Skip to main content
Normal View

Taoiseach's Meetings and Engagements

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 19 February 2019

Tuesday, 19 February 2019

Questions (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 110)

Micheál Martin

Question:

1. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his telephone conversations with Prime Minister May on 29 and 30 January 2019; if he has had subsequent conversations with the Prime Minister; and the issues that were discussed regarding Brexit. [5327/19]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

2. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if Prime Minister May or her officials have outlined the UK alternative proposals or suggestions when they spoke on 29 and 30 January 2019. [5328/19]

View answer

Brendan Howlin

Question:

3. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his most recent telephone conversation with the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May. [5373/19]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

4. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he spoke to the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May when she was in Northern Ireland; and if she outlined suggestions in relation to the European backstop as laid out in her speech on 5 February 2019 while in Belfast. [6678/19]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

5. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May explained the way in which she expects to prevent a hard border and not to scrap the European backstop in view of her speech in Belfast on 5 February 2019 when they last met or spoke on the telephone. [6682/19]

View answer

Eamon Ryan

Question:

6. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent conversation with the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May. [6702/19]

View answer

Joan Burton

Question:

7. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his most recent conversation with the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May. [6706/19]

View answer

Brendan Howlin

Question:

8. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May on 8 February 2019. [7902/19]

View answer

Richard Boyd Barrett

Question:

9. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent discussions with the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May. [7978/19]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

10. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if Prime Minister May spoke in relation to there being no need for a Brexit delay in view of the fact it would serve no purpose when they met in Dublin on 8 February 2019; and if his attention has been drawn to the fact that Prime Minster May informed business leaders of this in London on 12 February 2019. [8029/19]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

11. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he or his officials discussed the impact on supply chains from east to west and others with Prime Minister May when they met in Dublin on 8 February 2019. [8030/19]

View answer

Mary Lou McDonald

Question:

12. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting with the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May. [8286/19]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

13. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he has spoken with Prime Minister May since a motion was rejected on 14 February 2019 in the House of Commons to prevent a no-deal Brexit. [8463/19]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

14. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he discussed the future European elections with Prime Minister May when they met in Dublin. [8468/19]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

110. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he discussed the lack of a Northern Ireland Assembly with Prime Minister May when they last met in Dublin. [8034/19]

View answer

Oral answers (11 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 14, inclusive, and No. 110 together.

I met with Prime Minister May over dinner in Farmleigh House on 8 February when we briefed each other on our respective engagements in Belfast and Brussels that week. We discussed developments in Northern Ireland and our shared interest in seeing the devolved institutions restored. We also discussed possible structures for future engagement post Brexit.

On Brexit, I restated the EU position that the backstop is an integral part of the withdrawal agreement. It was negotiated in good faith over many months, it is finely balanced, and it was a compromise in itself. It was approved by the 28 EU leaders in November. No other solution has yet been found that ensures that the absence of a hard border in all circumstances can be guaranteed. I reiterated our wish to see the withdrawal agreement ratified so that negotiations on a future partnership between the EU and the UK in the areas of economy, trade and security can start as soon as possible. We did not discuss any technical aspects of Brexit. The Prime Minister indicated that further consultations are taking place in London and with the European Commission in Brussels. We agreed to stay in touch over the coming period.

Prior to our meeting on 8 February, I was in contact with the Prime Minister on Tuesday, 29 January and we spoke by phone on Wednesday, 30 January following the previous day's votes in Westminster. I set out once again the Irish and EU position on the withdrawal agreement, including the Irish protocol and the backstop therein, noting that the latest developments in Westminster had simply reinforced the need for a solution that is legally binding and practically operable.

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. There are 38 days to go until Britain is due to exit the European Union according to the current law of both the United Kingdom and the European Union. We all understand that there is chaos in London and that it is still unclear what would satisfy a majority in the House of Commons. The neat daily commentary we get from our own Government about what London needs to do is fine, but the issue today is what the Government is going to do and what it is doing.

For three weeks in a row I have asked the Taoiseach to answer a very basic question. If no deal or no delay is agreed in the coming weeks, what will happen on our borders both at sea and on land? We are so close to Brexit that some businesses are already taking orders and scheduling production which will take effect on or after 29 March. These businesses need to know a hell of a lot more than that our Government is not contemplating or planning certain things. The Taoiseach has said what he is not planning and what he is not contemplating. What do these businesses need to do to prepare for a no-deal scenario next month? Can they be assured that no additional steps will be required of them if they are crossing the Border in 38 days' time? The Taoiseach has repeatedly made it clear that a failure to have a withdrawal agreement and something like the backstop would mean disruption. He needs to start being open about what exactly that disruption will be. What will happen on 29 March in the event of a no-deal Brexit?

It seems clear that a text of some sort is being discussed with the United Kingdom and that our Government is fully informed about what is in it. Will the Taoiseach outline the nature of that text to us in the course of his answer?

We are now at ten minutes to midnight. If St. Patrick's week is removed from the 38 days, there are fewer than 30 working days until the UK's withdrawal, assuming that everybody will be working weekends in the lead up to it. The Irish Times today said that the British focus is now on legal language which would put a limit on the backstop in respect of content, duration, or both.

The Taoiseach has spoken with the Prime Minister several times recently, as he said, on the phone and in person. Has she told the Taoiseach specifically what legal changes to the withdrawal agreement she and the British Government are seeking? Have the Taoiseach's EU counterparts advised him as to what the British are actually looking for in their negotiations? Has an extension to the Article 50 period been considered in the discussions? Is the Taoiseach aware as to whether the Prime Minister is trying to negotiate that? An extension of the Article 50 timeline probably would suit a lot of people in Ireland because it would give us some more time in which to prepare. Has there been an agreement about any likely impact on the European elections in May in the context of an extension of Article 50?

I want to ask the Taoiseach about another aspect of British politics which we heard echoed today on "Morning Ireland", when a contributor echoed a position of Theresa May's about which we should have something to say. We had a journalist making a casual connection between support for Palestinians, criticism of the Israeli state and anti-Semitism, essentially suggesting they were all the same thing. This has been an extremely worrying narrative that Theresa May has echoed in attacking Jeremy Corbyn. They are attacking what they describe as the hard left and accusing them, incredibly, of being anti-Semitic because they support Palestinians and are critical of the apartheid policies of Israel. We all abhor anti-Semitism and should oppose it in the most robust fashion. However, it is absolutely unacceptable that an Orwellian narrative is now spreading across Britain. It had better not spread over here; it needs to be resisted. It suggests that legitimate criticism of apartheid policies in Israel and of the persecution of Palestinians by the Israeli state somehow equates to anti-Semitism. Opposing apartheid policies and racism should actually lead us to be critical of what Israel is doing, not to be silent about what Israel is doing. Precisely because we oppose racism and abhor the suffering of Jewish people in the past, it is absolutely important to criticise what Israel is doing to the Palestinian people.

I invite the Taoiseach to reiterate that the backstop, the Irish protocol as per the withdrawal agreement, remains the bottom line for this State and for the Government. Can the Taoiseach confirm that he told Mrs. May at dinner that this is the case? Can he confirm that the backstop cannot be time limited in any respect and cannot contain unilateral exit clauses, which would render the backstop entirely meaningless? Can he confirm that he had that conversation again with Mrs. May, to make that clear? Can he shed some light on what she shared with him in terms of her game plan to move things forward? We are now advised that the British Attorney General has a wording which would involve, it is speculated, a time limit on the backstop. Did the Taoiseach have a conversation with Mrs. May about that? Has text been shared? Does the European Union have text? Has the Taoiseach seen it? Did Mrs. May make any reference to moves to change the political declaration rather than the withdrawal agreement itself? Can the Taoiseach shed any light on these matters?

On Brexit, I assure the House that the Government is working towards securing the ratification of the withdrawal agreement including the protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland and the backstop. I think that is achievable. It may not be achievable in the next few weeks but it is achievable and we are working towards that. On what may happen if there is no deal on 29 March, we must always remember that 29 March is a UK deadline, one set in Britain for Britain. It was not set by Ireland or the European Union. A no-deal Brexit is not a threat that Ireland or the European Union is making. It can be taken off the table by the United Kingdom at any time, either by revoking Article 50 or by seeking an extension of it. We will listen to any requests the British may make for that. I was asked by some Deputies about texts being discussed. No texts have been discussed or shared with us and I have seen no text nor have I discussed any text. We are not being secretive about a text that does not exist. I imagine that is another conspiracy theory.

Will the Taoiseach answer my first question about what would happen? We all know we did not set the 29 March deadline.

I am going through them. That was not the Deputy's first question. In respect of no deal, we are making preparations at the ports and airports. We have control of land that we need at Rosslare and Dublin. We have control of Dublin Airport and will be able to enforce the acquis if we need to at the ports and airports. In respect of land borders, I have said many times in this House that we are not making any preparations for physical infrastructure, controls or checks on the land Border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. As I have said before, that does create a real dilemma and a real problem for us. In the event of no deal, the United Kingdom will have obligations under the World Trade Organisation and we will have obligations to protect our Single Market and customs union, of which we will continue to be a full part. That would create a dilemma for both countries and for the European Union. Therefore the only solution which can assure that we do not see the emergence of a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland is an agreement on customs, a common customs territory, call it what you will, and regulatory alignment between Northern Ireland and the European Union or perhaps the whole UK and the European Union. That is what we have negotiated. I do not think we will get anything very different from the agreement that is on the table now. Even if there is a period of uncertainty after 29 March, we will end up with an agreement not dissimilar to what we have now. That is why we should ratify it now and not subject citizens and businesses to that level of uncertainty or potential damage.

The UK Government has been quite open about what it is seeking. It is seeking to explore alternative arrangements which it believes could replace the backstop. We have yet to see any such alternative arrangements written down in legal form, let alone operating and tested and working anywhere in the world. They seek the possibility of a time limit and we have explained why a backstop with a time limit is not a backstop, as the Prime Minister herself eloquently explained when she was advocating for the backstop. An insurance policy that can be cancelled at the time one most needs it is not an insurance policy at all. They have sought a unilateral exit clause and again we have explained why it is something we cannot accept.

I have raised the issue of Article 50 potentially being extended and the Prime Minister has made her position clear. She intends that the United Kingdom will leave the European Union on time on the date it has set. On the European elections, there are conflicting legal opinions but the general consensus is that if Article 50 is extended to the end of June or early July, the European elections will not have to take place in the United Kingdom as the new European Parliament does not actually sit for the first time until early July. However, if Article 50 were extended beyond early July, it would be necessary for the European elections to be held in the United Kingdom, as UK citizens would continue to be EU citizens and therefore under the treaties would have a right to be represented in the European Parliament. We have made provision in our legislation that if the elections do take place in the United Kingdom, the candidates last elected in Dublin and in Ireland South will not take up their seats in the European Parliament until such a time as the United Kingdom has left. Another detail which is unfortunate but we can find no way around is that should the United Kingdom leave before the European elections take place, UK citizens resident in Ireland will not be able to vote in the European elections as the treaties say that the European Parliament represents the citizens of the European Union.

UK citizens will not be EU citizens after Brexit. They will continue to be able to vote in local elections, Dáil elections and Seanad elections, but will not be able to vote in European elections. Unfortunately, we could not find a way around that as it would require an amendment to the treaties.

I do not think for a second that criticism of Israel is inherently anti-Semitic, and I very much agree with Deputy Boyd Barrett in that regard. The occupation has gone on for far too long. This Government is a very strong supporter of a two-state solution and a just and lasting peace as there can be no peace that is lasting that is not just. We believe the settlements are wrong. The Tánaiste is currently hosting a two day retreat on the Middle East in Farmleigh House and Iveagh House, with foreign ministers from Arab countries, France, Bulgaria, Sweden and other countries. We are very committed to Palestinian statehood and a two-state solution. We do not believe it is inherently anti-Semitic to be critical of the state of Israel. Perhaps Deputy Boyd Barrett is missing the point about the concerns some people have. It is not so much about criticisms of Israel but the double standards of some people who are very critical of Israel for doing certain things that are wrong while turning a blind eye when similar things are done by regimes in places such as Zimbabwe, Cuba, Venezuela or North Korea. They naturally wonder if there is something particular or different about Israel that singles it out for criticisms-----

We are critical of all those regimes.

-----when other countries that do the same things are not criticised. What is different or unique about Israel that it is single out for criticism when other countries that do the same things are not mentioned, are absolved or are even supported?

Those regimes are not supported by my party.

Top
Share