Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 25 Jan 2017

Vol. 936 No. 1

Priority Questions

Brexit Issues

Darragh O'Brien

Ceist:

43. Deputy Darragh O'Brien asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views on whether the almost invisible Border can be maintained between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland in view of the fact that the British Prime Minister has stated that the UK will leave the Single Market and will seek a new arrangement regarding the customs union; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3260/17]

Darragh O'Brien

Ceist:

45. Deputy Darragh O'Brien asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the way in which his Department will advocate for the special position of Northern Ireland in the upcoming Brexit negotiations in view of the fact that the British Prime Minister has indicated that there will be no special deals or status for Northern Ireland or other devolved administrations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3261/17]

In the context of the British Prime Minister's speech on 17 January last outlining her Government's position on leaving the Single Market and the customs union, or certainly leaving most of the external factors of the customs union, there is an obvious risk to the invisible Border between the Republic and the North. What are the Minister's views on how we can maintain the current arrangements and what are the risks, following the British Government's announcement of a hard Brexit, to the freedom of movement we enjoy between the states in the Twenty-six Counties and the Six Counties on the island of Ireland?

I propose to take Questions Nos. 43 and 45 together.

The Government has noted the content of Prime Minister May’s speech last week and welcomed the fact that it provides greater clarity on the proposed approach of the British Government to the Brexit negotiation process.

Prime Minister May has made clear that she wishes to secure the closest possible future economic relationship for the UK with the EU, a goal that Ireland shares.

For Ireland, the priorities for the negotiation process that lies ahead are unchanged: our economic and trading arrangements; the Northern Ireland peace process, including Border issues; the common travel area; and the future of the European Union.

In her speech, Prime Minister May highlighted the specific and historic relationship between Britain and Ireland. In this context, she made clear that her priorities include maintaining the common travel area and avoiding a return to a hard Border with Northern Ireland, both of which are welcome.

The Government notes that the British approach is now firmly that of a country which will have left the EU but which seeks to negotiate a new, close relationship with the Union. The analysis across Government has covered all possible models for the future UK relationship with the EU.

When the negotiations start later in the spring, we, together with our EU partners, will face the UK across the negotiating table and will strive for a deal that everyone can accept but, more importantly, that protects Ireland’s fundamental interests. It will not be easy but we are prepared.

As part of our preparations for this process, I have carried out a round of contacts with all of my EU counterparts to make them aware of the need for specific arrangements which protect the key gains of the peace process on this island, a process to which the EU has already made a key and substantial contribution.

The Taoiseach has met with Chancellor Merkel, President Hollande, the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, and other EU Heads of Government to convey Ireland’s concerns. The Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and I also met with the Commission’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, here in Dublin last October.

The Government is encouraged at the extent to which our concerns are understood and appreciated by our partners and by the universal desire to assist in addressing them satisfactorily. Commissioner Barnier’s clear statement in December that Irish issues would be a negotiating priority was very positive.

The Government is talking to the UK and working closely with the Commission and Council secretariat to develop concrete solutions to the issues raised and to work out how these can be achieved in the negotiations.

The Government and the British Government have reaffirmed that the Good Friday Agreement is the indispensable foundation for all engagement on Northern Ireland.

While this provides much needed reassurance, we are under no illusions about the hard work needed to deliver it.

In advance of the commencement of negotiations, the Government's engagement is being intensified in 2017. Our embassy network across the European Union is being fully deployed in support of the process, which will be assisted by the allocation of additional resources to our permanent representation in Brussels and our embassies in London, Paris and Berlin. The first plenary session of the all-island civic dialogue was held on 2 November and the process is continuing. The next plenary session will take place on 17 February. Between these two plenary meetings, 14 sectoral events involving various Government Ministers and examining specific policy areas in greater detail will also have taken place. The work of the civic dialogue process has reaffirmed the priority issues identified by the Government.

I assure the House that the Government will continue to prepare comprehensively and proactively for all dimensions of the EU-UK negotiations in pursuit of our priority concerns. In this regard, we will continue to engage with all our EU partners to highlight the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland, and the consequences for North-South co-operation on the island as a whole, which must be factored into any new relationship between the UK and the EU.

I thank the Minister for his response. From his bilateral meetings with his counterparts in Europe, is he absolutely assured that foreign ministers in Governments across the EU are absolutely clear and agree with Ireland's unique position regarding future negotiations and the unique nature of our relationship with Britain and, more importantly, with Northern Ireland, which is copperfastened under the Good Friday Agreement? I would like to get a sense of the Minister's view on it.

Prime Minister May's statement outlined a hard Brexit, which poses a great threat to us economically. We could be looking at customs, tariffs and more difficulties for trade. Ireland does €60 billion worth of trade with Britain per annum. What are the Minister's views on Commissioner Pierre Moscovici's comments that there would be no interim or phased customs arrangements and that no discussions on customs could happen until the two years has elapsed, whereas Commissioner Michel Barnier's view appears to be very different?

During recent months, I have had the opportunity to speak directly with all of my EU colleagues. There have been a number of personnel changes since then and I have arranged a number of meetings for the next few weeks in those cases. I am encouraged by the manner in which the Irish concerns have been received across the EU. I am encouraged at the appreciation, acknowledgement and understanding on the part of all my EU colleagues as to the importance of the Irish peace process to the European Union and the strong, active and positive role that was played by the EU in our negotiations leading up to the signing of the historic Good Friday Agreement in 1998 and the support the EU has provided actively towards communities in Northern Ireland and Border areas. I get a clear understanding that my colleagues appreciate the gains of the Good Friday Agreement and of peace in Ireland and that they are conscious of the fact that nothing should be done that would be adverse to the continuing peace and stability on our island.

It is encouraging in one degree. However, in light of the risks regarding the UK leaving the customs union, the Taoiseach said papers were being prepared regarding minimising customs checks. Has the Minister any idea when those papers will be published and what Departments are preparing them? I return to my question on Commissioner Moscovici's comments and where the Government stands on them. It is worrying. I am not trying to seek a better deal on behalf of Britain. I agree with the Minister's comments on this. We are part of the EU. However, there is a risk to jobs and trade here, and having conflicting comments from two very senior people who are involved in the process and who will be involved in negotiations is a concern. I would like to know the Government's view. Does the Minister agree with Commissioner Barnier's position or Commissioner Moscovici's?

I remind the Deputy that negotiations have not yet commenced. To look for the end of the story before the negotiations have even commenced is probably somewhat ambitious. I welcome what Commissioner Barnier said, when he clearly indicated his understanding of the position on the island of Ireland and, furthermore, that he is anxious that this position be "defended". I also welcome what Commissioner Moscovici has said regarding his understanding of our position going into the negotiations.

Regarding controls round the Border, I assume the Deputy is referring to customs posts or any structures that might impede the free flow of people and goods. Our priority is to maintain the invisible Border. The establishment of any type of Border controls, such as posts on the Border, or any customs arrangements, would be a regrettable step for mobility on the island. I discussed the issue as recently as last week with my colleague, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. It is in the shared interests of Ireland and the UK to ensure the invisible Border can be maintained. This will be a priority of Ireland heading into the negotiation process. We have prepared for it.

I need not remind the Deputy that the future arrangements regarding the Border will not be exclusively determined by the UK and Ireland but will be influenced by the wider negotiations between the EU 27 and the UK. We are very conscious of it and I am satisfied, so far, that there is very much an understanding on the part of our colleagues. The issue has been a focus of our talks with the UK, albeit not at negotiation level.

In light of Prime Minister May's comments that she would not seek any special deal or status for the North of Ireland, how does the Minister square that circle with regard to our view, as the Oireachtas, in the main, that the North of Ireland should have special status? The UK, and in particular Prime Minister May, have chosen to curb immigration ahead of trade and relations between them and their nearest neighbour, Ireland, and the rest of Europe. This will have to be teased out in time. Given that Secretary of State Brokenshire does not even form part of the Brexit committee, is that understood at the Prime Minister's level, based on the bilateral talks the Taoiseach has had with her, about the real risks to the economy in the North of Ireland and in Britain? I remind the British that Ireland is their fifth largest market, therefore it is in their interests that we do not put up barriers between the two countries.

I agree with the importance of the points the Deputy has stressed. I assure him and the House that the issues will be fundamental in the context of Ireland's position. I listened to Prime Minister May's speech.

While the Deputy refers to certain aspects of the speech, it is important that we keep it in context. In her Lancaster House address, she said:

We cannot forget that, as we leave, the United Kingdom will share a land border with the EU, and maintaining that common travel area with the Republic of Ireland will be an important priority for the UK in the talks ahead.

She went on to state:

[We look forward to delivering] a practical solution that allows the maintenance of the common travel area with the Republic … Nobody wants [a] to return to the borders of the past, so we will make it a priority to deliver a practical solution as soon as we can.

I would regard that as being encouraging and not a hundred miles from our position of ensuring the invisible nature of the Border and the common travel area, with particular reference to the content of the Good Friday Agreement, an internationally-lodged and legally-binding document, which, in my view, will be fundamental in this process of negotiation.

Northern Ireland

Seán Crowe

Ceist:

44. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views on whether the allegations of deep-seated corruption by the Democratic Unionist Party, DUP, in respect of the renewable heat incentive, RHI, scheme have undermined the political institutions in Belfast (details supplied); and the steps and actions his Department is undertaking to ensure that the Good Friday Agreement and the other agreements are implemented in full. [3263/17]

I would like to use this introduction to pass on my gratitude to Martin McGuinness after his retirement from electoral politics last week and wish him every success in tackling his serious health problems. I do not think anyone has worked harder than Martin over the past ten years to maintain and realise the potential of the institutions in the North, which are sadly being undermined by the DUP.

I look forward to hearing what actions the Department will undertake to ensure the Good Friday Agreement and subsequent agreements are implemented in full.

The controversy concerning the substance of the RHI scheme is a matter solely and exclusively for the devolved institutions, and not something on which I or the Government would comment. As stated previously, I regret the circumstances which led to the decision of the deputy First Minister to resign from office. I acknowledge his contribution and leadership over the past decade within the power-sharing institutions. I also offer my congratulations to his successor, Michelle O'Neill, the new leader of Sinn Féin in Northern Ireland. I wish her well in this important leadership role.

It was clear, immediately following the resignation of the deputy First Minister, that the prospect of a resolution ahead of the triggering of an Assembly election was slim. However both Governments, in their capacity as co-guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement, made full use of the narrow window available to ensure that any avenues for resolution between the parties prior to an election were fully explored. In the event, an Assembly election has been triggered and will be held on Thursday, 2 March. The Secretary of State and I have agreed that both Governments should continue to work closely together in the weeks to come, looking ahead to the post-election period, when a new power-sharing Executive will need to be formed. We have also urged the parties to approach the election campaign in calm and respectful terms, conscious that polarising rhetoric and frayed relationships will damage the prospects of forming an Executive after the votes have been counted.

We must all be mindful that effective devolved Government, underpinned by a genuine spirit of partnership, is what the people of Northern Ireland voted for in 1998 and what they expect their elected politicians to deliver. It is of the utmost importance that all parties bear in mind the principles of mutual respect, partnership and equality that underpin the Good Friday Agreement.

In this regard, several elements of the Good Friday Agreement and St. Andrews Agreement have not yet been fully implemented, including an Irish Language Act. The Government’s firm position is that the Good Friday Agreement and the successor agreements must be implemented in full. This is reflected in the programme for Government.

It is generally accepted the DUP has failed to live up to its obligations on equality, respect and reconciliation. The RHI scheme and the arrogance of the DUP has further undermined and led to the collapse of the political institutions. Arlene Foster was the architect of the scheme. It has the potential to be a cost on the public purse in the North of almost £500 million. There are daily revelations of further DUP political interference in the implementation of the RHI scheme. Sinn Féin cannot and will not tolerate or turn a blind eye to financial scandal, incompetence or the waste of public moneys. To get to the truth of the matter, the North’s Minister of Finance, Máirtín Ó Muilleoir, has announced and initiated a public inquiry into the scheme to address the shortcomings of the legislation involved. It will also be away from political interference.

Has the Minister discussed the DUP's provocative actions with the British Secretary of State? Will he ensure the British and Irish Governments significantly engage in negotiations to uphold equality and parity of esteem?

I regularly discuss the political situation in Northern Ireland with the Secretary of State. I have discussed the current instability with reference to the issues raised as recently as late last week. It is important that the conduct of the elections is such that all parties ultimately elected to the assembly have a responsibility towards establishing a working Executive in accordance with the Good Friday Agreement.

The Deputy referred to the importance of several issues relating to the Good Friday Agreement, which a level of consideration must be given towards having full compliance. There are several outstanding provisions which have been specifically referenced in the Stormont House Agreement, including provisions concerning the obligations for the promotion of cultural tolerance, mutual respect and mutual understanding at every level of society, as well as a range of priorities for North-South co-operation.

The election campaign is under way and I look forward to continuing to play my part and the part of the Irish Government as co-guarantor of the Agreement. Ultimately, there will be an obligation on those elected to the assembly in March to sit down and work out a programme for government, re-establish the Executive in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Good Friday Agreement.

The issues have moved beyond the RHI scandal. Worryingly, the DUP MLA, Edwin Poots, recently stated that his party never committed to the Governments’ bringing forward an Irish language Act, despite such commitments being explicitly stated and agreed to in the internationally-binding St. Andrews Agreement of 2006. We have parties trying to unwind previous agreements. Will the Minister accept this is a completely false interpretation and crude attempt to undermine such agreements? Just yesterday on "Morning Ireland", the British Secretary of State, James Brokenshire, said the introduction of Acht na Gaeilge has to command cross-community respect. This is foolhardy and a dangerous intervention which runs contrary to the core principles of the agreements. If we accept it has been agreed by all-party negotiations, then his comments provide political cover not only for the DUP's prevarication on this issue but also its fundamentalist opposition to the Irish language and all expressions of Irishness.

Will the Minister urgently contact the British Secretary of State to inform him that the commitment to the Irish language Act is a core component of the St. Andrews Agreement and is in no way conditional?

I had a constructive face-to-face meeting with the British Secretary of State late last week and I intend to meet him early next week. I remind the Deputy that in the 2014 Stormont House Agreement, the Government and the British Government, recalling the commitments from previous agreements, endorsed the need for respect for and recognition of the Irish language in Northern Ireland. The Stormont House Agreement provides for regular review meetings with the participation of the Government, the British Government and the Executive party leaders.

At the last two review meetings, most recently before Christmas, I had the opportunity to draw attention to these outstanding commitments which go to the heart of the Good Friday Agreement. I am anxious these issues remain at the top of the political agenda. The Government views as a solemn responsibility its role and mandate as co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement. The Government has been unstinting in its efforts to uphold the principles of the Agreement and to advance the full implementation of all provisions.

Question No. 45 taken with Question No. 43.

Irish Prisoners Abroad

Paul Murphy

Ceist:

46. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will report on representations made by his Department following the recent postponement of the trial of a person (details supplied) in Egypt; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3259/17]

I was part of an all-party delegation to Egypt to visit Irish citizen, Ibrahim Halawa, who has been in prison for almost three and a half years. His message to us, which was heard loud and clear, is that he wants to go home. We conveyed that strongly to the Egyptian authorities, the Egyptian President and the various Ministers and parliamentarians we met. Considering we had the 18th adjournment of the trial last Tuesday, what actions are the Government taking to follow up on that to ensure he gets to come home?

I repeat to the House, as I have on a number of occasions over the past two years, that this consular case continues to be a top priority for the Government and substantial resources and time are being devoted to it not only be me but by the Taoiseach, officials in my Department and the Taoiseach's Department, by our ambassador and his team in Cairo and by the entire diplomatic network. The Government is doing everything it possibly can to ensure the Egyptian authorities are in no doubt about our determination to see this young man returned to his home and family at an early opportunity.

I acknowledge what the Deputy has said regarding the recent visit by Members of this House to Cairo. I express my appreciation to the Ceann Comhairle and all the members of the cross-party delegation who went to Cairo recently to meet this citizen to hear his story at first hand and press the case for his return to Ireland with the Egyptian authorities at the highest level. These messages have been clearly and repeatedly conveyed by the Government. It is very useful that the Egyptian authorities are clear on the fact that there is absolute unanimity across Dáil Éireann on this important issue.

The Taoiseach has spoken directly and personally with Egyptian President el-Sisi on numerous occasions calling on him to exercise his powers under Egyptian law to resolve this case and return Ibrahim Halawa to Ireland. He has done so in face-to-face meetings on two occasions and also by telephone and letter. The Taoiseach most recently wrote to President el-Sisi about the case before Christmas. For my part, I have engaged continually on this case with my Egyptian counterpart, Foreign Minister Shoukry, and I once again raised this case with him when I met him in Paris at the Middle East peace conference on Sunday, 15 January.

The trial, in which our citizen is a defendant along with more than 400 others, was back in court for a further hearing on 17 January. The hearing saw witnesses called and cross-examined for the first time since the trial began. This may be an indication that the trial has now at last moved into a substantive phase and that a conclusion may finally be in prospect. I assure the Deputy and the House of my continued engagement and I acknowledge the importance of the parliamentary delegation.

I add my thanks to the embassy and all those involved in organising the trip of the delegation and those who took part in it. What we heard from Ibrahim about the conditions he faces was harrowing. He is in a maximum security prison, which is supposedly only for those who have been convicted of serious offences. He has not been convicted of anything; he is effectively being interned. He shares a cell with nine others, he has no privacy and he is touching other people when he is sleeping. There is one toilet in the cell. It is horrific for a young man to have to go through. The fact he is bearing up so well is a testament to him. It is the same kind of character shown by his sisters in their campaigning work.

To be really concrete in terms of things the Government can do, has there been follow-up on the question of a heart echo for Ibrahim? Second, what progress has been made in getting the EEAS to monitor the trial? Third, has there been any response by President el-Sisi to the Taoiseach's letter at Christmas?

I will again make it clear that the Egyptian Government is in absolutely no doubt about the position of the Irish Government. The Taoiseach has made our views absolutely clear and it was interesting that the response of President el-Sisi to members of the delegation was the same response that was received by the Taoiseach following his intercession and contact with President el-Sisi. That point has been made perfectly clear by the Egyptians.

I acknowledged the importance of the Ceann Comhairle's delegation and I look forward to receiving a formal report. I know there are a number of issues raised in the report because I have had the opportunity to speak to a number of members of the delegation since their return. I assure the Deputy that on receipt of that report from the Ceann Comhairle I will be very anxious to see what way the Irish Government can continue to assist. The next trial date is 14 February. I have been speaking in recent weeks directly to my counterpart, Foreign Minister Shoukry, with regard to European involvement. I have raised the issue on a number of occasions with the EU High Representative, Federica Mogherini, who has made representations on behalf of the European Union, and I have engaged directly with the chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the European Parliament. I have also raised the issue bilaterally in the context of my meetings with other foreign affairs Ministers in cases where I have felt their engagement might be helpful in the circumstances. I would be happy, having regard to the importance of the delegation, to keep the House fully informed of developments.

Time has elapsed so I have to move on to the next question. The six and a half minutes have elapsed.

Is one not supposed to get time to respond?

The Deputy got one supplementary and the time is up.

I did not use the time. I appreciated getting the answer from the Minister. I am not complaining about that. I got a question and a supplementary.

The Deputy got three questions in the one supplementary question.

The Deputy asked three questions in the supplementary question.

Dublin-Monaghan Bombings

Maureen O'Sullivan

Ceist:

47. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the progress made regarding the Dáil Éireann motions on the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and the issues that continue to be left unaddressed for the families of those who lost their lives in the bombings. [3262/17]

My question relates to the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and the outstanding issues and various Dáil motions that have been passed. Has any progress been made on those motions and the outstanding issues?

I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue. The House will be aware that dealing with the legacy of the past relating to the conflict in Northern Ireland is a major priority for me as Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and for my Government colleagues. This commitment is reflected in the Programme for a Partnership Government, which makes specific reference to pursuing the issue of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings. The all-party motion on the 1974 Dublin-Monaghan bombings adopted in this House on 25 May 2016 has, like those adopted in 2008 and 2011, been conveyed directly to the British Government. These motions call on the British Government to allow access by an independent, international judicial figure to all original documents relating to the Dublin-Monaghan bombings.

The Government is committed to pursuing actively the implementation of these all-party motions and has consistently raised the issue with the British Government. The Taoiseach has raised the issue with Prime Minister May, emphasising the Government’s continued support for the Dáil motions. I have also raised the issue on a number of occasions with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. James Brokenshire, most recently at our meeting in Belfast on 19 January, just last week. In our discussions, I advised the Secretary of State that the Dáil motions represent the consensus political view in Ireland that an independent, international judicial review of all the relevant documentation is required to establish the full facts of the Dublin-Monaghan atrocities. I have also underlined to the Secretary of State that the absence of a response from the British Government is a matter of deep concern to the Government and the House. I emphasised the urgent need for a response from the British Government.

Secretary of State Brokenshire has acknowledged the importance that the Government and Dáil Éireann attach to this case. He indicated the British Government is still considering how it could respond in a way that would adequately address the motions and be consistent with its obligations. The Government will continue to pursue this matter with the British authorities, urging them to provide a satisfactory response to the motions that have been adopted by this House on a cross-party basis.

There are many families throughout these islands and beyond who continue to deal not only with the awful pain of losing a loved one but also with the struggle for answers decades after these traumatic events. Accordingly, the setting up of a new comprehensive framework for dealing with the past, as envisaged in the Stormont House Agreement, remains a priority for the Government.

I thank the Minister. We have had a number of engagements on this already, as have other Deputies. The Minister has met the relatives from Justice for the Forgotten. His Department funds the organisation. We have a Dáil group under Deputy Crowe's chairmanship that meets regularly with the relatives. The Taoiseach attended the 40th anniversary, which is the milestone. The Minister was at the 41st anniversary and we are now approaching the 42nd. We have had three Dáil motions. I do not doubt the engagement the Minister has had but the answer the British Government is still considering leaves much to be desired.

I would ask about the current Secretary of State and the Minister's perception of how serious he is on this. I would certainly have different views about the previous Secretary of State and her role in this regard. I would also ask the Minister about the talks going on between the senior officials in the Minister's Department and the Northern Ireland Office about those undisclosed documents on the British side, and whether he is confident they will accept that this independent international inspector holds them.

The Deputy is right that there have been contacts between senior officials of both Governments over recent times to explore whether a response to the Dáil motion that would be mutually acceptable to both sides can be found. As Minister, I continue to engage with the Secretary of State and with the Northern Ireland parties to ensure we can proceed to report progress on the wider legacy issues. In the course of my meeting last week with the Secretary of State, Mr. Brokenshire, I again raised the specific issue of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. I conveyed to him the dissatisfaction on my part and on the part of the Irish Government, and also the dissatisfaction of the House, that there has not been the level of progress on this issue that was envisaged on the matter of the Dáil motion. I agreed, however, that the contacts at senior official level would continue over coming weeks and months. I will be happy to keep the Deputy fully informed.

It is hard to understand why, after 41 years, the British actually fear the truth. We know how important the truth is for the relatives and victims. In 1993 there was a Yorkshire Television documentary, "Hidden Hand: The Forgotten Massacre". I think that sums it up particularly well. It is a forgotten massacre and if it were not for the relatives, I am sure this would have been swept under the carpet. That documentary was explicit in naming names so, again, I come around to the fear of letting the truth be told in that it might clear people who were named in that documentary or further give to the relatives the information they need. With regard to Brexit, will it mean a further delay for the victims and the Justice for the Forgotten group?

I do not envisage the Brexit negotiations will impact directly on issues pertaining to the Stormont House Agreement in respect of the setting up of the legacy institutions. However, I would point out that there is an election in Northern Ireland. I urge all the parties involved in that campaign to ensure nothing is said in the course of the campaign that might make more difficult the setting up of an all-party Executive in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Good Friday Agreement after the election.

I hope the elections do not impact on progress in setting up the legacy institutions under the Stormont House Agreement. Progress on these issues remains a priority for me and the Government. Right up to the collapse of the institutions last week, there were efforts on the part of the parties in Northern Ireland and the two Governments to ensure progress could be reported on the outstanding issues pertaining to the setting up of the legacy institutions. Even though we are in an electoral cycle in Northern Ireland, I assure the House the Irish Government will remain steadfast in its determination and efforts to ensure the new institutions provided for under the Stormont House Agreement are realised at the earliest opportunity.

I ask Members to stick to the time limit as we will be able to take more questions if we do so.

Barr
Roinn