Skip to main content
Normal View

Taoiseach's Meetings and Engagements

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 18 September 2018

Tuesday, 18 September 2018

Questions (8, 9, 10)

Brendan Howlin

Question:

8. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his bilateral meeting with the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May, at the Council of the European Union. [30645/18]

View answer

Mary Lou McDonald

Question:

9. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach when he last spoke to the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May. [30677/18]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

10. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the personal contacts he has had with Prime Minister May in the period since the last meeting of EU leaders. [36990/18]

View answer

Oral answers (27 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 to 10, inclusive, together.

I had a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister May on the margins of the European Council in Brussels on 28 June. We discussed the current political situation in Northern Ireland, whereupon I emphasised the Government's commitment to the Good Friday Agreement and we reaffirmed the determination of both Governments to secure effective operation of all its institutions. In line with this, we agreed that a meeting of the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference would take place in London in July in accordance with the Good Friday Agreement. This was co-chaired by the Tánaiste and the Minister, David Lidington.

We also discussed Brexit and I advised the Prime Minister that there would not be much time left if we were to conclude a withdrawal agreement and have it operational by the time the UK leaves the EU in March. The UK gave clear commitments and guarantees on the Border in December and again in March, and we need to see detailed, workable proposals from the UK to deliver on these commitments if it cannot accept ours. I told the Prime Minister that the EU 27 agreed that if we did not get agreement on the backstop and the other outstanding elements of the withdrawal agreement, including the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, ECJ, it would not be possible to finalise the withdrawal agreement as a whole, including transition arrangements, which are essential for the UK. I have always said that I hope the future relationship between the EU and the UK will be as close and comprehensive as possible and that it will remove any need for a hard border or for the backstop to be invoked. Nonetheless, we will need a legally robust backstop to apply unless and until better arrangements are negotiated and enter into force, thus ensuring there will never be a hard border on this island. While I am confident we will achieve a very close, comprehensive and ambitious future relationship with the UK, the Government is of course continuing to plan for a full range of scenarios. We need to bear in mind that the United Kingdom will leave the European Union and with it the Single Market and the customs union and, therefore, things will change.

I also spoke to the Prime Minister by phone on 7 July, when she briefed me on the outcome of her Chequers Cabinet meeting the day before. I welcomed the fact that the UK Government had reached a position whereby it would put forward detailed proposals for the future UK-EU relationship post Brexit. I expressed my hope that the UK Government would engage constructively with the Barnier task force and other member states. I also said that the Government was open to proposals which meet our aims of avoiding a hard border and maintaining free trade with the UK while respecting the integrity of the Single Market and the customs union.

I will travel to Salzburg tomorrow for the informal meeting of the European Council and I will meet Prime Minister May there over breakfast on Thursday. The Brexit negotiations are now in the final stage and talks will take place continuously from now on. I welcome the commitment from both sets of negotiators to intensify negotiations in the coming weeks. As the Prime Minister and I agreed, our offices have maintained close contact over recent weeks at ambassador and Sherpa level and we and our offices will continue to do so in the period ahead.

I call Deputy Burton.

Deputy Howlin?

Deputy Howlin is not here.

Yes. I am taking Question No. 8 on his behalf.

Yes. I am calling Deputy Burton.

We have already had an amount of discussion on the potential backsliding from the backstop. We have explained that people are really concerned and worried about what the implications are likely to be and about what the transition period is likely to be. As far as most of us can make out about what those in the UK want, whether the Tory Party or the Labour Party, it is that they essentially want the UK to step out of the EU and then, quite quickly, to step back into an agreement that would effectively mimic both the customs union and the Single Market. Obviously that would be on the basis of negotiations with the 27. It is the magical thinking about which there has been talk for a long time. When the Taoiseach has the bilateral meeting with Mrs. May to which he has just referred, does he hope to get clarity on the current status of the Chequers papers and the Chequers proposals? Clearly, an element of that relates to a political situation and a political proposal in the context of the internal difficulties in the politics of the UK, but it really does pose enormous difficulties for us. These papers also propose something we discussed before the summer break, namely, the "max fac", the maximum facilitation of movements and so on.

The second item on the discussion table in Salzburg is the issue of immigration. We know that the recently elected Government in Austria has taken quite a hard line on this. It seems to be another very far right government. Does Deputy Varadkar propose, as Taoiseach, to say anything about immigration? Could he share with us the sense of what he proposes to say on that matter because I am conscious that there are still huge numbers of deaths occurring in the areas around the EU, although the numbers are diminishing?

The Deputy is significantly over time.

Will the Taoiseach tell us about that?

In the Taoiseach's first response he said that he and Theresa May affirmed their determination to see the institutions in the North back up and running. I put it to him directly that there is in fact no determination from the British Government to achieve that outcome. In fact, it has acted to frustrate that very course of action. We achieved an agreement or accommodation last February and when the DUP ran away from that there was not a word nor a scintilla of pressure or incentivisation to return to the institutions from the British Government. The British Government, which the Taoiseach says has a firm determination to achieve fully functioning power sharing, is the same British Government that looks the other way as the DUP involves itself in scandal and in the waste of public money through the renewable heat incentive, RHI, scheme and, worse still, openly and brazenly refuses and faces down the rights of sections of Northern society. That is the fact of it. The British Government which the Taoiseach says affirms the commitment to re-establishing power sharing is, in fact, a British Government which has given safe shelter to the DUP at Westminster, far away from the halls of Stormont and away from any form of accountability. That is the truth.

Whereas I welcome the fact that the intergovernmental conference was convened in July - that was a necessary first step - I am now concerned that the foot has come off the pedal. We need a thoughtful map back to real, genuine power sharing and that has to mean the vindication and realisation of rights, be they language rights, marriage rights or the right to inquest. Families have waited decades for that simple, democratic, fundamental right. It is utterly shocking. I have said so to Theresa May and yet she looks the other way and stalls. I read no urgency, much less an affirmed determination, on the part of the Tory Government to re-establishing power sharing.

If we do not conclude the questions we will not be able to get answers.

I put it to the Taoiseach that it is actually very dangerous for him to set out that rhetoric on the floor of the Dáil, but that it is even more dangerous if he actually believes and is gripped by the delusion that the Tories have done anything positive or assertive to ensure a pathway back. They have not. They have frustrated progress.

The Taoiseach might clarify something for me. Earlier he spoke about the backstop and I sought clarity on whether the backstop meant continued membership of both the customs union and the Single Market for Northern Ireland because he seemed to indicate that there could be a Canadian style agreement or that Britain will be outside the customs union and the Single Market. The Taoiseach said at a press conference last December that the backstop would mean continued membership of the customs union and the Single Market for Northern Ireland. Can he please confirm that is still the position in respect of what the backstop actually means?

Today marks exactly 600 days since the main institutions of the Good Friday Agreement were collapsed over the details of a heating scheme. That is why it was collapsed - a heating scheme. I was fundamentally of a different position. It should never have been collapsed. It was a reckless and irresponsible position in which to be, given the threat of Brexit. In the past road blocks like this were dealt with through intensive engagement not just at ministerial level, but between the Taoiseach and the Prime Minister of the day. Even the most fervent member of Fine Gael could not describe efforts to re-establish the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement as either urgent or intense. July's meeting of the intergovernmental conference, to which the Taoiseach referred, was not even a sideshow. In my view, the disrespect shown to our Government was a disgrace. There is no way around the fact that, in comparison with the relations which various Taoisigh of different parties had with Prime Ministers Major, Blair and Brown, there appears to be no leadership being shown by the heads of government on Northern Ireland. In the face of the immense threat of Brexit and the real damage being done to the foundations of the peace settlement, can the Taoiseach explain why he and the Prime Minister have shown so little initiative?

If we put to one side the tragic Stormont debacle in which the Taoiseach flew to Stormont to sign a deal which never materialised, there has been no attempt to convene all-party talks or to take any joint initiative. Can the Taoiseach detail whether he has proposed any initiatives or is he leaving everything to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade?

First, there is no backsliding on the backstop from us. In terms of the transition period, we want it to run until the end of 2020, which means that no changes would take effect until January 2021. There will be changes, however, under our central case scenario which is based on a successful negotiation of a withdrawal agreement with a transition period and a backstop. It will still be the case that the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union and with it the Single Market and the customs union. Therefore, as things stand, we are planning for a situation in 2021 where there will need to be east-west checks and controls, though not between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. We are making those preparations in our ports and airports now. We confirmed in Derrynane in July that we would hire 1,000 additional staff. That will happen on a phased basis.

Does that mean Northern Ireland will stay part of the customs union?

Today we approved recruitment in 2019 of 270 additional customs staff, 116 additional sanitary and phytosanitary control staff, 51 additional staff for the HSE's environmental health service and 14 professional property staff, given the infrastructural needs. I should emphasise however that these are for the ports and airports including Dublin Port, Dublin Airport and Rosslare. They are not for along the land border because we are not making preparations for a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. I think Deputy Martin is attempting to ask a trick question. Maybe I am being unkind to him.

The backstop was published in March.

Yes, but what does it mean?

It has been there in black and white for everyone to read since March.

What does the Taoiseach think it means?

It says that the common commercial policy, the rules of the customs union and the rules of the Single Market will continue to apply in Northern Ireland unless and until there is a new agreement that makes it unnecessary and that it would apply to the extent that is necessary to avoid a hard border and to continue to protect the all-island economy as it now works. I do not have it front of me, but it was published in March. It has not changed since.

The Taoiseach said it would mean continued membership of the customs union, about which he was very clear. I am simply asking if that is still the position. It is a fair and straightforward question. It is not a trick question.

It depends on how one defines "membership".

I am referring to membership of the customs union.

Obviously when the United Kingdom leaves the European Union, Northern Ireland will leave with it. That is a statement of fact, as everyone knows. The draft backstop, as published in March, means that, to all intents and purposes, Northern Ireland will stay in the customs union and the Single Market. Even at that, it is not as straightforward as that. It is the full regulatory alignment and the application of the rules which allows us to avoid a hard border and continue to protect the all-island economy. The document has been published since March. I do not think the Deputy should need me to interpret it for him at this stage.

No, but it is a fundamental point. Does the Taoiseach agree?

Top
Share