Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 25 Sep 2018

Vol. 972 No. 4

Brexit Negotiations: Statements

The UK's departure from the EU poses a unique and unprecedented challenge for Ireland. The depth and strength of the ties between our islands, across so many areas, means that our relationship is unique. This relationship has only been enhanced and deepened by both countries' membership of the European Union. The complexity of the UK's departure and the scale of the challenge it presents have become even clearer in the course of the Article 50 negotiations which have been ongoing since last year. Negotiations are led by an EU Commission task force, on behalf of the remaining 27 member states, under Michel Barnier. Ireland's goal has always been for the EU and the UK to have the closest possible relationship post Brexit. At the same time, it is important that we remain a member of the EU and that we maintain the integrity of the Single Market and the four freedoms on which it is based, which is the greatest strength of the EU.

The Government continues to work to ensure that Ireland's issues are properly reflected in the negotiations on the withdrawal agreement, including, as a priority, agreement on the protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland, which will protect the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts, not least with regard to rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity, and the gains of the peace process. This includes the need to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland and to therefore agree the backstop as part of the Irish protocol. We are also working hard to ensure that Ireland itself is ready for the changes and challenges that Brexit will bring. Negotiations resumed on 16 August and have been ongoing continuously since then. Substantial work has been done, and on many issues, progress has been made. In his most recent update, Michel Barnier has reported that there is a provisional agreement on up to 90% of the text of the withdrawal agreement. However, key, substantial issues remain to be resolved. These include those related to Northern Ireland and the backstop.

Discussions to agree a political declaration on the framework for the future EU-UK relationship have also begun in earnest since the resumption of negotiations. This has been enabled by the UK's White Paper, or the Chequers proposal as we know it, on the future relationship and is being taken forward on the basis of the European Council guidelines agreed last March. Common ground has been found on the future EU-UK security partnerships including in areas of police and judicial co-operation. However, there are fundamental differences on the UK's suggested model for the future economic partnership, which would risk undermining the Single Market. As we enter this final stage of talks, EU and UK negotiators have committed to bringing new energy to the talks, including on Irish-specific issues and the Government welcomes these commitments.

EU leaders reviewed progress during the informal European Council summit held in Salzburg last week.

As President Tusk made clear in his remarks following the summit, all partners were agreed there will be no withdrawal agreement without a solid, operational and legally-binding Irish backstop. Leaders reaffirmed their full support for Michel Barnier in all of his efforts and as leader of the EU task force. On the joint political declaration on the future relationship, the leaders of the EU 27 agreed that the aim is to agree a text that provides as much clarity as possible on the future relations model. However, leaders agreed that, despite positive elements of the UK’s Chequers proposal, the suggested framework for economic co-operation could not work given the risks to the Single Market.

The European Council meeting on 18 October remains the target to achieve maximum progress and results in the negotiations. At that meeting, Ireland and our EU partners will then decide if conditions are sufficient to call an extraordinary summit in November to finalise and formalise the deal. Real progress on the backstop will be an essential part of that decision. I welcome that in her statement of last Friday in Downing Street, the Prime Minister promised that the UK will bring forward proposals on the backstop. This needs to be done urgently if progress is to be made by the October European Council, as time is running short. As the Taoiseach said in Salzburg, we need to redouble our efforts over the coming weeks to make sure we can successfully complete negotiations and agree a deal. That is what we are all working towards. Ireland, as a country, wants to avoid a no-deal Brexit. It is important that we can reach an agreement, as all sides will suffer in a no-deal scenario - the UK, the EU and Ireland more than any other member state.

Regarding the backstop, the Tánaiste met Michel Barnier last week on 18 September and discussed progress in the negotiations, and in particular the Irish protocol and the Northern Ireland Border. Mr. Barnier confirmed once again his view that without a backstop there can be no withdrawal agreement. He later briefed myself and my EU colleagues at the General Affairs Article 50 Council. He gave his assessment which was and is that both sides need to work to de-dramatise the protocol and focus on agreeing the workable solutions that it offers at its core. He set out a number of technical suggestions aimed at explaining the nature, location and modality of the controls needed in the event of the backstop being implemented. This would maintain the key principle of the backstop, to maintain the Border as it is today - invisible - and facilitating frictionless cross-Border trade - while also minimising the technical controls needed to protect the EU’s Single Market. Ireland fully supports this approach and we have consistently said so.

From the outset of these negotiations, the Government has been clear and consistent in our position that a Border between Ireland and Northern Ireland must be avoided under any circumstances. While our preference would be to see these issues resolved through the future relationship, the backstop must be legally operable and, in the event that it is triggered, it must be in place unless and until another solution is found. It cannot be temporary. The UK has provided guarantees on avoiding a hard border and it was repeated again by Prime Minister May last Friday. The UK is committed to a backstop. Prime Minister May’s indication that the UK will now bring forward proposals is welcome. A legally operable backstop which avoids a hard border and protects the integrity of the Single Market is essential for agreeing the withdrawal agreement so as to provide the certainty that no matter what the outcome of the negotiations on the future relationship, there will be no hard border on the island of Ireland. This is of critical importance. The invisible border is the most tangible symbol of the peace process. It has allowed relationships and communities to be rebuilt following years of conflict. I do not have to tell my colleagues here that it has allowed social, political and commercial relationships to thrive across Ireland, and this cannot be put at risk

It is important that we give communities in Northern Ireland and here in the South certainty that we will resolve this issue as part of the backstop agreement. This cannot be pushed into the negotiations on the future relationship, negotiations that will not begin in detail until after the UK leaves next March and which will not be concluded for at least another two years or more. The draft protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland also importantly addresses the commitment to protecting the Good Friday Agreement in all of its parts, on North-South co-operation and the rights provisions of the Agreement. North-South economic and social co-operation has benefitted people across the island and supported the development of an all-island economy. That is something that has benefitted all parts of the community. Protecting these gains is not just about ensuring frictionless trade but also is about facilitating peoples’ lives and livelihoods. Similarly the rights and citizenship provisions of the agreement are at the core of the peace process and must be protected. Fundamentally, the draft protocol works to support and protect the peace, reconciliation and prosperity that have been achieved through the Good Friday Agreement. Mr. Barnier is well aware of this and of our position and has been strongly supportive of it throughout these negotiations and we believe he will continue to support us in this manner.

The existence of the common travel area, CTA, between Ireland and Britain also plays an important role in underpinning the Good Friday Agreement in respect of both North-South and east-west co-operation. It also of course facilitates respect for the citizenship provisions in the agreement. Recognition of the continuance of the CTA has been agreed as part of the Article 50 negotiations and it is addressed in the draft protocol. It is a longstanding reciprocal arrangement which predates our membership of the EU. It is valued on both islands and its continuation is a stated objective of both the Irish and UK Governments The latter has publicly reaffirmed this as recently as 13 September in a technical note. We will continue to move and reside freely in either jurisdiction. Detailed work is ongoing, both at home and bilaterally between Ireland and the UK to ensure that, irrespective of the outcome, all necessary provisions are made in order that there is no reason to expect that a no-deal Brexit - we are working to prevent that - would affect our common travel area at all.

On contingency planning, Brexit will bring real changes for Ireland. We stand to be one of the most affected member states. A total of 15% of Irish exports go to the UK and 11% of our imports come from the UK. Any change to our trading relationship will have an impact on our economy and our businesses. The nature of this will depend on the outcome of the negotiations. We know, however, that any kind of an outcome will entail change and so we are planning accordingly. We believe we have been responsible and measured in this approach. Our contingency and preparedness planning for Brexit has intensified in recent months and is well advanced at this stage. It provides a baseline scenario for the impact of Brexit across all sectors. This includes contingency planning for a no-deal or a worst-case scenario to make sure Ireland is ready. Co-ordination of the whole-of-Government response has been taken forward through the cross-departmental co-ordination structures chaired by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, as well as work at home, to help us engage actively with the European Commission's Article 50, or Brexit, task force and its Brexit preparedness unit on areas where the lead policy role lies within the EU.

In respect of contingency planning for a no-deal outcome, last July the Government approved a number of Brexit preparedness measures. This built on the extensive work that has been under way for some time. Last week, the Cabinet approved the latest phase of this preparedness planning regarding staffing. This included sanction for the first phase of recruitment for up to 1,000 customs and veterinary officers for our ports and airports to deal with the east-west implications. Ministers and their Departments have identified as an early priority work in their respective Departments and this is well advanced. We have focused on the immediate economic, regulatory and operational challenges which could result from such an outcome. It assumes that trading relationships would be based on default World Trade Organization, WTO, rules but we also examine the possible effects on many other areas of concern. Relevant Departments are now working on the roll-out of detailed action plans. This is with a view to advancing, as appropriate, the mitigating measures which they have identified in the areas of their responsibility from the planning to the implementation phase. All of this work is in addition to measures which have already been put in place to get Ireland ready for Brexit.

I will finish up quickly. In dedicated measures we have a €300 million Brexit loan scheme and a €25 million Brexit response loan scheme. I refer also to our capital expenditure of €116 billion under the Project Ireland 2040 plan and we are also providing funding for new diplomatic missions to expand Ireland’s global footprint, in line with our trade strategy. We have State agencies working with companies to help them get ready for Brexit. This is now being intensifying with the “Getting Ireland Brexit Ready” campaign which was launched last week by the Tánaiste, the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, and the Minister, Deputy Creed. This is a whole-of-Government communications effort, using online resources and outreach activities to build public awareness of the implications in areas such as goods and services, travel and so on, as well as the practical steps that can be taken to prepare in each case. All of this is to try to build further awareness and to help the various sectoral audiences on the steps that are being taken by the Government, but also to assist them in being prepared.

We did not ask for Brexit. While we respect the democratic will of the British people, we regret the UK’s decision to leave. Our priorities remain to ensure that the terms of the departure respect the legacy of the hard-earned peace in Northern Ireland and in taking measures to minimise the impact of Brexit on citizens at home. The challenges I have described today are considerable but we are fully committed to meeting them. We are thankful for the support and advice received from all sides of the House on this issue. We will continue to keep them updated and fully informed of these developments. These issues are far-reaching and have implications for all of us.

In fairness, the Minister of State read as fast as she could. The next few weeks in the Brexit negotiations are critical. Our citizens, business community, farmers and Members in this House are genuinely concerned that we are not in a better place at this late stage in negotiations. We were supposed to have a withdrawal treaty finalised by 18 October and the backstop issue resolved in order that we could assure the Irish people that there will be no border on this island. Recent events have left a nervous feeling across the board and time is not on our side. We are continuously told about what has been agreed to date but there has been very little movement in recent months. The key issues for Ireland remain unresolved and we appear to be at a stalemate. We need to focus now and do everything we can from an Irish Government perspective to ensure that a deal is reached. The alternative scenario where there is a no-deal Brexit would be catastrophic for Ireland.

It is essential at this juncture that calm prevails. The UK leaving the EU without an agreement is not in the interests of any party; it would cause economic harm to all concerned, particularly to Ireland. I assume that we are still working to the 18 October deadline. The Tánaiste said the Irish issues should be resolved by that date, but it seems deadlines in this Brexit process are merely something to be casually stepped over before we move on to the next so-called deadline, which now appears to be November.

It would be most helpful if the Minister of State could outline to this House, in a serious manner, exactly where we are in these negotiations. What does she expect will be achieved by the October meeting, if anything? What is happening with the Irish backstop? Are the Minister of State and the officials from her Department actually working on this? Are negotiations going on behind the scenes with British officials, or are we simply leaving it to Mrs. Theresa May and her government to solve this issue on its own? I would suggest that is a very risky strategy for Ireland.

Negotiations are at an extremely delicate stage, and I understand that Mr. Michel Barnier is attempting to "de-dramatise" the backstop. That is the buzz-phrase at the moment. The megaphone diplomacy and celebratory tone employed by the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach in the aftermath of the December agreement was a misstep, as I have said on a number of occasions. The comments were ill-judged and premature, and we have been paying for them ever since. "We are where we are" is the phrase used, but it is ten months since we were told that a backstop was agreed, and it is still not agreed. Understandably, all communities in the North and citizens living along the Border are losing faith in the Government’s ability to deliver on backstop to ensure we do not have a border on this island, hard or soft. We are sailing dangerously close to the wind by allowing this issue to remain unresolved as we move towards the final stages of the negotiations. This undoubtedly weakens our position; even if the Minister of State says it does not. I believe it does. The impression was given at our last stakeholder meeting that something was happening on the backstop behind the scenes and that we were more or less there, but in Salzburg that seemed to evaporate in a matter of minutes, with Theresa May saying she did not think the UK would have anything on the backstop by the October meeting. When we, as Opposition spokespersons, attend these meetings we do so in good faith so we can engage with the Tánaiste and the Minister of State, ask questions and get a serious update. However, this side of the House does not feel properly informed or briefed by the Government, and there is little information from those meetings that I cannot read in The Irish Times. It is often said that the Government wants and needs the support of the Opposition, but I think it has been given a fair degree of latitude in that respect. That latitude must be reciprocated by the Government's side, by informing this House what exactly it is doing and where we are with these negotiations. If people are kept in the dark they will inevitably fill in the blanks themselves.

As the Minister of State said, Ireland is the most vulnerable member state in these negotiations. Without a doubt, we stand to be most affected by Brexit, regardless of the type of Brexit that emerges. With in the region of €1 billion of trade weekly between Ireland and the UK, it is by far our largest market and trading partner, and I think some in the Government need to be reminded of this. More than 50% of our beef, more than 70% of our dairy and more than 70% of our timber products go to the UK. These are among a number of sectors that stand to be seriously impacted by Brexit. Even before we deal with additional tariffs - if they apply when the UK becomes a third country - there are the expected delays with new customs procedures and delays at the ports in Dublin, Dover and Calais, all of which impact on the cost of trade. One can image the impact of a delay of two days in the transit of produce if that produce is perishable, for example, mushrooms or cheese. All of a sudden the delivery of those products is called into question. The immediate impact of a no deal or bad deal Brexit would be the fluctuation in currency between the pound and the euro, which we saw when the referendum took place. This can severely impact cashflow overnight. We have to bear all of this in mind when we sit at the Brexit negotiating table.

I want to acknowledge the fantastic work being done by Enterprise Ireland, which I met with earlier today, in helping Irish companies to prepare for Brexit and to diversify their markets. It is welcome to see that exports to the UK as a percentage of total exports have fallen over the last ten years. We are gradually reducing our dependence on that market, but we will always need and want to trade with our closest neighbour. A good working relationship and the ability to trade as freely as possible with the UK post-Brexit is absolutely essential. Another area of great concern is haulage and the delivery of goods to and from this country. The Irish Haulage Association has outlined its concerns that around 70% of its drivers are from eastern Europe. They are driving Irish trucks, but they will not be covered by the common travel area. Will these workers, who are driving Irish trucks and helping to stock the shelves in our supermarkets and pharmacies across Ireland, need special work permits? What work has been done behind the scenes to deal with that particular issue? In fairness, the issue has been highlighted at length.

In terms of our domestic preparedness, which the Minister of State touched on in her speech, it might surprise her to know that my party submitted a number of freedom of information, FOI, requests to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to try to get some information on the preparations for a no deal or hard Brexit which have been carried out, and about the hiring of inspectors. Those FOI requests were refused. We appealed the refusal, and it was refused again. What kind of approach is that to take? If we are all working together on the same team and the Government wants the support of the Opposition parties, and it is preparing for all eventualities, surely it would want us to know about it. Perhaps the Minister of State can look into that matter and consider whether those records can be released to my party.

The Dutch Government announced at the start of the year that it would hire 750 new customs officers. It completed the hiring of 1,000 new customs officers in early July and is now training those people. We are in the process of hiring around 400 customs officers. Ireland and the Netherlands have similar levels of trade with UK. This is one area where we can do better to prepare. We should be better prepared because Brexit will affect Ireland more than any other member state.

I want to touch on what happened in Salzburg last week. The informal summit revealed that there is still a substantial chasm between the EU and UK negotiation teams, and it was a pity that the summit was used to provoke rather than persuade. It was most regrettable that the whole affair went so badly; it set the negotiations back. It was an informal summit and nobody was expecting a major breakthrough or for Brexit to be solved in its entirety, but equally we were not expecting it to descend into such bitterness. The optics of that summit were not good for Ireland. Our Taoiseach was seen across media in Ireland and the UK strolling side by side with the French President, who gave a considerable kick to Theresa May at that summit. The British Prime Minister, rightly or wrongly, went home feeling as though she had been ambushed, and the British media loudly declared that she had been humiliated by the EU 27 the next day.

In fairness to the Tánaiste, Deputy Coveney, he appeared on the BBC that night in what I believe was a damage limitation exercise. He did quite a good interview, and reminded the British people and the UK Government that we are still neighbours and that we still want to trade and work with them, and that we very much want them to make a deal. That was the correct thing to do, and necessary considering the events in Salzburg that day.

Britain needs our help. It is one thing to enjoy beating England at soccer or other sporting events, but at the end of the day, a triumphalist approach is not going to serve our interests either. If the UK crashes out, it will be extremely bad for us, to put it mildly. We need the UK to get a deal. We should be using our influence at that negotiating table to ensure there is a good deal for Ireland, the UK and the EU as a whole.

We need serious focus now on getting a deal delivered for our citizens, North and South, and for citizens across the EU. We need less spinning from Government, less focus on PR and more focus on getting the job done. Not every meeting has to be tweeted or the stage set for every engagement. The Government should be aware of the optics, because they matter; we do not necessarily have to damage relationships between ourselves and the UK. It is extremely important that the relationship, which is under pressure, is worked on. Every Minister in government should be meeting regularly with his or her counterpart in the UK. We need to see some concrete proposals as to what exactly that future engagement is going to look like post-Brexit, and what type of mechanism or system will be in place to ensure we have regular contact with our counterparts across the water.

Brexit was not of our making or of our choosing, and the main focus now must be on protecting Ireland’s interests and reaching agreement on the terms of the withdrawal arrangement. We must also reach agreement on the backstop to ensure there is no hard border on this island, which would run contrary to the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process. Cool, calm heads are required. I hope that the Salzburg summit focused minds and provided time for reflection. Both sides must now come to the table to ensure that the most vulnerable in our societies are protected. While nobody wants to see a no deal, crash out Brexit, it is possible, and we may sleepwalk into it if we do not act with a renewed focus in order to get that deal done.

We are approaching the end game. In order to judge this Government on what it has achieved we have to go back to almost the start of the process. At the start of the process, this Government and the European Union promised that the Irish issues would be resolved before moving on from phase one of the negotiations. There were a number of elements in that phase, including the divorce agreement and issues around trade, but the Irish issue was crucial.

There was a fudge, of course. We moved on from phase one into phase two and the Irish issues have been fudged ever since. We had a political agreement last December that was hailed as a cast-iron guarantee by the Taoiseach and oversold by the Government at the time. We cautioned it not to do so. We were then told we would have a legal text by March. March came and went and there was no legal text. We had a legal text from the European Union. The EU put its position on the table; it was rejected out of hand by the British Government. June was to be the new deadline. June came and went and still no agreement emerged. We were told that October would be the new deadline. Now it seems October will come and go, and we still will not have agreement.

I am a bit perplexed by the Fianna Fáil position. That party seems to want to wrap Prime Minister Theresa May up in cotton wool. It says that if only we were nicer to Theresa May we might have got a better outcome. That is a very naive position. The reality is that this Tory Government forced Brexit on the Irish people. It is the same Tory Government that is ignoring the will of the people in the North who voted to stay in the European Union. It is the same Tory Government that has created chaos around Brexit. It has no plan and no strategy. It did not care one jot about the Irish people before the referendum, during the referendum or, as we have seen, after the referendum. That has been the sad reality of the British Tory Party. It is divided, but it is divided as to its own interests. A war within the Tory Party is being played out and it is having devastating consequences for the Irish people. I am not in any mood to give any protections to a British Prime Minister who has failed in her obligations and her responsibility to come up with the proposals that she needs to come up with.

There are so many contradictions in this that it is hard to make sense of it and understand what is happening. A British Prime Minister has promised there will be no hard border on the island of Ireland to protect the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts and to protect citizens' rights. She also says that she does not want a border in the Irish Sea or to divide her country. She is talking about the United Kingdom; I will not go into the irony there. However, in the same breath she says that she will take the North out of the customs union and Single Market. That is going to happen. How can we avoid a border on the island of Ireland and a border in the Irish Sea if Britain and the North leave the customs union and the Single Market? It simply cannot happen and everybody knows it. We have had this fantasy politics, this absolute nonsense from the Tory Party for far too long. At some point the British Government is going to have to put its solutions on the table. It is going to have to explain to people how it will square that circle, having told the Irish people it can avoid a hardening of the Border, protect the Good Friday Agreement and avoid a border in the sea.

What we know is that we had an agreement last December. As a political agreement, it certainly ticked a lot of boxes, with the North staying in the customs union and elements of the Single Market. It was not ideal. It was imperfect and needed to be built on, shaped, nurtured and negotiated in detail to give us a product we could see as a solution for Ireland. It was also meant to be a permanent solution in the event that something better did not come along. That was what the backstop was meant to be.

There are two sets of negotiations. There is the negotiation on the withdrawal agreement, which has to be in place by March. The backstop has to be attached to that. Further to that there is the separate future trading relationship, which will work itself out as part of the implementation period which will be in place for a year. However, the backstop was meant to mean that whatever happened in the future trading relationship talks, at the very least Ireland would have this guarantee. Not for a week, a month or a year; it was to be a permanent solution.

However, this is an evolving situation. The British Government now wants to make that a temporary solution. It obviously wants to keep the DUP on board. It wants whatever is in play for the North to apply to Britain as a whole, but it obviously does not want to be in the position of saying that the North and Britain will stay in the customs union and the Single Market. These games are being played out. There are all sorts of nuances and considerations. I accept that the British Prime Minister has a difficult job in managing her party and bringing some of the hard Brexiteers with her. That is fine, but she has had an awfully long time to do it. We are now coming to the crunch and when we come to the crunch we will need to see product and solutions, but we still have not seen them.

I was always on the optimistic side of this issue. I always believed that we would get a deal. I am still on the optimistic side because we need one. If there is no withdrawal agreement then there is no protocol for Ireland. There is no backstop. If there is no withdrawal agreement the United Kingdom, including the North, will crash out of the European Union. That means a hard border. It means real challenges to the Good Friday Agreement. A no-deal scenario is an absolute disaster for the people of Ireland. I would argue that it is also an absolute disaster for the people of Britain and the European Union. For that reason, logic would say that there has to be a deal. However, we have seen logic thrown out the window so many times on Brexit that it is hard to know. I still believe that there will be some arrangement.

Our fear is that at the eleventh hour something will be put on the table that will be less than what we were promised in December. It might be a time-limited backstop, or one that does not have the provisions we want to protect against a hard border or protect the Good Friday Agreement. The Irish Government will be bounced because neither the British Government nor the European Union will move, and we will end up in a difficult situation. That is what we are trying to avoid. That is why all of this was to be tied up last March, and then in June, and now in October. It is a real worry that all of these dates are coming and going.

We never sought, as some Ministers have said, to make this an orange or green issue. Our position is very clear. The voters in the North must be respected. They voted to stay in the European Union. We are seeking special status for the North so that it can stay in the European Union. We want a deal. We are not planning for a no-deal scenario. Obviously, if it happens, we must have contingency plans but we are not hoping for it. We do not want it. We want a deal. We want a solution because the lack of one will have such a devastating impact on the people we represent on either side of the Border.

If the British Government continues with its strategy of not considering Ireland and not putting solutions in place and if we get to a point in March where there the UK crashes out of the European Union, then from the point of view of everyone who believes in Irish unity or believes that the island of Ireland should stay as a unit in the European Union, it is reasonable to think there should be a Border poll. I do not think that is an unfair proposition. It would be a very fair one. All the opinion polls are showing that in the event of a no-deal scenario, a hard Brexit and a crash more people in the North, including some unionists, will support a united Ireland. I wish to put that on the table.

We have taken some flak for supporting the Government on this, but we never saw it as supporting the Government. We see it as supporting an Irish position. We see it as supporting an Irish outcome and getting the best deal for the people who we all collectively represent, the people of Ireland, North and South. That is our absolute priority. However, the Minister must understand our perspective. There are shifting deadlines, divisions in the Tory Party and contradictory statements coming from Theresa May. Only last week after the Salzburg statement she reiterated that there will be no solution that creates a border in the Irish Sea, as if that is what the people of Ireland are looking for. It is as if we are all jumping up and down, demanding a border in the Irish sea. The only people who will put a border in the Irish Sea are in the British Government. It is not an objective of the Irish Government, the European Union or Sinn Féin. The way to avoid a border in the Irish Sea is for Britain as a whole, not just the North, to stay in the customs union and elements of the Single Market, or for some sort of free trade agreement to be worked out. Such an agreement is being called a "customs arrangement". There are solutions and there are possibilities. The problem is that we are arriving at the eleventh hour and we have not seen them. That is not a good position for us to be in at this point in time.

Approximately a week ago, the UK Labour Party's spokesperson on Brexit, Mr. Keir Starmer, MP, addressed an all-party meeting in the Oireachtas.

He quoted part of what he wrote in an article in The Irish Times in which he stated:

More of the same simply will not do.

We need a fresh approach, one that recognises it is only through a combination of a new customs union, a strong single market deal and shared institutions that we find a solution that works for Ireland, the UK and across the EU.

Very few of us would disagree if that were to be the outcome but, to be honest, it is typical of the type of magical thinking that is going on. When we spoke to Mr. Starmer about it, he said that in effect the day after, or some period after, Britain has left, it would immediately sit down with the 27 member states, individually or collectively and collectively would be the desire, to hammer out a deal to provide for the customs union and the Single Market. The magical thinking is that this is what Britain has at present through its membership of the European Union. It found that in a referendum the people said they wanted to leave the Union. In recent days, we have had a lot of evidence that the campaign by various British newspapers for a second referendum to support remaining in the EU has gathered pace. At the British Labour Party conference, a significant proportion of delegates appear to favour this. There certainly has been political movement in the UK as the perception begins to dawn on what it might mean, with some scary scenarios being painted even by Tory-supporting tabloid newspapers that it could mean miles of queues to the ports on the English Channel, a shortage of medicines, which are imported and exported through various countries in the Union, and other impacts.

The fact is that members of the Government have come home from Salzburg with hope in their hearts but their hands are empty. Being involved in a negotiation is a drawn-out process. One does not get the answers all at once. The EU has well-established customs and practices, which mean that as we near the witching hour of having to make a decision, the Heads of State are in the room, and the other Heads of State gather recalcitrant members around to persuade them that in the greater good they have to act in a particular way. Herein lies a genuine problem for Ireland and an enormous problem for the Government. Everybody is apprehensive about any rebuilding or reincarnation of the Border as we knew it. Anything such as this would be very difficult for people in Ireland to swallow and would also put in danger the huge dividends, difficult and all as the earning of those have been, of the Belfast Agreement and the peace process.

Earlier in the summer, and other people in the Chamber may have seen it also, I went to see the film "Munich", which is based on Robert Harris's novel about 1938. In it, Chamberlain brought back what was described as "peace in our time". Clearly, the Taoiseach is trying to bring back a Brexit agreement in our time. As was said about Czechoslovakia and the Sudetenland Germans at the time, it was a faraway country about which people knew little. For many people in Vienna or Berlin, those places feel like the centre of Europe, and geographically they are. Naturally, we in Ireland are the centre of our own world but we have to ask ourselves what exactly is the view of the 27 member states. Excellent diplomatic work has been done to keep the 27 member states together and to negotiate under Mr. Barnier's direction as a single force but the Government cannot deny that at this point in time, we should have the shape of an agreement. The Taoiseach arrived back in a way that is a reminder of that period in European history, with papers in his hands stating he had a bullet-proof backstop. This part of the conversation has to be about exploring what exactly that now means. The answer, hopefully, is that it could mean an awful lot but, in a negative outturn, it could mean extraordinary difficulties for us.

The meeting last week was attended by many people from the Border counties and several from the North of Ireland. Anybody who knows the Border knows its complexity and its extreme porousness, with hundreds of formal and informal crossings, and knows that just occasionally having a friendly customs official ten miles south or north of Dundalk is not a runner. I plead with the Minister of State to share with us the Government's concept of what this would look like. The Revenue Commissioners have told us they are ready to take on the required staff. Is there a partial IT-based solution? Of course there would be over a period of three to five years but the IT has to be developed. Logistics in Ireland are not as developed as they are in many other countries because we are at the end of a long run. If the discussion here is to be of any use, the Minister of State needs to share with us how she and the Government propose to address the issue of the Border.

We must bear in mind that both communities in the North recognise they benefit enormously from the effective disappearance of the Border as it once was, and this is often forgotten. Except for those who take a political view, most people North of the Border, and certainly people in the unionist camp whom I have met, would like the Border to continue as it now. Ports and airports are the easiest way to do this and, of course, ports and airports have an accepted customs and police presence. Will the Minister of State paint a picture of what she anticipates happening? Going back to Keir Starmer's simple and honest remarks about a new customs union, a strong Single Market and shared institutions, the issue for us is how we get these. In a certain sense, a two-year extension which, like everybody else, I assume would work for the full two years, would give us additional time but, nonetheless, we need a legal agreement. Britain has voted. The first day after the result of the referendum I said I would love the British people to have an opportunity to reconsider their position, as we did on several occasions.

There are many ultra-left people in Ireland who do not like the European Union but the Union has been one of the great modernising forces in Ireland in terms of employment, women's rights, disability rights and environmental concerns. I will close by again saying that I am not getting what the Government's suggested solution is to this difficulty. The Minister of State must share her confidence with the House.

I will be sharing time with Deputy Mick-----

I apologise. It is just as well I am not on the European Union negotiation team. Deputy Burton finished on a point I want to raise. There are two types of Europe and for most ordinary people, the discussion of backstops, a hard border and borders in the sea is quite confusing. Most ordinary people probably think listening to such discussion is like watching paint drying.

It was discussed on "Love Island".

Most ordinary people see Europe as positive. It is the Europe that supposedly came together after the Second World War to ensure peace and an end to war, and to ensure that France or Germany would never again create war at the cost of millions of lives. It was to ensure that fascism and authoritarianism would never again take root. They want a Europe that sets standards for the environment, women, workers and measures that could act as a balance to the free market drives across Europe while delivering fairness. It is a Europe that is synonymous with Beethoven's composition, "Ode to Joy". When most people react positively to Europe, it is to that idea of Europe, which is the concept of a commonality cutting across barriers of nationality, removing distinction and giving people the right to travel freely across borders. It is typified in something as simple as the common currency. This idea of Europe - a progressive, liberal and pro-worker Europe - is one I argue is and has always been more of a myth than reality.

If we saw rules and regulations in the past that changed and removed barriers for people or set standards that were good, it is worth understanding that this was not the purpose of the regulation or the change but rather it was often a by-product of the real aim of the European Union. The Common Market was not necessarily a progressive liberal goal but rather the goal of big business and a corporate Europe that in the 1980s feared the demise of profits and business. It saw that only by pooling markets together could the entities survive and compete in international business and a globalised economy, with one big market able to face up to the United States, Japan or China. That is the motivational force behind European unity, which is, above all, unity of big business and the European round table of industrialists that remains the single most influential force in lobbying Europe and its Commission. With other business groups, it remains the guiding force behind the regulation and rules that govern Europe today.

This European round table has the biggest and most profitable companies, including the chief executives of Volvo, Philips, Nestlé, Nokia, BAE Systems and Airbus. Europe is made and shaped in their interests and not on the instincts or in the interests of ordinary citizens of Europe. If we get the right to travel without borders and with a single currency, it is only because it serves the interests of those businesses and not for any lofty ideals of commonality. It is they who set the benchmark for every policy and goal of competitiveness, fiscal restraint, etc., in what the State can spend. It is why when we debate closures of post offices in Ireland and cuts to bus and health services, as well as the outsourcing of health, it is often the European rules that demand we tender out those services and allow private multinationals to win the awards.

The Europe formed after the Second World War was supposed to be a response to militarism but it has now become one of the leading sources of arms and military hardware across the world. It is a Europe of permanent structured co-operation, PESCO, and military units that can be deployed across the globe for so-called humanitarian missions when in reality it is there to ensure and continue to defend the reach and scope of the interests of former colonial powers. This is a Europe of 30,000 paid lobbyists, the majority of whom are corporate and big business lobbyists who help influence the rules on which the European Parliament votes.

The real Europe is that of the savagery inflicted on the Greek people. The real Europe is that of the savagery inflicted on the Irish people by shoving a bailout of €64 billion of toxic debt from French and German banks down our throats. Despite the catastrophe of the financial crash and the crisis leading from it, that same Europe has not learned its lessons. We want to see a Europe that will never again witness fascism or war but instead we are getting the opposite. We are seeing the rise of fascism across Europe, with fascists knocking on the doors of parliaments and a real confusion about what sort of world in which we want to live.

For us and our Brexit negotiations, the bottom line is there should be no hard border in this country. Therefore, there should be no co-operation with a hard border; for example, there should be no employment of customs officials or gardaí, etc., and we should totally resist the implementation of that hard border in Ireland. It is not the interests of Brussels or London but those of ordinary people across Europe and in Ireland that should come first. The Government should reflect that.

One week ago Mrs. Theresa May, the British Prime Minister, arrived in Salzburg with a hardline message for her European Union counterparts. She was sent home with an equally hardline message from the other 27 leaders. Agreement on the terms of a Brexit now seem as far away as ever. Understandably, many in Ireland are fearful of the consequences of Brexit, the possibility of a hard border and the rise of sectarian tensions that may result. They are fearful that the burden of a Tory Brexit may be placed on the shoulders of working people in the form of job losses, wage cuts, etc.

To understand the meaning of recent events, it is necessary to restate certain truths. The EU is an institution designed to smooth co-operation between Europe's various capitalist and corporate elite in the interests of those elite. It has introduced a series of fiscal rules that write neoliberal policies into law, promote widespread privatisation and engineer a race to the bottom in terms of worker rights and conditions. For example, these rules seriously restrict the ability of the State to address an unprecedented housing crisis without breaking those rules.

The cheerleaders for the European Union, including many in this Chamber, trumpet the supposed benefits of the EU but the impoverished pensioners of Greece know the reality. The railway workers of Britain who have resisted EU-mandated attacks on their terms and conditions and have been to the fore in making a left case for Brexit know this. The Brexit negotiations represent a clash of interests between the rival capitalist elite. There is nobody at the negotiations representing the interests of ordinary working people. That includes the representatives of the Irish Government, including Fine Gael Ministers who have helped rigged the economy against working people and taken no effective action against the housing crisis. Nevertheless, they pose as the people's champions on the international stage.

The organised working class movement must take an independent stance on Brexit. First and foremost, the trade unions must firmly resolve that working people will not be made the whipping boys and girls. There must be strong resistance organised to any threat of redundancies or pay cuts. The working class movement must stand for a completely different type of Europe, a socialist Europe that serves the needs of the many rather than the greed of the few. Precisely because we fight for the rights of all working people, we oppose any hardening of the Border between North and South and the introduction of any infrastructure that impedes freedom of movement. We also oppose any restrictions being brought in between the North and Britain. Both Catholic and Protestant working class people in the North are at one with ordinary people in this State in opposing any hardening of the Border and we stand with them.

In 2017, Mr. Jeremy Corbyn won major support at the polls for left policies, including the ending of tuition fees, the building of 500,000 council homes and the nationalisation of energy, rail and mail, as well as the creation of a state investment bank. Not a single one of these policies could be implemented within the framework of a Single Market or capitalism. There is now a real possibility of Mrs. May's Government collapsing and a general election in the UK this autumn. The Socialist Party and Solidarity would welcome this and the return of a Corbyn-led Labour Government.

If Mr. Corbyn forms a Government in the coming months and implements his programme, it would echo right across Europe. It would raise the sights of people that instead of a choice between an anti-democratic, austerity driven EU and a bargain basement Tory exit, a struggle for a socialist Europe could be posed. It could give an impetus to the building of new parties of the working class across Europe as well as the need for working people across Europe to stand together and take joint action against the attacks of big business and its representatives.

It could pose the election of left, socialist governments as part of a struggle for a new, socialist Europe, with working people united in opposition to the big business elites that play with our futures.

I am sharing time with Deputies Jackie Cahill and Robert Troy.

The clock is ticking. There are 185 days to go. I am tinged with a certain sadness at the prospect of any reintroduction of a Border, either hard or soft, when it has, for all intents and purposes, been removed. That tinge of sadness also creates a certain madness at the futility of two islands on the periphery of Europe harming each other's economies and people. I have said in this House on a number of occasions that I am old enough to have seen how my county and the Border region fared before the EU. I am also old enough to have seen the benefits of joining the European Union both north and south of the Border. I am old enough to remember when we did have some peace before 1969 and the benefits that accrued from the Good Friday Agreement.

I have also been involved long enough in cross-Border and east-west participation as a public representative in this House to see the futility of putting those relationships that have been created, North-South and east-west, in jeopardy. I come from the smallest county in Ireland but it has had the greatest impact on issues of division and divisiveness. Three members of An Garda Síochána were assassinated in more recent times as part of that division and divisiveness. We all know that any vacuum creates a volatility and uncertainty in the Border region in trade and commerce and in our communities. Although some people describe it as scare-mongering we should be under no illusions. There is a possibility of a return to the bad old days. The extreme paramilitaries are watching closely and hoping for Brexit.

I have had discussions with senior members of An Garda Síochána, as has the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Flanagan. The Garda's intelligence shows that it is unprepared. It does not have the ability to man what I would describe as a sieve in the Border region.

The December agreement promised to ensure there would be no hard border, including any infrastructure or related checks and controls and, most importantly, to uphold the Belfast Agreement in all its parts. That agreement went on to outline the backstop arrangements that would allow full alignment between north and south in the future. The news has emerged in the past week that the EU is preparing to accept a frictionless Irish Border using technological solutions. That is alarming. That is maximum facilitation, max fac, and has already been rejected by the Government. A lot of businesses do not seem keen on this option because of the higher costs. Deputy Chambers alluded to the Irish Road Haulage Association which clearly described that a one-hour delay in the movement of a truck equates to a cost of €15 per tonne on that truck.

The Government needs to act now and come down hard on any change to December's agreement. While Michel Barnier has never wavered in his position of insisting on a backstop, the practicalities of any proposed technological solution need to be ironed out so that Border checks will be avoided. The Minister of State lives close enough to that Border and is all too aware of the issues. Let us not cod the people because, while they are fed up listening to the word Brexit, if it happens in the form that Theresa May wants, this country and the UK are in for a rude awakening.

I want to raise a few points that are pertinent to the area of transport. There is concern among many in the sector that the Government is overly reliant on the fact that a hard Brexit is too big to happen. One hopes that a deal will be done by the 11th hour. A hard Brexit will ensure that trade is governed by the WTO and it will ensure the introduction of tariffs, customs and the reintroduction of administrative supports. I compliment the ports which have carried out the necessary infrastructural improvements to cater for a hard Brexit. Earlier this summer, the Government confirmed that it approved the recruitment process.

Is the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine prepared to carry out all inspections on live animals, foods and plants? I expect a reply to that question. How many posts have been filled as of today? How many posts have been advertised and when will they be filled?

Aviation is a critical sector for a small island nation. We currently have market access through the open skies policy. Earlier this year, Taskforce 50 of the European Commission announced a bare-bones contingency plan for fallout from the open skies policy. Has any flesh been put on the bare-bones contingency plans to avoid flight disruptions post March 2019? What is the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, doing to ensure the third and fourth freedoms codified by the International Civil Aviation Organisation, ICAO, will be invoked to ensure that, post March 2019, travel between the EU 27 and the UK will be maintained?

Safety regulation is sometimes not acknowledged or spoken about, but parts from many Irish aircraft currently come from the UK and they will not be valid if there is a hard Brexit. We need to ensure that there is mutual recognition between our safety standards. If there is not, the parts that keep our aircraft in the skies until the end of March 2019 will not be recognised after that. What work is being done to ensure that there is mutual recognition of safety standards?

I will make a few points about the agrifood sector. Agriculture is under economic pressure and primary producers are finding it extremely hard to survive. A hard Brexit scenario sends a shiver up the spine. The predictions are that by 2030 if Britain chooses to join the European Economic Area after Brexit, Ireland will lose 15% of its exports to the UK. That number increases to 31% if it falls back on WTO rules.

The beef sector will probably be the hardest-hit sector. Some 35% of our trade will be lost if WTO rules apply. It is impossible to imagine that scenario. If WTO rules apply to the dairy sector, Ireland will lose 40% of its trade.

The UK is obviously our nearest customer and we are greatly dependent on it. Think of our processing industry under a hard Brexit. Consider the level of cross-Border trade. Each week 1,500 milk lorries cross the Border to be processed here. There is talk of different food standards operating in Northern Ireland compared with the Twenty-six Counties under a hard Brexit. We must consider the practicalities of how that will work and the economic hardship that they will bring. We have discussed Brexit for some time but the harsh reality of the economic damage is really coming home. It is hard to envisage how the family farm structure as we know it will survive under a hard Brexit.

I now call on Members from the Rural Independent Group. Deputy Michael Collins will share his time with Deputies Michael Healy-Rae and Danny Healy-Rae.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important topic this evening. Brexit will have many implications for Ireland, some of which we can predict and others we cannot. One thing that is sure is that there will be many challenges ahead for Ireland and it is vital that during the Brexit negotiations we steer through these waters with a clear vision of what Brexit will mean to Ireland.

We need to pay particular attention to the agricultural sector. Ireland is greatly dependent on it and exports almost 70% of its agricultural produce to Britain. It is vital that during the Brexit negotiations our agricultural produce being exported to Britain is protected. Britain is a very serious market for Irish agriculture, especially for dairy and beef produce. For export markets we need to maintain strong competitive transport links with the rest of the EU in order to secure Ireland's economic future. Some two thirds of Irish exporters use the UK landbridge to access Europe. Brexit will have a huge effect on Ireland's ability to use this route for exports. We need to look now at negotiating transports routes. Coming from west Cork, I know only too well how important our ports are to us and to the export economy. My own constituency has ports such as Bantry Bay, Castletownbere and Kinsale, and their futures need to be secured. I plead with this Government to support these ports through the uncertain times ahead with Brexit on the horizon.

The Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, needs to be protected post-Brexit. We need to look at this and put provisions in place. Our fishermen have suffered very difficult times in recent years. It is vital that we protect their livelihoods. There is serious danger of greater numbers of European boats fishing in Irish waters after Brexit. We need to protect our waters and our fishermen.

The cross-border directive is very important for the people of Ireland. To date, we have sent 14 buses from Cork and Kerry to Belfast with people who have availed of cataract procedures through the cross-border directive. These people could have waited for anything up to five years if they could not have availed of this directive. During the negotiations, we must ensure that our cross-border directive is protected with Northern Ireland and Britain. This also includes agreement for cancer patients travelling from Donegal to Derry and small children travelling from Northern Ireland to Dublin for operations. There are many agreements that must be protected for the future.

Upset constituents have approached me. They fear for their uncertain futures and those of Irish citizens living in the UK. One case is of an Irish citizen living in the UK who married in Ireland almost ten years ago. They lived in Ireland for a year afterwards with their spouse and they now live in the UK. Their spouse is a non-EU citizen who had lived in Ireland for two years prior to their marriage - as well as one year afterwards - but because they had not lived three years' reasonable residence out of the last five years, they will not be able to obtain an Irish passport. This family is frightened that they could be split up as a result of Brexit. This needs to be addressed urgently. No Irish citizen living in the UK should have to live with this fear. We must also ensure that there will be freedom of movement between ourselves and our neighbours.

Our negotiations must also deal with what will happen to Irish students studying in UK colleges. Clearly Brexit will have a huge effect on Ireland and we now need to step up to the challenges that lie ahead for our country and put in place the provisions that will deal with these challenges.

It is clear that this is a very delicate moment in the negotiations for the UK's withdrawal from the EU and we are right in the middle of it. It is no exaggeration to say that the two most important international relationships that Ireland has are with the EU and its members and with the United Kingdom. One is the primary partnership we have chosen for our future and the other is our closest neighbour that has picked a different future for itself.

Many British citizens have voted to leave the EU as they believe it will allow them to take better control of their futures. I am not going to comment on whether they are right or wrong but I will say that we in Ireland know that membership of international rule-based organisations is the best way to build international relationships and for countries to support each other. Maybe we know this to be true more quickly as a small country, that it is a big, complex and volatile world out there and I imagine it can be very cold on one's own. The support we have achieved from our European friends and partners in the negotiations has been unwavering.

The Border presents a paradox and serious challenge and solving it is still urgent. The issues being raised by the various solutions being proposed are core to many people's sense of identity. It looks as though emotions are heightened more than ever. It would be easy to get caught up in who is right or wrong and who said what but at this time we need to put all that aside and remain steadfast in our ambition to come to a good, fair agreement with the United Kingdom that mitigates as much as possible the inevitable damage that will come.

Sometimes it feels as though our fellow British parliamentarians do not fully understand the consequences of some of what they are suggesting for this island so it is important to keep talking and explaining. For example, Keir Starmer, MP, was in Dublin a couple of weeks ago, when he spoke to Members of these Houses and others. He appeared before the committee I chair and we had a very meaningful discussion, of which the Minister of State will be aware. I will not say that his speech today was based on those interactions, but it shows all of us why we must keep talking to one another.

As the competitors at last week's ploughing championships know, when one ploughs a field the most important thing to get right is the first furrow, and to get that straight. A ploughman tracks the wheels into the first furrow. If that first furrow is crooked, there is no fixing it. One could repeat the mistake for the whole field. To find a solution that works for the Border is the first furrow in the withdrawal agreement. I have always found the best thing to do is to pick a fence or tree at the end of the field and keep an eye on it all the way. Do not waver, do not look down or up, do not look left or right but keep going in a straight line.

We are in uncharted waters. On behalf of the joint committee, I remind the Minister of State that we fully support her in the work she has been doing. She has been very workpersonlike in appearing before the committee at all times. She has made herself available and I could not find any fault in how she is carrying out her role, and it is a difficult role at this time. I have said it on record before, and I would not say if it was otherwise, but it is no harm to recognise a person when they are committed to doing the best that they can do. We are all in this together. This debate tonight is important. We need to keep talking and keep the people on the other side of the water talking too, to try to make them understand the complications we face in dealing with the mess that they have made for us.

We are approaching the most crucial, critical time in the State's history in terms of how the people of Ireland will survive or manage if Brexit becomes a reality. I was the first person in this Chamber after the result of the referendum became known to ask the then Taoiseach and Tánaiste to plead with the UK to have another referendum. I am still asking for that and many people around the country hope that at the last minute, they will hold another referendum and that the result would be to remain.

For farmers, particularly in disadvantaged areas, Brexit becoming a reality will have a detrimental effect on so many. Some say that many will be wiped out and that farming as we know it in disadvantaged rural areas will be lost forever. Worry over Brexit has meant that the price of cattle has already fallen. The price of cattle is very bad.

Business people are worried about changes in the value of sterling. People with small industries who export to the North of Ireland and the United Kingdom are already losing money because of the cost of sterling.

We are worried that the cross-border directive, which we use frequently to bring patients to the North to get cataracts removed from their eyes and thereby prevent them from losing their sight, will cease or will not work for us anymore when Brexit becomes a reality. Many people would have gone blind by this stage if we had not been able to take them to the North on buses over the last 12 or 18 months. The ability to avail of this directive has saved the eyesight of hundreds of people. Many people are going to the North for hip operations and various other procedures. They could not afford to do that, or attempt it at all, if they were not getting their money back under the cross-border directive.

I wonder how the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste got it so wrong before Christmas last year when they said there was going to be no hard Brexit. It is so serious. Mrs. May does not appear to know what she is doing. She is saying one thing one day and saying another thing another day. We will lose many markets to England if Brexit becomes a reality. We are all hoping for another referendum and a different result.

I welcome the opportunity to share some of my reflections on what is happening during the Brexit negotiations, which are so critical for our country, our neighbours and our European Union. Like most of my colleagues in this House, I have spent two years looking at this inside out and upside down. We are no wiser about what will happen in the next six months than we were a year or two years ago. Who would have thought we would be living in a world in which we would hear a speech like that given by the US President today? I am in a state of flabbergast at some of the sentiments that were expressed in his speech. Similarly, who would have thought that the UK political system would be in such a fractured state? It is not just fractured. I was thinking today that if we end up with a simple choice between the Tories going for some kind of Canada-plus deal and the UK Labour Party going for some kind of Norway-plus deal, we could see what side will win. While that is the usual fracture in any political system, we need to look at the fracturing within both parties.

I understand that Prime Minister May today ruled out a Canadian-type trade deal arrangement on the basis that it would inevitably lead to the fracturing of their Union and the introduction of borders in the Irish Sea. It is hard to understand why she is adopting that as her firmest and most trenchant position, given that on 5 December 2017 her Government was willing to sign off on an initial deal which would have provided for exactly that, as previous speakers have said. One wonders whether some of the UK negotiating position is now informed by a desire to use the Irish issue as leverage to try to get some sort of favourable "have your cake and eat it" terms whereby the UK benefits from some of the same flexibilities that the EU has rightly said it will extend to Ireland and - equally rightly - has said it will not extend to the UK. That is only one path or possibility, but others can be followed. I understand the UK Treasury intends to present a paper on Friday of this week which will outline how the costs of certain options favoured by Brexiteers could lead to a fall of 5% or 10% in the gross domestic product, GDP, of the UK, which would be the equivalent of the crash we have just been through. We know what effect that would have on society and on the political system. It is hard to imagine that any political system would inflict such a shock on its own country and economy.

Similarly, one gets a sense that the UK Labour Party is getting accustomed to the idea that the UK might stay within the Single Market or try to stay within the customs union. When one drills down on that, one has to reflect on how those pursuing this option would answer the critics within the UK Labour Party and the Tory Party who would argue that it would involve the UK leaving the EU but becoming a rule-taker. How would they get that through their own party? If those within the UK Labour Party who are asking to be trusted on the basis that the key thing is to get into government do not have an answer to that question, we are left again in a state of uncertainty.

I think we are in a difficult position. I think Ireland and the EU have been taking the correct diplomatic approach, by and large. This is a time to be united and strong, as the Union has been, and to maintain adherence to the treaties and to our code of law, which is what Michel Barnier is doing in protecting the four freedoms. I know there are always circumstances in which those rules are seen to be moved, if the Union really has to move them. I think the Union has taken the correct approach, by and large, in this instance and the Government and the Dáil have followed suit. I would like to make one criticism, however. I think that in some of our tone and some of our diplomatic language and positioning, we are at risk of unnecessarily creating a division with our neighbours to the east and to the north which we may come to rue.

I will give an example of why I say that. I was at an interesting conference during the week. It dealt with our energy future and where we are going. Anyone who knows anything about our low-carbon energy future knows that we have to move to a huge extent towards the electrification of our transport and heating systems. The power grid is critical in that context. This is at the heart of the new industrial revolution, not just for the energy sector but also for aspects of the digital sector like data centres and other infrastructure. According to the best grid engineers at the conference in question, which was held in the middle of the week, we have to make sure we maintain an all-island approach. They pointed out that we are going to have to run a synchronised system with huge quantities of renewable power on it and argued that it will be incredibly expensive to do this as part of a Twenty-six-County approach. I know there are differing opinions on the issue of North-South interconnection. I strongly adhere to the need for such a connection because my analysis of where we will need to go on energy, which is the critical industrial revolution of our times, and on the digital services that come with it, is that we need to adopt an all-island approach. Regardless of the dealings that are eventually worked out, it would be a terrible failing for us to end up having to reintroduce the previous system on the island of Ireland. It would not be a border in the sense that it would not involve checkpoints. It would not be political in the sense that it would be on wires. If we do not end up with an all-island energy market and co-operative all-island arrangements with regard to energy, it will be one of the tragedies of this whole process. I am not just talking about the North because the scale of the energy transition we need, and the balancing capability we need, will also require an east-west connection with the UK and on into the rest of Europe.

That is my vision of some of the critical things in this context. They might be slightly policy-wonkish, but they actually matter. That is why I was critical of the Tánaiste when I heard him say on Saturday that he has not spoken to Arlene Foster in months. Regardless of what we think of her actions with regard to the renewable heating incentive and the failure to re-establish the Northern Ireland Assembly, it is in our interests to maintain relations with her. It is a concern that we are not talking to the DUP at this time, not just because there are practical issues to be discussed but also because regardless of what comes next, there will be a need to maintain personal relations in a way that reduces some of the concerns the DUP will have. It seems inevitable in my mind that we will go towards some sort of border in the Irish Sea. I know the Taoiseach said last week that we should not describe it as "a border in the Irish Sea", but the first premise I would come to is that we are not going to go along with borders between counties Monaghan and Tyrone, counties Cavan and Fermanagh or counties Donegal and Derry.

We are going to have to be careful in negotiations. Maybe some people in the United Kingdom might decide to be really clever by forcing the European Union to impose such a border, or force an Irish Government to impose it. We should hold to the Good Friday Agreement and say we have signed a globally recognised treaty and that we are not introducing a border come what may in this process, and that we may have to have border controls at some of our other ports but will not introduce a border along the Northern counties. If that is to be the case, then it is critical we maintain good relations.

I have a slight fear. Part of this is to do with the UK press and others presenting us in a certain way. I understand we are not in control of that. I believe, however, that we have to be careful in our relations with the UK political system and the Northern Ireland political parties such that, whatever else happens, we will be able to pick up the pieces after the incredibly tense, uncertain next six months and return to a normal working arrangement. I make this point as a former Minister responsible for energy who was able to sit down with Mrs. Arlene Foster and agree we would have the same energy target in the North and South, namely, 40% renewables. We were able to agree that the ESB would purchase the distribution network. We agreed to set up an all-island energy market and a common transmission system. That was all possible because the decision was to a certain extent taken out of the identity politics account and was presented in a beneficial, good-relations account. That is what we need to do. It will not be easy to do in the next while but we should start talking to the DUP and listening. The assembly should also be returned to do the same.

I will conclude by reiterating a couple of points and by trying to address the many points raised by many of the Deputies. Time is running short. We have all agreed on that and acknowledged it. The efforts in the negotiations will, however, be redoubled and intensified in the coming weeks. We need to see the successful completion of negotiations by the end of the period. The October deadline has not changed. The only way that there will be a November summit or an extraordinary meeting is if we have something to meet about. Therefore, if we meet again in October with nothing new on the table, there will be no point to meeting. Therefore, the October deadline is still in place for us and extremely important. To use Deputy Michael Healy-Rae's analogy of ploughing and focusing one's sight on a tree, we have been very clear since the very beginning of this process on what we are trying to do and the outcome: as part of the overall withdrawal agreement, we must include the protection of the Good Friday Agreement and avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland. We have not moved on this. Our EU partners, in supporting us as part of the European Union, have not moved on this.

I will address again the issue of having separate or secret negotiations. We believe it would be a strategic mistake to change in this regard. We are not having separate negotiations with the United Kingdom. That is the reason the European Union fully supports us and why we have had its support until now. Our priority for now is to conclude the withdrawal agreement. Again, this includes the protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland, which, of course, encompasses the backstop. It is imperative, however, that the United Kingdom in these final stages of negotiations engages with the issues that have been identified to achieve the progress by the October Council meeting. It has given these guarantees time and again, not just at Christmas but also in March, in the Chequers paper and at the meeting last week. The United Kingdom has provided these guarantees to avoid a hard border. It has given clear commitments on agreeing a backstop and has indicated it will bring forward its own proposals shortly. Of course, time is of the essence.

Michel Barnier's approach — to de-dramatise the protocol and focus on what is currently in place, what is moving north and south, what goods are moving and where they are coming from, including from east to west, and whether goods go through Ireland before getting to Northern Ireland — is an attempt to find a way forward because to date, the United Kingdom has not agreed with our proposed legal wording on the backstop. It has not agreed with Michel Barnier's approach. Therefore, it must bring forward its solutions. What we saw last week in Salzburg was not a hardening of Irish or EU positions but merely a restating of the position we have always had, that we must have a legally binding and operable backstop in place in the withdrawal agreement for us to move forward. The European Union clearly stated its position that we cannot interrupt or change the integrity of the Single Market or cherry-pick the four freedoms. Were there any view that Ireland had hardened its position against the United Kingdom, I would absolutely disagree because, for us, the United Kingdom will remain a key partner. We want the best possible outcome. We want the United Kingdom and the European Union, including Ireland, to have the best possible relationship moving forward. Our bilateral relationship with the United Kingdom is important. Brexit inevitably puts pressure on it but our Ministers, despite all this, meet regularly and try to discuss a number of areas of mutual interest. We have reached agreement on the common travel area. It will remain in place irrespective of the outcome. The British–Irish Intergovernmental Conference met in July. There are already discussions to determine how the Good Friday Agreement could be used in terms of bilateral relationships after the United Kingdom leaves the Union. This is a relationship that is very important to us. I do not believe anybody here would disagree with that.

Specific issues have been raised. Deputy Eamon Ryan mentioned the single energy market. As part of the European Union, we are working with the United Kingdom to try to ensure these issues are addressed. The issues include the landbridge through the United Kingdom, which is obviously extremely important in terms of the transit of goods between Ireland and the Continent.

Our contingency and preparedness planning has intensified and is well advanced. It will be more visible from now on. Deputy Lisa Chambers raised the issue of freedom of information. Negotiations are at a very difficult stage. Our contingency planning is continuing but we must not endanger it or have it interrupted. I take the Deputy's point on transparency. We encourage individuals and all sectors and industries to get involved in the Getting Ireland Brexit Ready campaign, which will build public awareness and outline the measures that are already in place. We have already approved a number of key Brexit preparedness measures, focusing on east–west trade, including the preparation of our ports and airports to take into account the changes. Deputy Troy asked when this will happen. This was agreed by the Cabinet only last week but these measures have been put in place and we will be hiring staff as quickly as possible.

A number of issues were raised by Deputies across the Chamber. For the past two years, all our Departments and individual Ministers have been asked to identify the various challenges they or industries or representative groups may face. They have been asked to identify possible measures, including legislation, regulation and new funding, that need to be put in place. Since the summer, they have been asked to put in place an action plan. All the issues raised today have been identified not only by the Departments but also by the Commission.

We do not know the full nature and extent of the change Brexit will bring. Obviously, this depends on the outcome of the negotiations. I assure Members that the Government will be ready to meet that challenge.

On Deputy Burton's question on Ireland and the Border, our plan in this regard is the Irish backstop. Negotiations have still not finished. The withdrawal agreement is 90% complete. The United Kingdom has said it will bring forward proposals. Therefore, we need to see those proposals. Ireland, as a member of the European Union, is ready to work with them, and we believe there is still time. I thank the Deputies again for their support in all this.

Barr
Roinn