Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 20 July 2016
1. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach to report on his conversations with the First and Deputy First Ministers on the work of the North-South Ministerial Council and the cross-Border bodies and the impact of Brexit. [20698/16]
View answer2. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Taoiseach to report on his recent meetings with political leaders in Northern Ireland following the United Kingdom's referendum on leaving the European Union. [20701/16]
View answer3. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach his views on the proposal to set up an all-Ireland forum to deal with the outcome of the British referendum on exiting the European Union. [20703/16]
View answer4. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the status of his meeting with the First Minister, Ms Arlene Foster, in Dublin Castle on 4 July 2016 at the North-South Ministerial Council; and her reaction to the suggestion of an all-island forum following the recent British referendum result, given that the people of Northern Ireland voted to remain. [20904/16]
View answer5. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach his plans to proceed with an all-Ireland forum and invite all interested parties to contribute to this forum. [20908/16]
View answer6. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he discussed the suggestion or plan for the all-Ireland forum with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade before it was announced. [21098/16]
View answer7. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach the discussions he had with the British Prime Minister, the First and Deputy First Ministers of Northern Ireland and the First Minister of Scotland on the British exit from the EU. [21101/16]
View answer8. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach for an update on the discussions he has had on the Border issue with the British Prime Minister and the First and Deputy First Ministers of Northern Ireland since the decision on Brexit by the British people, and if there will be some mechanism for political parties across the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland to participate in developing Ireland's strategy for dealing with the impact of Brexit. [22492/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 8, inclusive, together.
I hosted the 22nd North-South Ministerial Council plenary meeting in Dublin Castle on 4 July. The meeting provided the new Irish Government and the new Northern Ireland Executive with the opportunity to meet formally for the first time and exchange views on a wide range of issues of mutual interest and concern, especially in light of the recent UK referendum decision to leave the EU. We had a detailed discussion on the potential impact of the UK referendum result. It was agreed to work together to ensure that Northern Ireland’s interests are protected and the benefits of North-South co-operation are fully recognised in any new arrangements that emerge as regards the United Kingdom’s future relationship with the European Union. Ten specific actions were agreed to optimise North-South joint planning and engagement on key issues arising following the UK referendum result. This will include a full audit of key North-South work programmes to establish risks and likely impacts arising from the UK’s planned withdrawal from the EU. In the margins of the ministerial council meeting, I had brief bilateral meetings with the First Minister, Arlene Foster, and the Deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness. We agreed on the need to work together to preserve the benefits of the peace process in any future negotiations.
While proposals for an all-Ireland forum were not discussed at the ministerial council meeting, the Government believes that there is a need for the widest possible conversation on the implications of the referendum result for Ireland, North and South, and for North-South relations. We will continue to explore options to achieve this in a way that is not divisive. I hope to bring forward proposals on this shortly and I will discuss these with all parties.
There is a clear need for broader public dialogue, including on an inclusive all-island basis, on all of the many issues that may face the people of the island, North and South. There will also be an ongoing engagement with other parties in the Oireachtas. This is in addition to the engagement with the Brexit stakeholder group, which has already been meeting for some time now.
On Friday, 24 June, the then UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, telephoned to inform me personally of the result of the referendum and of his intention to resign. He thanked the Irish Government for its support all through the process. Irish and British officials met in Dublin following a commitment made by the Prime Minister and I to early bilateral engagement at senior official level on a number of issues arising in the context of the result of the UK’s EU referendum.
I spoke with the new British Prime Minister, Theresa May, by telephone on 13 July. I offered her my congratulations and best wishes following her appointment that evening. We discussed a range of issues of mutual interest, including the importance of continuing to work together to build on the excellent relationship that now exists between Ireland and Britain, our joint support of the peace process, and the wider development of co-operation between our two countries. We also discussed the important challenges that arise from the recent vote by the UK to leave the European Union. I outlined Ireland’s key areas of concern and shared my perspective on the challenges that lie ahead in the forthcoming negotiations. We agreed to stay in touch and that we would meet each other in the coming weeks.
Five Deputies have asked questions in this block, so if Members are reasonably brief we will get everyone in and we might even get a further answer.
I thank the Taoiseach for his answer and welcome it very much. Sinn Féin is a united Ireland party. Fine Gael once described itself in this way also. In the wake of the Brexit vote, we said that an opportunity existed for a referendum on Irish unity as contained in the Good Friday Agreement. I welcome the Taoiseach's comments about the potential or possibility for a referendum on Irish unity arising from the Brexit decision in Britain. I also want to welcome the Fianna Fáil leader's move to this position. The SDLP and the Irish Labour Party have expressed support for this. I appreciate that the Taoiseach says this is not the time for such a referendum, and that is fair enough. Achieving it will depend very much on political will. That means the parties and Independents in this State and the wider society must work alongside people in the North to ensure all of this is on the agenda of the negotiations around Brexit which could be over two to four years, so we have a bit of space. We need to be open, imaginative and inclusive in all these matters. I also welcome the Taoiseach's commitment, which he reiterated today and at a meeting with party leaders last week - which I thought was a positive engagement and a good meeting - to establish an all-Ireland dialogue or forum to bring in as many sectors as possible. I spent Monday afternoon at Stormont and there is big concern among many sectors - I know the Taoiseach picked this up himself - and fear in some cases about the impact that pulling the North against its will out of the European Union on the basis of a decision taken mostly in England will have.
Of course, there are challenges but I think the Taoiseach will be surprised at the number of sectors, who traditionally would not see themselves in this position, starting to think themselves into a different space.
I put it to the Taoiseach that we need to ensure this is not put on the back-burner. When would the Taoiseach see the first meeting of this forum taking place? When would he see the dialogue commencing? We must be persuaders on these issues; we cannot be passive.
If I may say so, the issue of Irish unity is bigger than any of us. It is bigger than any political party or anyone else. There are challenges and there are opportunities and we face into them very positively.
Perhaps the Taoiseach could also indicate, if it is feasible, when he will meet the new British Prime Minister, Theresa May, and when the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Charles Flanagan, will meet his counterparts in the North. The lead British Ministers all voted in favour of getting rid of key elements, such as the Human Rights Act 1998, voted against or expressed dislike for elements of the European Convention on Human Rights which is integral to the political infrastructure of the Good Friday Agreement, and the British Prime Minister has made a point of emphasising and reiterating her Unionist credentials. Therefore, we really need to be on our game, not only around the consequences of the vote to the leave the European Union but also in regard to the Good Friday Agreement consequences with what is arguably a more right-wing British Government in place in London.
Much of the talk and media commentary in recent days has been about constitutional issues but I would like to ask the Taoiseach if social issues featured in the discussions. I noticed a report published in the Belfast Telegraph on 28 June which indicated that there are now 100,000 children living in poverty conditions in Northern Ireland - some 25% of all children in that state. The report indicated that 395,100 persons, or 22% of the overall population of Northern Ireland, in the year 2014-2015 were living below the poverty line. If I was asking the question of Sinn Féin, I would ask Sinn Féin quite sharply how it defends being part of a government and presiding over a system that delivers that level of poverty within the state but my question is to the Taoiseach. Obviously, we, on this side of the House, would argue that the solution is for working-class people, North and South, Catholic and Protestant, to organise to fight and to challenge the social conditions, the austerity and the capitalist property relations that lie behind them. My question to the Taoiseach is whether these issues featured as part of his discussions and what solutions, if any, did he discuss with the political parties in the North as a means of addressing them.
I would ask the Ceann Comhairle to note that we urgently need to review this system because there are five Members with questions down in a 15 minute slot. I have three questions. It is not feasible.
I have two.
It is simply not doable and it needs to change. It needs to be put back to the reform committee during the recess. It is not fair to anybody trying to have meaningful discussion about these issues.
There is broad agreement now about the need for an inclusive process to help define and address the many threats posed by the Brexit vote. The new Northern Secretary, Mr. Brokenshire, stated on Monday that he could see everything being handled at the level of the North-South Ministerial Council. This goes completely against the spirit of what is required. It is an issue that goes beyond business as usual and there is no way it can be dealt with by a body which meets infrequently and has a different remit. That is a body for discussion between two official entities. It is not capable of the sort of broad inclusive dialogue that we need and that the Taoiseach articulated in his response. Employers, unions, professional organisations and wider civic society have a wide range of concerns and they have to be listened to.
I put it to the Taoiseach that we should have a form of national dialogue. We do not need a politician-focused approach. Equally, we do not need the type of forums we have held in Dublin Castle in the past. It cannot and should not be State-heavy. It should include business and other members of civic society, including younger people. It should be fast, accessible and practical in terms of that dialogue around Brexit. Will the Taoiseach outline any developments on this matter and what is to be done in the next two months to move it forward?
To be absolutely clear, I do not favour an immediate Border poll, as advocated by Sinn Féin in the immediate aftermath of Brexit. Some 55% voted to remain in the European Union. One cannot automatically say that 55% would vote tomorrow morning for a united Ireland. We need to be straight-up about that. A united Ireland is about unity of people. It is about persuasion, consensus and bringing people with us, not to now inflame passions unnecessarily or create unnecessary divisions. The focus at present must be Brexit and ensuring that community groups, business people, trade unions and workers all have an input in trying to articulate their concerns and needs and then working a way through that.
I asked the Taoiseach about the UK Presidency. The British Government has stated it will not be taking that up. I put it to the Taoiseach three weeks ago whether he would consider Ireland agreeing to participate as part of a multinational replacement Presidency. Has anything happened on that matter and have we held discussions with the President of the European Council, Mr. Tusk, on what will happen next in that regard? At some stage, the Taoiseach might answer, in the context of Question No. 4, whether or not he alerted the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade of the forum idea.
Given the importance of the issues, I suggest to Members that we might take the second 15 minute slot to deal with these questions?
Agreed.
If I was in government, I could not do that.
We might get answers.
I indicated to the Taoiseach previously that there are significant concerns in the Border counties, both North and South, following the British decision to exit the European Union. Fortunately, there was 20 years of good growth in trade and commerce between North and South and South and North. Those businesses in the Border region - I am familiar with those in the two southern Ulster counties of my constituency, Cavan and Monaghan - that are heavily dependent on exporting to Northern Ireland and to the British market have already been hard hit by the weakening of sterling. The Government and the Oireachtas need to focus on the immediate issues hitting business at present and there must be a case for some support for small and medium-sized enterprises that are heavily dependent on exporting to the sterling area.
In this whole discussion, we all are mindful of the difficulties that will arise for exporters to the sterling area. We must also be conscious of the exporters who will send their products through Britain to further destinations. If there are customs and tariffs, products exiting Ireland and transiting through Britain to Asia and elsewhere will meet with additional costs. Even if there are not hard borders, there will be customs and tariff regulations to be met. That all generates additional costs.
As the Taoiseach will be aware, the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body was established in 1990. The Taoiseach was a member early on, as I was. We worked together, both representatives from the Oireachtas and from Westminster, in very difficult political times in the early and mid-1990s. That body now is the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly and it has representatives from the Oireachtas, Westminster, the assemblies in Northern Ireland and Wales, the Scottish Parliament and from Jersey and Guernsey. It was established in 1990 as a forum for discussion for Members of Parliament and members of political assemblies to discuss and consult on issues and areas of mutual concern and interest. The British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly could be given an additional remit in ensuring that we use the parliamentary processes that are already in place. We are not only talking about North-South. Unfortunately, we are also talking about an east-west dimension as well.
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for facilitating all of us. These are really important questions.
As has been mentioned by a number of other speakers, representatives of all parties and groups in this House gathered in Government Buildings last week at the Taoiseach's invitation to discuss the implications of Brexit for the island of Ireland. It was a very useful and constructive meeting and, surprisingly, there was much consensus. There was unanimous agreement that a forum or dialogue between those North and South of the Border to tease out in real terms the implications of Brexit was urgently needed. It was further agreed that the forum should be as broad-ranging and inclusive of all strands of society as was possible.
I am trying to get my head around what has happened since. I read the remarks of Deputy Martin and the Taoiseach's reply to questions at the MacGill Summer School. It seemed to me that he is now in support of the Sinn Féin proposal calling for a Border poll. The Taoiseach's comments yesterday in this House seemed to move back from that, and there was further clarity from Deputy Martin this morning. The suggestion immediately infuriated Unionists in the North, who were already sceptical of the all-Ireland dialogue proposal. It was unnecessary and unhelpful to inject fears about the objective of a forum into this, as it really would be a forum that would be to everybody's benefit on the island of Ireland.
As Deputy Martin indicated, the Good Friday Agreement enshrined consent as the principle on which matters in Northern Ireland relating to constitutionality are to be determined. There is not a majority in the North that would now vote for unification, according to all opinion polls, and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has made it clear there is no intention on behalf of the British Government to call for such a poll. Plainly, it will not happen. It is unfortunate in that context that there is in any way a connection by some between a proposal and a reality. All of us would like to see the day arrive when such a poll would carry in the North. To have any connection in the eyes of Unionists between proper and open dialogue on the impact of Brexit and how we can continue deep and meaningful co-operation on the island of Ireland, and a fast-track to a constitutional poll, would be unhelpful.
I ask the Taoiseach to put things back on track and advance the idea agreed by all parties and groupings in the House in the Sycamore Room in Government Buildings last week to advance the dialogue we spoke about and return to serious thinking about relations that are inclusive, welcoming and not frightening for anybody on the island of Ireland. Perhaps we can then think about preparing to accommodate Unionists in a united Ireland when that becomes a real possibility.
Deputy Adams raised a number of points. We had a good meeting last week with the different leaders of the groupings here. It was a positive and constructive engagement. I should make it clear that what is actually unique in respect of our position here is the Good Friday Agreement, as we are a co-guarantor of the Agreement with the British Government. It deals with all the aspects of life in Northern Ireland and, by implication, North and South and east and west. My point in Donegal was that the authors of the Good Friday Agreement in their vision put a clause in the agreement, and at some point in future - we are nearly 20 years on now - a Secretary of State might have evidence that would trigger that clause. That evidence is not there now. My following point was that, were it to happen at some point in future, the negotiations as part of the overall reflection on the Good Friday Agreement should ease the way if the majority of people in Northern Ireland said they wanted to leave the United Kingdom, and, having found themselves removed from the European Union and wishing to join a country - the Republic of Ireland - that continues to be a member of the Union, the road should be made easier for them. It is just that point, and it might never happen. As part of the overall discussions, the position should be catered for. Clearly, there is no evidence of a majority in Northern Ireland voting for that now or in the immediate future. One can consider the discussions we will have, and the Good Friday Agreement is central to that. It is an issue the original authors foresaw and, whether it happens or not, they put in a clause that will allow for it to happen. I am just continuing that for the time ahead.
I would like to think we could have this engagement and conversation in September. I agree completely with everybody that this is far bigger than any individual party, as it is about all the people. This process should be enthusiastic, forward-focused, welcoming and inclusive, allowing for every person's view, whether he or she is an entrepreneur, a researcher, a farmer, a worker, a housewife or whatever type of citizen. It is much too important not to have that happen. In the 1980s, when the New Ireland Forum was set up, not all the parties agreed to join, and I remember the McGimpsey brothers attended on behalf of the Unionist party to give evidence in a personal capacity. When one considers the implications of what we may have to deal with, it is very important that people have the opportunity, or whatever term we put on it, to have their point of view put forward. Whether it is an island conversation, conference or opportunity, the issues need to be heard so that everybody understands the scale of what we are at. I am receiving much interest from businesses North and South that want to express their opinions. I would like that to be done in a non-divisive way, as it is in the interests of everybody that this should happen. I am quite sure the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Flanagan, has been in touch with his counterpart asking for a meeting, and I spoke with British Prime Minister, Theresa May, saying that when it is appropriate, and as early as possible, we should arrange a meeting to build on the relationships we have had for quite some time.
With regard to Deputy Barry's question, we have the North-South Ministerial Council, cross-Border activities and agencies working with each other because of social issues, as they reflect on the challenges, disadvantages and unfairness in many areas of society. That is why the peace process has been backed by the European Union for all these years, and there is €3 billion on the table between now and 2021 for fragile communities coming out of a conflict situation in which 3,000 people lost their lives over 30 years. The overall intention is that Northern Ireland should be peaceful, prosperous and outward-looking and should be able to provide opportunity for its citizens. That involves trade and business. That is why we have the many discussions and activities going on and why we support, in both monetary and political terms, the likes of the A5 project and the north west gateway. It is why we continue to be strong supporters of the Narrow Water bridge, the Ulster Canal and so many other activities North and South, including medical, educational and infrastructural projects. These are social issues that have an impact in enclaves and areas where there have been difficulties - where the peace walls apply and outside them.
Cross-Border trade is of greater importance to firms in Northern Ireland dealing in goods and products with companies and people down here than vice versa. The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation has been in touch with both IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland, which have contacted their companies and small and medium enterprises individually.
The point made by Deputy Brendan Smith is true. One can leave the Republic with a lorry load of machinery and drive to the Ukrainian border but if controls and checks are in place, they will add to the amount of paperwork on the way in and out. While hard borders have disappeared in many cases, there is the capacity with modern technology to track the movement of goods and conditions that apply in terms of country of origin for raw material, products sourced for manufacturing and so on. Ireland has improved greatly in terms of its competitiveness and we do not want to see anything happen that would damage it. For us, one of the outcomes following Brexit should be that Britain would be as close to the Single Market as possible because that impacts on us and our interests including the common travel area, trade links, the peace process, the common Border and the opportunity to continue to expand.
We have discussed it before and I agree with Deputy Martin that the kind of conversation we should have should be about the future. It should involve as many as is possible from across the spectrum, including young business entrepreneurs, academics, researchers, politicians and so on. I agree it is not a static forum such as that of the 1980s, but it is an opportunity to be able to reflect on the many issues.
The British Government has stated that it is not accepting the EU Presidency now. I know that others have expressed an interest. Belgium has been referred to in this context. There may be a statement later in that regard.
Did the Taoiseach say Belgium?
Yes. I understand it has been mentioned but I do not have confirmation of it.
The British-Irish Interparliamentary Body, which is now the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, the British-Irish Council and the North-South Ministerial Council present opportunities but we need a different sense of contact in respect of what we have to deal with here. I was a member of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body in the beginning. The idea was that we would become acquainted with the system and the members of the House of Commons and talk about issues. It was a big success. We should also not forget the North-South Interparliamentary Association which was set up by the former Ceann Comhairle and the speaker of the Executive.
I agree with Deputy Howlin in respect of North-South dialogue. It should be inclusive and broad-ranging in everyone's interest. We are co-guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement. The point he makes is important. Comments about a Border poll or having a discussion about the future of the island, North and South, should not be connected or linked to an attempt to influence people's thinking in the North about an all-island situation. This is much more immediate and of profound consequence. It is important that we have access to the advice and views of the businesses and people of Northern Ireland. I do not see why we cannot have that, while not interfering in any way with the politics or priorities of the parties in Northern Ireland or down here. This is about people, North and South. I agree it should be inclusive, comprehensive and welcoming and it should allow everyone to set out their stall. Until such time as the British Government sets out its objective and its own horizon, it is difficult for Europe to respond in detail. I note in some cases that it has referred to Article 50 not being triggered until the new year. I think that might be the cause of some frustration in some European countries. The Prime Minister will make a statement when she has reflected on it.
From that point of view, I would like to speak to the leaders about my set of propositions and to have a conversation early in September. We need it then so that we can move on, build on the consensus we have and get that of our friends and colleagues in Northern Ireland, while respecting their views. It could be in everyone's interest. I will work hard on it over the next few weeks.
On a point of order-----
Two Deputies are offering supplementary contributions, that is, Deputy Adams and Deputy Martin. If Deputy Adams wishes to follow up-----
Do we have the time for it?
We have a certain amount of time, but it is limited.
We are very flexible today.
If it is 30 minutes-----
We have 13 minutes remaining-----
How many?
We have 13 minutes remaining for Questions to the Taoiseach, but we are not taking-----
I rushed the last contribution thinking I had only four minutes.
Rush again.
The Taoiseach gave an excellent reply that went on a good ten minutes. Fair play to him. I know he had to cover all our questions. In terms of an outline of the developments or next steps in relation to the dialogue, does the Taoiseach have a clear plan in mind? For example, what is to be done during the next two months to move it forward? I agree with what Deputy Howlin said, that there is no disagreement in terms of my position on consensus building and so on.
I was a bit confused on Monday.
The Deputy would not have been if he had read the script.
I read the reporting of the script, which is not always the same thing of course.
Correct.
It will be interesting to see why Belgium should get the Presidency. I am puzzled by that. The Taoiseach might come back to us on it at some stage because-----
It is being mentioned that it is being offered by Belgium. That is all.
The UK Presidency was to follow that of Malta and, in turn, Estonia was to follow its Presidency. The Presidency can be a lot of pressure on smaller countries and simply moving up the rota might not be the best option in this case. Given that we have such a unique relationship with Britain, there is a case-----
For the Deputy's information, the foreign affairs Minister has offered it. It is to be discussed at COREPER today, but no decision has been made.
Have there been any other offers?
Not that I am aware of.
Have we offered?
We had it in 2013. We have not made a formal offer now.
I think we should. I suggested this three weeks ago because of the unique situation facing us following Britain's decision to leave the European Union.
Perhaps the countries-----
It might give us some insight and engagement in terms of negotiations that are key to the future of the island and relations between the UK and Ireland.
Deputy Adams wanted to come in.
First, could we use the rest of the time for Questions to the Taoiseach to deal with this issue and for us all to be let in to ask supplementary questions? Given that this is the last-----
If the House agrees to it, but there are only about 11 minutes remaining anyway. Does the House agree?
We will use the 11 minutes.
Does the House agree? It is agreed.
I wish to make a point of order. What we are doing is crazy. I am being told I have two minutes, I come in within the two minutes, but we now have 11 minutes.
In fairness, that is not-----
In fairness, it just shows that this is not a system that can go on. I lead a party of 44 Deputies, 30 minutes went and I got four minutes.
Two minutes were spent giving out.
It has gone from one extreme to another and it needs to change. It cannot go on in this manner. Otherwise, at least state that we are taking eight questions for half an hour. If that was stated at the beginning, we would all know where we are.
On a point of order-----
There are ten minutes remaining.
On a point of order, is it that we are not getting to the other groupings?
That is the point.
The House just agreed it, so I call Deputy Adams.
I wish to make two initial points. I have asked consistently for the North to be discussed regularly in this House and I want to return to that point. Second, all of these arrangements are open to review and they are reviewed regularly. I think that is the trigger for this.
The invitation to a forum or whatever sort of dialogue we want across the island should be very open. It should include those who have totally different views from those here and include those who want to stay as well as those who want to leave and so on.
We also need to recognise that partition and partitionism affects all of us. I have no problem admitting it affects me.
It affects the leaders of the Fianna Fáil and Labour parties and it affects the Taoiseach.
It does not affect us. Workers have no country.
It is no more obvious than in this institution. Is a united Ireland something that cannot be named? Is it something for which we do not have a responsibility? Are we always to behave like Slattery's mounted foot and rubbish Sinn Féin's proposition, only to go for it later? This is bigger than all of us. We should become persuaders for Irish unity because we will not have a workers' republic, nor any kind of real republic, without the unity of the people of this island. That is the Connolly proposition for those from the William Walker school of gas and water works socialism.
We need to have an inclusive discussion in this House about new relationships. The Taoiseach talks about people joining this State. Does he think the people in the North are mad? We want a new Ireland but look at our health services. Why would any thinking person, in the Unionist community or otherwise, want to leave the public health service they have, for all its faults, to come to what we have here? The same applies to all the other social and economic issues, such as homelessness, which press down upon us. Partition created two conservative states on this island and while the focus has historically been on the Orange state, this one, as a result of the counter-revolution, was just as bad. Let us reimagine Ireland not just as one part joining the other part and not as a 32-county free state, but as a new imagined Ireland to which the founders of the Fine Gael, Labour and Fianna Fáil parties, as well as the party of which I am part, subscribed. I say this provocatively because we need to be a bit provocative in looking at these matters. We also need to expedite funding issues in this space. It is not good enough that the failure of the British to start negotiations should put so many people under so much pressure, whether it is in respect of the Narrow Water bridge project, some other project in the Border corridor where capital investment is needed, or people on the PEACE or INTERREG programmes. We need to push all of those ahead but, most important, we need to set aside time in this Dáil to discuss these matters in a reasonable and rational but robust way.
The next speakers have a total of seven minutes. I am sure the Taoiseach is anxious to reply.
I want to get back to the nub of the questions. I thought we had a broad agreement last week on an invitation to an inclusive dialogue without preconditions for people to ask about the implications of this profound change in the status of the United Kingdom for the people on the island of Ireland. We invited people, whether farmers, industrialists, workers or employers, to come and talk to us. Over the weekend that seemed to change. The suspicion of Unionists and the dismissal by the DUP of the proposal were not well handled and it was not the Taoiseach's finest moment. Notwithstanding that, the linking of this notion to the idea that it might speed up a Border poll and somehow hasten a vote on unity move what was suspicion to a feeling of being threatened. This damages the prospect of it being as inclusive as we would want. It has been characterised as a Sinn Féin proposition.
It was a Good Friday Agreement proposition.
I though we had a unanimous view which Sinn Féin bought into Government Buildings last week.
We proposed it.
Absolutely, and we said it. In fact, Sinn Féin was second to the SDLP in this.
I wrote to Deputy Howlin about it.
I replied to Deputy Adams.
What was the reply?
Deputy Martin did not reply, however.
I replied to the effect that it was a good idea to progress in the consensual way we wanted. There is no advantage in our trying to score political points on a separate agenda on this real issue that is a manifest threat to us all, namely, Brexit. My job is to perfect the imperfections of this Republic and I make no apologies for that. In the meantime, I want to address real issues that will affect the well being of the people of the entire island.
We think people are entitled to have a Border poll if that is what they want. We have to listen to the people in the North as to whether that is what they want.
A poll about whether to have a poll.
It is called "consultation". It is called "listening to people". It is a legitimate question but it does not help when Deputy Adams mischaracterises the position of People Before Profit.
How did the Deputy know I was talking about him?
He suggested we were opposed to a Border poll but we are not. It is one thing to have a Border poll but it is another thing to win it and there is no point in posturing about polls that one knows will not be won or will not even take place. James Connolly said the working class were the incorruptible fighters for Irish freedom. In saying this, he understood that unity meant having a consistent line of defending and promoting the interests of working class people North and South and needed to be built from below by winning over Protestant workers to a united fight against inequality North and South of the Border. Connolly was primarily an internationalist and his motivation was to break from empires, rather than siding with them or going into Government with people who were loyal to empires. If we want unity we should start not by looking for corporate tax reductions, which will only come at the expense of working class people, or having a race to the bottom in the area of pay for working class people but by siding consistently with working class people, North and South, in the fight against austerity and inequality.
The people of the two southern Ulster counties that I have the privilege of representing want us to focus on the immediate issues. The people in my clinics were concerned about sectors in which they work facing particular trading difficulties because of the weakness of sterling. Is the Government considering giving some assistance to small and medium enterprises in sectors that are very heavily dependent on exporting to Northern Ireland? They have already been hit by uncertainty and the weakness of sterling and they are very concerned about the immediate difficulties that face them, never mind the long-term difficulties. The Government needs to send out a message to employers, employees and businesses in those sectors that assistance will be provided to them to get through these very difficult times.
Enterprise Ireland, on the instructions of the Minister, is engaged directly with companies who are now trading. There have been currency fluctuations and volatility and Enterprise Ireland is giving them advice and every help that can be given. We have had variations of this in recent years, although things have been very steady for a while. Increased costs due to currency fluctuation are a cause of anxiety but I assure Deputy Smith that Enterprise Ireland is very actively engaged with companies which export to Britain and it will continue to be so. The Government will monitor the situation on the basis of reports from the Minister as needs be.
Deputy Adams cast aspersions on our entire health system when he asked why a person would want to join this State. I assure him that I receive accounts from people of the care and level of attention they get. We should not decry the efforts-----
I do not. It is the two-tier system-----
-----and the work front-line staff do. That is the reason we want a ten-year vision for the health system. We work assiduously to deal with the difficulties therein but I would not cast aspersions, as Deputy Adams did, on the entire system and the people who work in it because-----
Please, Taoiseach, do not misrepresent what I said.
-----I have reports of the highest standards of care.
The Taoiseach, without interruption.
To return to the point, the British have said they are not taking the Presidency. There had been talk from different areas but no decision has been made about what happens or who will take it up. It might be the case that a Presidency may be moved forward. I believe that is being discussed this afternoon at the COREPER meeting. We are represented there and we will advise the Deputy as to what happens.
I take it we are not going for it. Is that the Taoiseach's judgment?
No. We had it quite recently - in the first half of 2013.
We do not want it.
We want to be players in this and we have a lot to say and discuss.
Be ambitious.
I hope we can put together a consultation-discussion process that will follow through on what we agreed here. There is never anything wrong with talking about these issues. I take the Deputy's point fully that there should never be a correlation. There will be no Border poll now. There is no evidence of a majority wanting to join the Republic. My point is a different one in that it is about catering for the future, in whatever number of years. If that were ever to be triggered, there is an opportunity to deal with that consequence in the discussions. That is all. It has nothing to do with immediacy in terms of a Border poll. People of the Unionist persuasion are fully entitled to their views and there should not be a false understanding that there is some kind of an attempt to have an immediate Border poll to pressurise them into joining the Republic of Ireland. That was never the intention and is not the case but in the interests of the island of Ireland and the people of Northern Ireland and the Republic, we should at least be able to discuss and hear their view of the challenges that will be faced now because of the consequence of the vote, particularly when Northern Ireland voted to remain a member of the European Union. We need to have a rational, commonsense, inclusive way of doing that and I hope we can get that going in the interests of everybody.
