully appraised of what is happening?
If I can, I will respond briefly to the Fianna Fáil leader's assertion there was no need to collapse the Executive. This was from the Fianna Fáil leader who recently called for the Assembly to be suspended. If he is not sure why the Assembly was collapsed, I will send him a copy of the letter written by the late Mr. Martin McGuinness. I commend the all-island civic dialogue, an idea that was also rubbished by Fianna Fáil when we first put it.
I beg the Deputy's pardon. Do not tell untruths in the House. I initiated that when we agreed with the Taoiseach on it at the time.
Good man. Gabh mo leithscéal. The Deputy had his spake.
Come on lads.
Bí ciúin, a Theachta. It was very successful in terms of participation-----
The lack of truth characterises the Deputy's political articulation.
Please, Deputies.
-----in the sectors. Everyone involved is to be commended. Of course, the real test will be how the views expressed will be reflected in what is the Government's approach in the time ahead.
I very much welcome the talk of a united Ireland and the prospects for that, although some of the parties are saying they want a united Ireland but not just yet. Is the British-Irish and Northern Ireland affairs section in the Taoiseach's Department perhaps a division that could look at all of the issues? We must persuade those opposed to a united Ireland or who have doubts about its viability that it is the right course for the future. This is not the property of one grouping or political party. There is a need for the Oireachtas to bring forward proposals on what a united Ireland might look like, how it could be achieved and how a referendum on Irish unity could be won etc. It is a very common sense democratic approach and a constitutional imperative. Is there a role for the division in his Department to consider the issue?
It is regrettable the Executive is not up and running. The election took place and members were elected to the Assembly. There was time to put together an Executive but that did not happen. I do not have control over that. The British election was suddenly called by the British Prime Minister, which obviously directly impacts the position in Northern Ireland and between ourselves and Britain.
With regard to Deputy Martin's comments, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has been in Northern Ireland for very extensive periods and dealing directly with Secretary of State James Brokenshire. He is available any time, if necessary, to either go to Northern Ireland or Downing Street to speak with the British Prime Minister. Equally, the British Prime Minister has committed to being engaged in that regard. I know Deputy Martin understands that. I saw the comments from former First Minister Foster and they have been helpful. It is regrettable the North-South Ministerial Council cannot meet because there are no Ministers from an Executive.
Deputy Adams-----
It has always proven to be a worthwhile body for issues that needed to be discussed. It is expected all the parties in Northern Ireland will again be around the table the day after the election.
I hope that a renewed sense of understanding just how important this is will prevail there and that they get the Executive up and running.
In response to Deputy Howlin, I do not have an objection to senior public servants taking opportunities, where they arise publicly, to deal with matters. However, as the Deputy is aware, under the system here one gets very extensive briefings from senior Ministers. They are delivered in political fora both here and abroad. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs deal with the General Affairs Council and they have extensive, detailed briefings on these matters. I do not have an objection per se, so long as it is understood that a political process is being followed by the Government and that members of the Government are available to make comments as appropriate.
Deputy Adams raised the question of a united Ireland. I have seen the comments about a second New Ireland Forum and what that might involve. However, there is already a facility in the Oireachtas, the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, which could lead on discussing both the issues that are not fulfilled in the Good Friday Agreement and what the future might look like in the context of a decision that might be taken at some time in the future by the people of Northern Ireland and what that would involve in terms of different jurisdictions, different educational issues, different judicial systems, how it might be catered for in terms of economics and so forth. There is no reason that we should not use that committee to examine both the issues that are not yet fulfilled and also a brave new future that might lie ahead, provided the people of Northern Ireland choose by consent to make a democratic decision to join with the Republic of Ireland on an island that is part of the European Union of the future.