Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 8 November 2016
1. Deputy Sean Sherlock asked the Taoiseach the measures in place to engage with Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas on Ireland's position ahead of the negotiations with the United Kingdom following the vote to leave the European Union. [32801/16]
View answer2. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the all-Ireland forum on Brexit that was held on 2 November 2016. [33523/16]
View answer3. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the civic dialogue conference. [33550/16]
View answer4. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the reason he indicated at the civic forum that the British Government could initiate Article 50 by December 2016. [33802/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.
The all-island civic dialogue on Brexit which I hosted last week with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade was an important opportunity to hear a wide range of views on the implications of Brexit for this island. The dialogue was the first in a series of sessions to discuss both the challenges and the opportunities arising from Brexit on an all-island basis. It was an open and inclusive event, bringing together around 300 people from all parts of the island of Ireland, representing a broad range of civic society groups, trade unions, business groups and non-governmental organisations.
I very much welcome the constructive engagement of those who attended from political parties, North and South, including many from this House. I was also impressed by the quality of the interventions from across civic society, from large business groups to local and community representatives from Border areas. I was struck by the appetite of the audience and participants for deeper consultation and engagement. As I said during my remarks at the event, this is just the first part of an ongoing dialogue. We need more detailed discussions across a number of specific themes and sectors which will form the next phase of our dialogue. We will hold a number of sectoral consultations in the coming weeks and months and I will convene another all-island civic dialogue in plenary format early next year.
During my remarks at the dialogue I noted that the Prime Minister, Ms Theresa May, had indicated that she would trigger Article 50 by no later than the end of March but that this did not preclude her from taking this action at an earlier date.
That was a simple statement of fact at the time, although the subsequent ruling of the High Court on the role of Parliament on Article 50 reduces the likelihood of an earlier notification.
I will continue to update the Members of the House on Brexit related issues through a range of methods, including weekly responses to parliamentary questions and Leader's Questions, regular briefings for party leaders, as required, making statements to the House before and after European Council meetings and making statements to the House itself, as required.
To follow up on the Taoiseach's comments on Article 50 and when it would be triggered, he seems to be rowing back somewhat from the comments that were reported in terms of a real possibility that it could be triggered earlier than March and even before the end of this year. In particular, I ask the Taoiseach for his opinion on the latest developments on Brexit in Britain in the context of the decision of the High Court. Does the Taoiseach agree that while it is appropriate that the British Parliament should discuss a mandate for the Brexit negotiations for the British Government and that there should be such a democratic discussion and accountability of the British Government to the British Parliament, it would be absolutely wrong for the Parliament or the courts to act to try to subvert or deny the wishes of the people, as expressed in the referendum, to exit the European Union?
I commend the Taoiseach, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Government for holding last week's civic dialogue. I also thank all those who organised the event which ran very smoothly. It was informative, wide ranging and many voices expressed their opinion on Brexit. While the Unionist parties did not participate, I am certain they were listening to what was discussed at the forum. I am sure they are still listening to what is going on.
What is going on is not very good, as we all appreciate, for the people of this island, whatever our position may be on the constitutional issue. Monday's report by the Department of Finance and the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, reveals some of the very real dangers. The report finds that a so-called hard Brexit would permanently damage the economy, reducing its size by almost 4% and increasing unemployment by as much as 2%. It goes on to give some detail around all this. I know that there is currently a short-term gain for retailers in the North, which I am sure is welcome in places like Enniskillen, Derry and Newry but that will be short-lived and will ultimately lead to inflation and an increase in the cost of living for citizens in the North.
How do we combat all this? The Taoiseach should give us more meat in terms of the plans and the next steps in the programme for the civic dialogue. He has not gone any further today but has simply told us that it will meet again next year. We need to have more detail, particularly about the notion of moving the conference throughout the island.
I was at a disability rights conference in north Louth recently, organised by Ms Martina Anderson, MEP. An issue was raised there which I had not thought about previously. It was very clear that the rights of people with disabilities, which are now legislatively based, will be done away with if the British, or rather the English, Government leaves the European Union and drags the North with it. This is another issue of grave concern.
The last time we discussed this matter I asked the Taoiseach whether he had asked Prime Minister May about the implications for the Good Friday Agreement post-Brexit. I particularly asked if the Taoiseach had asked her about the Human Rights Act but he did not answer me. He just ignored the question entirely. Later the journalist Justine McCarthy asked the same question and the Taoiseach on that occasion told her that he had not raised the issue with Prime Minister May. I congratulate Justine McCarthy for being able to get the answer that I was not able to get. The Taoiseach also said that he did not have enough time but I would suggest that he did not make it a priority. That is part of the problem. This Government does not have the imagination, vision or investment in the process of political change on the island, particularly arising from the Good Friday Agreement. We must raise these issues and we look to the Taoiseach to do so. He must stand up for people in the Six Counties who expressed their vote. They have not given their consent to being dragged out of the European Union at the whim of a right-wing government in London. I ask the Taoiseach if he has had the opportunity to raise any of these matters relating to the Good Friday Agreement with the British.
Has the Taoiseach been briefed on the recent High Court decision in London and its implications? That decision came the day after the Taoiseach's comment to the effect that he thought that the British Prime Minister might trigger Brexit before March. Has the Government been briefed on this issue? Has the Taoiseach raised any of these crucially important issues, which as equal co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement, he is obliged to protect?
I feel the civic forum went well. The participation of stakeholders in business and farming and the raising of workers' issues, trade unions and so on were quite effective. However, if it is to be a true dialogue, it must continue and we must get down to specifics with the various sectors that are represented. The potential impact on the academic and research communities is, for example, a very real issue, as is the concern around North-South interactions and the all-island economy.
We have heard various fears expressed by different sectors, but I am not clear on what the Government's response will be. It is interesting to note that the more one looks at the budget, the more one sees that it failed to make any adequate provision of substance for Brexit. When one reads last month's publications from the Department of Finance on the sectors that are exposed to Brexit and yesterday's report from the Department and the ESRI, one sees that even in the context of a so-called soft Brexit, there will be downside repercussions for Irish economic growth, GDP and employment unless action is taken. We need to move into the space of putting it to our European colleagues that direct aid will be needed for some industries. The reports from the Department of Finance indicate that traditional manufacturing will be under threat, the regions outside of Dublin will be badly hit and the Border regions will be hit hardest by a hard Brexit or even a soft Brexit. The Department identifies particular sectors that are at risk including farming, agrifood, traditional manufacturing, tourism and others. The thinking cap should have been on with regard to what will be required in the next year or so and then in the aftermath of Brexit actually happening. Are scenarios being prepared in terms of the supports that the Government may have to provide to transition certain SMEs out of trouble, that is, those which are heavily reliant on the British market to sell their produce? The same question applies in quite a number of other areas, including our VAT rate, for example.
We must accept the urgency of this because it is very serious. Brexit fundamentally alters the economic model that we have been operating since the 1970s. The model we have been working under for the last 45 to 50 years will be turned upside down by the decision of the British to leave the European Union unless Britain magically gets a Norway-type deal, with full access to the Single Market, without tariffs. We would love to see such a deal, but we are not getting any sense of that happening right now; therefore, we need to prepare for the negative scenarios. One can add into the mix the negative figures on income tax and the fact that retail sales are beginning to flatten out.
Manufacturing output in general is down again this month. I accept that these are monthly figures but if one puts it all together, there are significant challenges ahead. Will the Taoiseach indicate whether he has approached the European Commission and pointed out these realities and the fact that intervention will be required? Has he outlined or published his negotiating goals or principles in advance of any of this? It is important that this would happen. I would argue that maybe the time has come for us to have a meaningful discussion in this House about the measures we will be looking for to mitigate the impact of what has been a disastrous decision by the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. It is time to talk substance. There is a degree of superficiality in terms of the debate.
I join others in commending the Taoiseach for facilitating the first "open mic" for all the different stakeholders who feel this momentous decision by the United Kingdom will impact on them. I stayed for the full debate because I thought it was most important. I agree with the Taoiseach that the impact of Brexit is probably the most serious issue we will face as a nation in our lifetime. It will certainly be as challenging as the economic disaster we battled our way through for the past few years.
In respect of the first question on the Order Paper today, it is and has been important to allow all the social and economic actors in this State to have a voice and we need to continue to do this. Fundamentally, we need a united clear voice in this House. I am not reassured by the notion that the Taoiseach will be amenable to answer normal Leaders' Questions or take Topical Issues or anything else. We need a structure. We need some way in which the negotiating position of the 27 member states is impacted by the best interests of the people of this island, North and South, because as other speakers have said, nobody will be impacted as much as the people on this island. I do not expect the Taoiseach to give me an answer now, but I ask him to reflect on how the Oireachtas can move into a different forum to ensure we deal with the issues of substance about which Deputy Micheál Martin spoke. We can all identify the challenges but we must scope out the best solutions and influence the negotiating position of the United Kingdom in the first instance. One of the things that struck me in the debate at the forum was the notion that we would wait until negotiations start and somehow have a tripartite discussion involving the 26 member states, Ireland and the United Kingdom. It will not be like that. It will be the United Kingdom with a set-out position and the European Commission negotiating for the 27 member states; therefore, we need to influence the opening positions of both the United Kingdom and the 27 member states before Article 50 is triggered. I ask the Taoiseach to give serious consideration as to how we can as an Oireachtas deal with that issue.
Deputy Gerry Adams asked whether there have been any specific briefings relating to the judgment of the UK High Court. One issue many of us have talked about is the possibility that at the end of the negotiation period of two or three years, the people of the United Kingdom will have the chance to vote again. Implicit in the judgment was that once Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty is triggered, it is irrevocable. Without treaty change, there is no comeback from this. That is a fundamental issue. Does the Taoiseach have legal advices that this is the position or will it ultimately be a determination of the European Court of Justice?
Unfortunately, I could not attend the dialogue last week because I had a commitment-----
The Deputy should not take too long because we have time restrictions and are over time.
I agree with Deputy Brendan Howlin. There will not always be agreement but there will be agreement in some areas and we should try to achieve agreement in these areas and work together regardless of whether it is taking up issues with the European Union or the British Government around things like grant funding in Northern Ireland, making sure we do not have a hard Border and other issues relating to particular sectors. In so far as the dialogue has started, is there recognition that one of the lessons of all of this is that our economy is not diversified enough and that it is too dependent on a couple of key sectors, notably beef? I submitted a question that was not taken. I was contacted by the Iranian ambassador before the summer break who told me that Iran was willing to sign a contract for beef with this country worth €2 billion if we were willing to re-establish the embassy in Tehran. That is something the Taoiseach should know. The Iranians even offered a building in Tehran if the Taoiseach did decide to re-establish the embassy.
I saw a shocking graph at a meeting at the weekend which showed that when one stripped out of our growth figures-----
The next question will be curtailed because the Ceann Comhairle-----
-----intellectual property-related trade-----
The Ceann Comhairle indicated as he was leaving that the next question would have to be curtailed if a contribution went on too long. I am sure he was not anticipating the Deputy's speech.
Nobody else was interrupted.
We are moving on. The Deputy has had more than his fair share. He did not have a question.
Deputy Paul Murphy raised a question about Article 50. It is only 18 weeks to the end of March. I would not want anybody to be complacent and wait until the last few days in March expecting that only then will the Prime Minister decide to trigger Article 50. When I made that comment at the civic forum, what I had in mind was that we have no time to waste and that we should be looking at what we must discuss and get ready for. At the time, it was the Prime Minister's right or it was assumed to be her right to trigger Article 50 whenever she thought it appropriate. As that could be any time from December through to January or February, it might not be at the end of the March. The UK High Court has made its ruling on the basis that only Parliament has the authority to trigger Article 50, which is the legal route out of the European Union for the United Kingdom and that this precludes the invoking of Article 50 by the Prime Minister or the Government under the royal prerogative, which gives it sole authority over foreign policy and the making and unmaking of treaties. The High Court ruled that the European Communities Act 1972, which gives effect to the United Kingdom's EU membership, is a matter of domestic law and not foreign policy. Everybody is aware that the British Government intends to appeal that ruling to the UK Supreme Court. Arrangements have been made for that to happen in December. I do not know what the outcome of that will be and whether the Supreme Court will support the High Court or come to a different decision. I cannot say at this stage whether it will upset the timescale set out by the Prime Minister. She contends that Article 50 will still be triggered by the end of March 2017.
Deputy Gerry Adams mentioned the fact that the Unionist parties did not participate in the civic forum. I met Mike Nesbitt, MLA, in Stormont and hope to meet the First Minister, Arlene Foster, MLA, on Sunday in Enniskillen before the meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council on 18 November. I am sure everybody is listening to this debate. I thought that the ESRI report on a Norway or Swiss-style operation or a WTO arrangement spoke for itself in that if the Government was to do nothing, the implications would be very serious. The Government will do what it can. Our priorities remain the economy, jobs, the situation in Northern Ireland, the peace process, Border and citizenship issues, the common travel area and so on.
In response to Deputy Gerry Adams, it will be important to move some of the sectoral and thematic issues out from Dublin.
As the Deputy knows, I was in Carlingford, Blackrock, Dundalk and Newry recently. At one of the meetings of the Brexit conference yesterday, we agreed to go to Newry for the next thematic session which will involve education and research. We will set out a timetable throughout the country, North and South, for those thematic issues. We will have a further plenary session early in the new year. I have been invited by the Newry Junior Chamber and the Newry Chamber of Commerce & Trade to go back to Newry and I intend to take up that opportunity. I have made the point that the Government will continue its co-guarantorship requirement in respect of the Good Friday Agreement. I understand that has been reiterated by different British Ministers.
Deputy Micheál Martin is right. We discussed a number of sectoral areas, including energy, the agrifood sector, hospitality, education and research, water, and human rights. Following yesterday's meeting of the Brexit committee, all these themes and sectors will be outlined and we will decide where they should be held around the country and in the North, followed by a plenary session afterwards.
I made the point about the Brexit committee. I have had to deal with questions about whether to appoint a Minister for this or a Minister for that. This is a national challenge for everybody. For that reason I recall back in 1969 when Jack Lynch - God rest him - was standing here, they had several options about how to deal with the challenge then. In this case it is about Ireland, the people, the economy and our future. It should be led by the Taoiseach, the Department of the Taoiseach with everybody involved. Let us figure out a way here of having everybody discuss it here. We could devote an hour and a half or two hours every week to Brexit; I do not mind. We could set up an Oireachtas committee to deal with it. It is appropriate that the party leaders should be briefed regularly. If they require information individually it should and will be given to them because they each need to be able to talk to their people in Brussels. In that sense these things are important.
What we know is as follows. First, Article 50 will be triggered by the end of March.
Not December.
Second, there will be no return to a hard Border. Both Governments agree the benefits of the common travel area should be preserved. We stand by the Good Friday Agreement. There will be no access to the Single Market without freedom of movement of people. The European Council makes the political decisions about all of this.
What do we not know? We do not know whether the British Government intends to stay with the Single Market, pull out of it or have elements of it made available to it. Does the United Kingdom intend to remove itself from the customs union, which would bring other complications? The economy, jobs, the people and our relationships with Northern Ireland, the United Kingdom and the European Union remain central to our priorities. It is appropriate that we should discuss measures that might be taken here. Some extra facilities were made available to the agencies, IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine has introduced a scheme for those in the agriculture sector. It might be possible to expand that into the food business and so on.
I have no objection to the House having a weekly session for an hour or whatever Deputies want. If the committees can agree, I would be happy to do that in order that the people are fully briefed because everybody has to wear the national jersey here.
In response to Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett, I have spoken to the Minister, Deputy Charles Flanagan, in respect of embassies in different locations around the world. I am aware of approaches that were made in respect of Iran, but that is a matter for a separate analysis.
As far as Brexit is concerned, I would like to think we give everybody the fullest information possible when it is needed and appropriate in order that everybody clearly understands the impact of this decision is the most serious of the past 50 years.
