Vol. 927 No. 3
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]
2. 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]
3. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the civic dialogue conference. [33550/16]
4. 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]
I 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.
5. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if he has sought bilateral meetings with the First Minister for Northern Ireland, Arlene Foster, and the leader of the UUP, Mike Nesbitt, regarding Brexit and the all-island civic dialogue. [33516/16]
6. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach the status of any further discussions with the devolved administrations in the United Kingdom, in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales regarding Brexit. [33530/16]
7. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meetings on 3 November 2016 with the leaders of the Northern Ireland political parties. [33551/16]
8. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he has been in contact with the Northern Ireland First Minister since the civic forum on Brexit was held on 2 November 2016. [33804/16]
9. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meetings with the leaders of the UUP, SDLP and Sinn Féin that took place on 3 November 2016 in Stormont; and the understandings that were reached regarding the legal and constitutional developments in regard to the invocation of Article 50 during the Brexit process. [33825/16]
I propose to answer Questions Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive, together.
I was in Northern Ireland last week to meet representatives of the Newry Chamber of Commerce to hear at first hand of the challenges of Brexit in Border areas. I also outlined the Government's concerns and position in a speech at an event organised by the Newry Junior Chamber. Subsequently, together with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Charles Flanagan, I held bilateral meetings with the leaders of Sinn Féin, the SDLP, the UUP and the Alliance Party in Stormont. Our discussions focused on how best to work together to achieve the best possible outcome for Ireland and Northern Ireland in the context of the forthcoming negotiations and discussions on Brexit.
It did not prove possible to meet representatives of the DUP on this occasion. However, I will be attending the Remembrance Sunday service in Enniskillen on Sunday together with the First Minister, Arlene Foster, MLA. I also expect to meet the First Minister in Dublin in advance of the North-South Ministerial Council which takes place in Armagh on 18 November.
I will also attend the British-Irish Council meeting later this month - I believe in Cardiff - where I will have the opportunity to meet the leaders of the devolved administrations as we continue our work on the implications of Brexit for all member administrations.
I thank the Taoiseach for his answer. Everybody who attended the all-Ireland civic dialogue was aware of the absence of the Unionists, from both the DUP and the UUP. It was also clear that if we are to have a consensus approach it is important that their input is facilitated in whatever way we need to devise to ensure they are comfortable to bring those influences into a dialogue or a discussion. The Taoiseach has had discussions with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade on the best way to do that to ensure we have a joined-up approach to dealing with issues. Everyone has outlined a myriad of issues, but the single biggest issue is trade. I am struck by the blind optimism that I hear from every British voice about the inevitability of a trade deal, although they have an embargo, if one likes, on the notion of the free movement of people. I believe this is blindly optimistic and it will have detrimental effects on this island.
During a recent trip by the British Prime Minister to India to do a trade deal, the Indian Prime Minister, Mr. Modi, linked access of Indian workers and students as part of trade. It was suggested by The Observer that the post-Brexit India-UK trade deal has now suffered a hammer blow. The more dialogue the United Kingdom has with other third countries the more it will find that it is not so easy to deal with trade issues. We need to have our view as to how we can secure our linkages into the British market. That means having a joined-up view from the island of Ireland, meaning we need to work out how to get the DUP and the UUP involved.
We have only 11 minutes left and we will try to get the Taoiseach's reply, if everybody co-operates.
Has the Taoiseach spoken to the Northern Ireland deputy First Minister on the proposal aired in the newspapers in recent days? The current legal indications are that a vote on Brexit will be required in the British Parliament and that is likely to be very close. Many MPs from Scotland and England who have attended various meetings have very strongly indicated their view and expectation that there will be a vote. Has the Taoiseach asked the Northern Ireland deputy First Minister in the event of such a vote being called - a very important vote - if Sinn Féin MPs will take their seats in Westminster and vote in favour of the interests of the whole island of Ireland?
In our discussions so far and the many question and answer sessions with the Taoiseach here, there has been a very strong approach by all the parties, including Sinn Féin, to an all-island approach.
I was a little surprised to see a Member of the European Parliament denouncing the idea without even giving it any consideration in terms of what the advantages might be. At times parties do have to act in the national interest and in the interests of the island. Has the Taoiseach had an opportunity to discuss that issue with the deputy First Minister?
I turn to what will happen when Mrs. May triggers Article 50. This is something on which we have to have legal advice from the Attorney General. What will happen to the European Union's legal relationships with the United Kingdom? We are given to understand that once the United Kingdom triggers Article 50, there will be no going back. Clearly, the court case may result in prolonged discussions, but essentially - as can be seen from the ESRI's report yesterday - it looks like Britain will be out of the European Union by 2019. Perhaps the Taoiseach might let me know if he has heard anything from the deputy First Minister and whether the island of Ireland's interests will be put first? I know that when elections were last held, it was not expected that the people of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, would vote for Brexit, but it may be important to utilise all the votes on the island of Ireland in the interests of all the people on the island of Ireland.
I very much welcome the invitation from the Newry chambers and the decision to hold a meeting of the civic dialogue there. That is very good. Unlike the Labour Party, Sinn Féin sticks to its electoral mandate. We were not elected - it was my great honour to represent the people of Belfast for a long time - to take our seats in the British Parliament. It is a foreign parliament; it is not our parliament and we owe no allegiance to the English Queen. However, we wish her and the people of Britain well. We have been part of developing new relationships between the people of this island, with our Unionist friends and the Government in London, but that is another day's business.
Is that a "No"?
I think so.
The Taoiseach was enumerating what we did and did not know. One of the things we know but which he did not say is that Brexit will reshape the arrangements and relationships between the peoples of these islands, on this island and between us and the European Union. We talk about the national interest and an all-island vision. We need to stand by the vote of the people in the North. We need to ensure and argue for options other than Brexit. We need to argue for special designated status for the North within the European Union. Much of what the Government is arguing for is concessions for the North outside the European Union. That is not acceptable and does not show the imagination and vision required, especially if I go back to my primary point, that Brexit will reshape arrangements and relationships. Do we stick with the status quo, the old partitionist field entity, or do we look at other possibilities to move forward? I commend that approach and have done so, as has the deputy First Minister, not least because that is the result of the decision, democratically made, of folks in the Six Counties. I also remind the Taoiseach - I am sure he is sick listening to me make this point - that he has a responsibility above and beyond that of the Taoiseach and the Government which is co-equal guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement. The last North-South Ministerial Council-----
Time, please.
Beidh mé críochnaithe i gceann bomaite. The joint communiqué following the July meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council states: "We agreed to work together to ensure that Northern Ireland’s interests are protected and advanced and the benefits of North/South co-operation are fully recognised in any new arrangements which emerge as regards the United Kingdom’s future relationship with the European Union". The Government, therefore, has a responsibility under point 17 of Strand Two of the Good Friday Agreement-----
The Deputy's time is up.
-----to represent the views of the North-South Ministerial Council. The Taoiseach has the result of the vote, responsibilities under the Good Friday Agreement and also the responsibilities of a member state.
I accept that Sinn Féin has had a strong view for a long time on abstentionism at Westminster. It is, however, a very curious form of abstentionism because its members have never abstained from taking salaries or expenses at Westminster, or the Saxon shilling. They take the money and run, or they do not actually go over at all but still take the money. I read that a couple of million had been pocketed by Sinn Féin over a couple of years at Westminster that Sinn Féin wants to have nothing to do with. A pure, principled form of abstention would have seen it abstain from all aspects of the Westminster Parliament, but that is the view of-----
The Deputy would be an expert on principles.
Equally - I believe it is true - it is extraordinary hypocrisy. On the one hand, it is abstaining for the optics that nobody-----
The Deputy should look in the mirror.
We dealt with the issue of abstentionism in 1927 in the second election.
What about the confidence and supply arrangement?
Come on; focus.
I believe the decision of the DUP to abstain from being represented at the forum was also a mistake.
Then contest with the DUP in the North.
One speaker at a time, please.
I also believe the tone at the DUP conference was not constructive. To describe anybody scared of the impact of the Brexit vote as "remoaners" was dismissive. It showed a basic refusal to engage with the realities. If one listened to people at the forum, they were very worried. They were from the third level sector, the academic sector, businesses and the farming community in the context of the the CAP ultimately. Hardly anyone is cheering from the sidelines and even those who voted for Brexit realise deep down that there will be a real impact. It was not the right tone for the First Minister to set. She said her relationship with Dublin was great, but the Taoiseach did not meet her last week. There does not appear to be any urgency to the relationship between the First Minister and the Government in Dublin. It is now four months since the referendum on Brexit and the level of direct contact has been ridiculously small, either for the political optics from the DUP's perspective or from what else I do not know, but something needs to change. The issue is too serious for the people on the island of Ireland to have that low level of contact; it is at the same level it was before the vote. Perhaps the Taoiseach might indicate if it is the DUP's demand that Brexit be discussed at the North-South Ministerial Council. If it is, we have to make sure the council will meet more often than it does. Does the Taoiseach accept that the twice a year format is clearly not adequate and has he requested a new timetable for meetings of the council? Has he requested specific work plans from the sectoral committees of the council on Brexit? Such plans would be very important.
I add my voice to those of the other speakers who have said to the Sinn Féin leadership that it should consider doing the unthinkable. This is not an ordinary time. Nothing would reflect this fact better than its presence at Westminster to defend the Good Friday Agreement. Deputy Gerry Adams is absolutely right - we all have an obligation to do this. What message would be sent if Sinn Féin members did attend the Parliament at Westminster to act in that way? We would very much commend them for and support them in doing so. There would be no one slagging them for giving up their electorate if they were to do so as these are unusual times.
Will the Taoiseach also stand up for the Good Friday Agreement by supporting the other legal case taken by Mr. Stephen Agnew, the leader of the Green Party in Northern Ireland, with Assembly Members from Sinn Féin, the Alliance Party and the SDLP, as well as others, which was heard in the High Court in Belfast? I hope I am not infringing judicial propriety, but there was a very conservative judgment which I argue, if reinforced in the Supreme Court where the case is due to be heard in early December, would seriously infringe on the rights of Irish nationalism.
Will the Taoiseach, similar to the Scots and Welsh administrations, take a direct interest in that case, recognising that we do have a direct constitutional interest in the Brexit process, particularly in defending the rights set out in the Good Friday Agreement? I have a real fear that this case, if it is not argued sufficiently or won, could lead to a diminution of the Good Friday Agreement without us having any say on it. Will the Taoiseach seek legal representation for the Government in it?
There are only three minutes left in the game.
There are only 30 seconds. We are in overtime.
To answer Deputy Brendan Howlin, I did meet Mr. Mike Nesbitt, leader of the UUP, and he presented me with a document. The basis of his party's argument is the protection and progress of the economy of Northern Ireland and the good relationships it has with the Republic. The Deputy pointed to the various statements coming from elements in Britain which caused a deal of uncertainty. I hope that, as time marches on, there will be greater clarity. As the Deputy is well aware, the agri-sector and business in general are intrinsically linked with the UK market. Between the North and the South there is a market for beef, pork, dairy, milk and all other products. It has been a seamless operation for many years. A point was made to me in Newry and Carlingford the other day about the situation that applied when there was real trouble with security along the Border. Of the 200 roads leading into Northern Ireland, 18 were approved, while the others were blown up on either side. That is the way it remained for 30 years. No one wants to go back to a situation which remotely approaches this.
Deputy Joan Burton mentioned speaking to the deputy First Minister. I do not speak for the Sinn Féin Party. Its president has answered that question for the Deputy. It will not take its seats in the House of Commons-----
Would the Taoiseach like it to do so?
-----although, as Deputies Joan Burton and Eamon Ryan said, the situation is unprecedented. Secretary of State Davis responded yesterday to questions in the House of Commons about the common travel area and what Brexit might mean for our citizens. He has proposed to write in detail about the preservation of these benefits, on which I agreed with the Prime Minister when I met her.
It was made very clear to me in Stormont by the SDLP that we had voted here in a referendum on Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution on the territorial claim to Northern Ireland and that, if and when Britain left the European Union in 2019, the negotiations - I referred to this issue at the Magill school - should cater for a situation where the people of Ireland, North and South, wished to see a united Ireland, in the same way as happened when East Germany was assimilated into West Germany. This is an issue that was raised specifically with me and it is something which should be part of the negotiations which should be far seeing enough if that were ever to transpire to be the case.
Brexit will reshape the relationship between the islands. When I spoke to Sinn Féin, obviously with the leader and the deputy First Minister, two issues were raised. One concerned an alternative strategy, while the other concerned special status. Whether they would be the same is a matter for discussion. We have a situation where we have a special status in Northern Ireland. It is the only peace process in the European Union that is supported by the Union. It will be the only land border in the European Union with the United Kingdom if and when it actually leaves the Union. On top of this, the process is embellished by the United States and the European Union with PEACE funds and INTERREG funds, through cross-Border activities, health and education co-operation. I point out to the House that letters of offer have issued in respect of INTERREG and PEACE funds and that 17 major projects will continue, as we expect, in the coming years with substantial moneys from the European Union. We want to see this special status, these special circumstances and particular benefits continuing. This is an issue we need to discuss in the context of whether it is the right strategy to follow. It should be, as it would be easier to do this than to try to develop something entirely new.
Deputy Micheál Martin referred to the North-South Ministerial Council. I agree that establishing it was a very good idea. The Deputy has been in attendance at meetings-----
I think we all agree that it was a good idea.
Many issues which might not have been of great international significance have been dealt with quickly. In this case, it might be necessary to look again at what we need to do in the context of North-South relationships and the island approach to the negotiations in respect of our contact with the United Kingdom and this country's place in the European Union. The meeting in Armagh will be chaired by the First Minister and the DUP and Government members will attend. There will be a special meeting before it to synchronise the issues raised, Minister to Minister, which are important in terms of the sectoral and thematic discussions. The sectoral committees are working on their programmes which I expect to be finalised before 18 November. We need a schedule in respect of North-South relations and Brexit for the North-South Ministerial Council, as the case might be. I do not disagree with the Deputy. It might be necessary to hold a couple of special meetings as needs be, perhaps every quarter, to update and see how things are progressing in the discussions and negotiations.
To answer Deputy Eamon Ryan, we will have an interest in the court case that is taking place. I will speak to the ambassador, Mr. Mulhall, in seeing to it that it is properly covered. As I stated, Secretary of State Davis announced yesterday in the House of Commons that he would write in detail about the protection of the benefits arising from the common travel area which have applied since the 1920s and which we do not want to lose.
