Michael Moynihan
Question:7. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Taoiseach the key areas which need to be addressed to avoid a hard Brexit, in particular, to protect the island of Ireland. [16397/17]
View answerWednesday, 5 April 2017
Questions (7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)
Micheál Martin
Question:8. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he has spoken or written to the British Prime Minister, Ms Theresa May, since she wrote the letter to President Tusk on 29 March 2017 instigating Article 50; the details of the proposed statement he will make at the next EU Council following this instigation; and his main requests and concerns in this regard. [16400/17]
View answer
Gerry Adams
Question:9. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he has had contact with the British Prime Minister, Ms Theresa May, since the triggering of Article 50 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on 29 March 2017. [16411/17]
View answer
Eamon Ryan
Question:10. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Taoiseach when he last spoke to or corresponded with the British Prime Minister, Ms Theresa May, to discuss Brexit arrangements; and the details of that conversation. [16458/17]
View answer
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:11. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if he has spoken to the British Prime Minister, Ms Theresa May, since she triggered Article 50 to commence Britain's withdrawal from the EU. [16463/17]
View answer
Brendan Howlin
Question:12. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if he will provide an update on the all-island civil dialogue on Brexit; and his plans for further meetings. [16728/17]
View answerGerry Adams
Question:13. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when he will publish the promised consolidated paper providing details of the Government's priorities and approach to the Brexit negotiations. [16553/17]
View answer
Joan Burton
Question:14. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach the discussions he had with the British Government since its letter to EU Council President, Mr. Donald Tusk, invoking Article 50 of the European Union treaties. [16735/17]
View answerOral answers (26 contributions)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 14, inclusive, together.
I spoke with Prime Minister May by telephone on the day Article 50 was triggered. I acknowledged the constructive tone of the Article 50 letter and the references to Ireland and Northern Ireland. We discussed the next steps in the Brexit process and agreed to maintain close contact at political and official level. We also discussed the political situation in Northern Ireland.
It has been clear from the start that the United Kingdom's departure from the European Union will have significant economic, political and social implications for Ireland. The Government has been working very hard for more than two years, even before the UK referendum, to engage with all sectors across the island of Ireland, fully analyse our main areas of concern and develop our negotiating priorities. These are to minimise the impact on our trade and the economy; protect the Northern Ireland peace process, including through maintaining an open Border; continue the common travel area with the United Kingdom; and work for a positive future for the European Union.
The Government and UK Government are agreed that a close and friction-free economic and trading relationship between the UK and the EU, including Ireland, is in our best interests. We note that our particular concerns, including in relation to the Good Friday Agreement, were acknowledged by Prime Minister May in her letter. They were also reflected in last week's resolution on Brexit by the European Parliament and they are set out in the draft guidelines circulated by President Tusk, which are to be finalised at a meeting of the 27 member states on 29 April. The consistent, strong acknowledgement of the Irish issues in each of these documents is evidence of the extensive engagement by Ireland with our partners at political, democratic and official level in recent months. As I stated the other day, now that Article 50 has been triggered, we will publish shortly before the European Council meeting on 29 April a consolidated paper providing more detail about our priorities and approach to the negotiations ahead.
A report on the civic dialogue process to date is available on merrionstreet.ie. Further all-island civic dialogue events and consultations will be held, as required, in the coming months.
I have two questions in this group. We spent some time on this yesterday and we had a debate on Brexit. Will the Taoiseach elaborate on a question I asked? Will he seek an explicit reference to the continued EU citizenship of Northern Ireland residents post-2019 in the Union's negotiation instructions? This has implications far beyond what would happen if there was reunification. The German unification which the Taoiseach referenced yesterday involved the creation of new EU citizens. In this case, we are talking about people who today are EU citizens and we want their continued rights to that citizenship protected. That has many practical implications for the negotiations, including freedom of residence in the Union and guaranteeing access to services. Will the Taoiseach propose an amendment in the draft negotiating guidelines to include an explicit reference to the continued EU citizenship of residents of Northern Ireland?
With regard to the consolidated paper, what are the key areas that need to be addressed? Has the Taoiseach pursued special status and a special trading zone on this island? Will the paper detail the Government's approach to key issues such as trade between the island of Ireland and the UK in a post-Brexit scenario where there could be tariffs and where Britain could be outside the customs union?
Under the constitutional framework of the Good Friday Agreement, citizens of Northern Ireland have the right to be British citizens, Irish citizens, or both and Brexit will not change that. Since the referendum outcome, our priority has been to ensure the terms of the Agreement are both recognised and accommodated in the final settlement between the UK and the EU. We have engaged extensively with the EU and its institutions about this and there is now a recognition at European level of the importance of the Agreement and its understanding. As co-guarantor of that, we will work to see that those provisions are protected.
The legal provisions governing citizenship and citizenship through naturalisation are set out in the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended. Any person living on the island of Ireland, one of whose parents or grandparents was an Irish citizen, is entitled to Irish citizenship by descent and may make an application for a passport directly to the Passport Office. Similarly, any person born on the island of Ireland prior to 1 January 2005 has an entitlement to Irish citizenship and, therefore, European citizenship and may also make an application for a passport directly to the Passport Office. Post 1 January 2005, the entitlement to Irish citizenship of persons born on the island of Ireland to non-national parents is governed by sections 6A and 6B of the 1956 Act, as amended. The Act states: "A person born in the island of Ireland shall not be entitled to be an Irish citizen unless a parent of that person has, during the period of 4 years immediately preceding the person's birth, been resident in the island of Ireland for a period of not less than 3 years or periods the aggregate of which is not less than 3 years."
Citizenship through the naturalisation process, on the other hand, is based, among other factors, on the individual having the required lawful residence in the jurisdiction of the State. The Act requires a period of one year's continuous residency in the State immediately before the date of application for naturalisation and during the eight years immediately preceding that period to have a further total residence in the State amounting to four years. That relates to the technical issues.
We want to protect the common travel area arrangements. The point the Deputy raised will be followed through by me in these negotiations.
The Taoiseach may have said when he will publish the consolidated paper and I may have missed that. That has to be done in sufficient time to allow those of us who want to persuade the Government of the need to make amendments to the draft EU guidelines to do so because, as I said during Leaders' Questions, we are not satisfied that these guidelines are clear enough or that they go far enough. It remains my position - I do not mean this to be offensive - that the Taoiseach and the Government do not understand the huge shift in the relationships within the island and between the two islands since the Good Friday Agreement. The British Government is not just able to make declarations at this time without the Government having co-equal status to deal with it on that basis.
The Taoiseach earlier differentiated between the case of Gibraltar and that of the North. Of course, there is a difference. The difference is that the Spanish Government believes that Gibraltar is part of its sovereign territory. Whether it is or not is another issue but that is what the government believes. However, our Government has to believe, as many of the people of the island believe, that the island of Ireland should have territorial sovereignty and in the processes set out under the Good Friday Agreement, we have a responsibility - the Government specifically has a constitutional responsibility - to advance that objective. On Saturday last, on a radio programme with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, he reminded us that Fine Gael is The United Ireland Party. Let us see some evidence of that.
We need to have the time, the forum and the ability to look again at what the Government will bring forward and the space that will allow us to make specific amendments in order that we can influence the outcome. Will the Taoiseach give a commitment that he will do all of this in that spirit?
In respect of Deputy Martin's second question, the consolidated paper will refer to the question of trade both within the island of Ireland and between Ireland and the UK, which is fundamental to the future relationship. The point he made is central to the future negotiations and, therefore, that will be covered in the consolidated paper.
In response to Deputy Adams, there will be sufficient time to consider this when it is published. He has written to some Members of the European Parliament and has expressed his view that both the Irish and British Governments have reneged on their responsibilities in so far as the Good Friday Agreement is concerned. Obviously, I disagree fundamentally with him in that regard but I understand that he has to make a case politically to people-----
It is what I believe and I can prove it.
The Deputy may believe it but I disagree with him fundamentally. He has to do that anyway. His party voted against nine different referenda in respect of Europe-----
Quite rightly.
The Deputy cannot say "rightly".
------and the Deputy has a particular tradition of not being supportive of anything to do with Europe in this House and outside it.
Originally, when Fine Gael took its roots from Cumann an nGaedheal, it was known as The United Ireland Party.
A long time ago.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade is correct in that sense that the party goes back a long way. However, in respect of the potential for a united Ireland, the visionaries who put the Good Friday Agreement together foresaw a time when that may become a decision to be made by the people of the North and the people of the Republic. The answer to the Deputy's question is that there will be time to consider the consolidated paper, and rightly so, because these are the most important negotiations, both between Ireland and the UK and between the UK and the EU, of which we will continue to be a member, for many years. They will impact on all our citizens for many years to come and, therefore, everybody should have their say.
On the negotiating strategy, the point I made last night in our Brexit debate was that we should be looking to push the Commission and the Council to enter talks on areas where there can be co-operation into the future. Prime Minister May is in the Financial Times today saying a trade deal will not come until after the Brexit talks are finished and that is probably right. There is a whole range of other standards we will have to get co-operation on in energy, digital services, environmental rules and so on. It does not make sense for our strategy to be, first, to talk for six months about whether the UK will pay its exit bill and on the divorce terms and then to start talking about certain areas of co-operation. The Taoiseach should be proactive when it comes to the Council meeting. His officials should set up a safe space in advance in which to discuss some of the standards that are set by the European Union. They should not go into the sensitive area of tariffs or the detailed trade arrangements. There are certain key standards we need agreement on in how energy markets work and in how digital services, privacy and other rules are set and agreed. It is in our interests, with the greatest risk at play, to get those standards and a safe space in which to talk about them straight away in the negotiations rather than waiting six months in what is already a very tight timetable. Would the Taoiseach agree to such a negotiating approach? Will he push it at the Council?
Deputy Ryan's question is valid. Article 50 sets out the process for the so-called divorce proceedings over a two-year period. If they are not concluded within that period, an extension can only happen with the unanimous support of the European Council which I assume would be given. The article also clearly states the future framework of the future relationship must be taken into account. These two things confuse lots of people because on the one hand we say we will talk only about the exit strategy and wait until it is concluded before we start talking about the future strategy and yet, on the other hand, Article 50 itself says we must take into account what the future framework is. It may well be that when the European Council comes together on 29 April to sign off on the negotiating foundations there will be some discussion about whether we do this on the basis of a series of pillars that move forward together in respect of the divorce proceedings as distinct from the future trading relationship which is the fundamental issue that will follow. My view is if we focus exclusively on the question of what the assessment of charges might be for the British Government and these are principles and modalities to be followed it would be far better to talk about a range of issues in respect of the exit process by the United Kingdom before we run into any particular stone walls. The Deputy raised a question about common positions. Energy, water and animal health are issues that could be considered for an all-island situation here.
The European Union of 27 has its own agenda - the Single Market, the single digital market, the capital markets and how we continue to invest for prosperity and future job opportunities. It is the European Union agenda for the future. The question here is to negotiate what the future relationship of the United Kingdom will be with those 27, one of which will be Ireland. It is a common agenda of the 27. The future framework and that structure of negotiation between the UK and the European Union is one where the negotiations will obviously get into serious detail in the time ahead.
Our interest-----
The Deputy should be brief.
Our interests are aligned with the European Union agenda on a single digital market and an energy union. The Taoiseach should be establishing a pillar straight away, not waiting for the autumn. We should be leading co-operation in that area, not just from an Irish perspective although it will affect Ireland more than anyone else. We should be leading Europe in that approach. We have an interlocutory position and we should use it to lead the safe space talks on those sorts of regulations and standards. That is what we need to do straight away and not wait six months into the autumn as the Commission seems to be suggesting.
Given that time is elapsing, I will take Deputy Howlin and Deputy Burton before the Taoiseach responds.
We will bear with the Ceann Comhairle.
I thank the Deputy.
I want to follow through on the points made by the Taoiseach in his answer. Right now, the European Parliament is debating its comprehensive resolution. It is interesting to hear Deputy Ryan talk about bilateral discussions on key elements of what would be a new acquis. The European Parliament points out it would be contrary to European law for any individual country to have any such bilateral discussions and that it can only be done on a unilateral-multilateral basis through the 27. Michel Barnier, the chief negotiator, speaking in the European Parliament today, said very incisively of the trade agreement that the devil will be in the detail. There is no expectation that this will be done within the timeframe. The reality is if there is no deal and no withdrawal agreement there will be an automatic disorderly exit on 30 March 2019 which is now under two years away. Does the Taoiseach expect there to be a withdrawal agreement within the two-year timeframe? Does he expect that subsequent to that there will be a transition agreement? Is it his understanding it is what will currently be worked upon? What sort of a timeframe does he envisage for transitional arrangements before the complete exit from the European Union, the end of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and the full severance of connections between the United Kingdom and the European Union?
Some time ago, Mrs May was at pains to announce on a number of occasions, as were many members of her Cabinet and many leading Brexiteers, that no deal is better than a bad deal. While the tone of her letter, which we discussed last week, is quite emollient, there is absolutely no sign from the British Government that the people who are pro-Brexit, who seem to be in the majority, have moved away from that position. In that context, it is very difficult to see at this point how the negotiations will be successfully concluded.
We now have a situation where Northern Ireland is not represented at all in the negotiations. It does not sound like it will become engaged any time soon as a result of the collapse of the power sharing institutions and with both parties seemingly determined to avoid, in practice, any recommencement of the institutions, notwithstanding the fact that they are talking. It is unfortunate but it seems to be a very dug-in position by both parties to the previous power sharing executives. How does the Taoiseach envisage Northern Ireland will be represented? The Taoiseach talked a number of minutes ago about negotiations between Britain and Ireland but, as the Taoiseach has been at pains to say to us, Ireland is very much in the EU 27.
Last week, Michael O'Leary said he saw a situation in which it was possible that air travel arrangements could be severely disrupted for a number of months in the event of a total British leaving. There was also an interesting comment by one of the Taoiseach's potential successors when the Minister for Social Protection said the Border would be a camera on a pole. I do not know if that was him acknowledging there was going to be a Border. For a lot of us, a camera on a pole could potentially be quite a hard Border and quite a difficult development. Was he speaking for the Government or was he just giving us the benefit of his thinking aloud?
In respect of Deputy Howlin's comments about the European Parliament discussing this at the moment and Michel Barnier responding and making comments there, it is true to say that one does not do deals with any individual country of the 27. It is with the Union that this happens. That is why I have explained to others internationally that it is important to understand what the European Union is, what it stands for, how it functions and how trade deals are put together.
Michel Barnier has commented on a few occasions that he thinks it would be possible to conclude the "divorce proceedings", as they are called, within the two-year framework. Whether that is possible or not is anybody's guess. When these negotiations start in earnest, both about the withdrawal and the future relationship, I expect them to become complicated. Article 50 is clear, however, in that, if it is not concluded, one either has the option of blunt removal with all that entails or an extension of time granted unanimously by the members of the European Council, which I would expect would be granted were that situation to arise. However, as the Deputy says, nobody can say exactly what the outcome there will be.
I expect that there has to be a transition period. As to putting a time on it, it could be quite extensive.
A decade.
CETA, the Canadian deal, took five years to put together and two years to get approval, and still has to go through a number of parliaments. The trading area has become quite complicated.
In response to Deputy Burton, I remain optimistic that the politicians in Northern Ireland will accept their responsibilities and that, in respect of the two main parties, the DUP and Sinn Féin, we will get out of that a functioning executive authority, which is very important for Northern Ireland. I assume that Secretary of State Brokenshire would be able to legislate for that retrospectively when the Commons returned after the Easter recess. I hope that the main parties can put this together and that we will have a functioning Executive. It may hold differences of opinion but at least it could have a common set of objectives for the people that it represents across the North.
In respect of the Border, the position is that, on behalf of the Irish Government and the British Government, we have a clear understanding of there being no return to a hard Border. By that I mean customs posts on the Border as traditionally applied. My reason for being so clear and so strong about this is that it brought with it sectarian violence and all of the issues that arose in the troubled past that we had in Northern Ireland and between Northern Ireland and the Republic. We are not going back there. That is the political groundwork. It is a political challenge to deal with that, not just a matter of mere technology.
Is a camera on a pole acceptable?