Micheál Martin
Ceist:1. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if the Cabinet committee on arts, Irish and the Gaeltacht has been established and met. [28623/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraCabinet Committee Meetings
Ceisteanna (1, 2)
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:2. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet sub-committee on arts, heritage and Gaeltacht affairs last met. [30614/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (11 píosaí cainte)
I proposed to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together. The Cabinet committee on arts, Irish, the Gaeltacht and the islands was established on 8 June this year and its first meeting took place last week, on 13 October.
The Taoiseach stated that the arts committee was established on 8 June.
Yes.
Its first meeting was on 30 October.
It was 13 October. An triú lá déag.
I had thought he said 30 October. We are not there yet, how could that be?
I am not that bad.
That is the early influenza. Need I say more?
This is an appalling indictment of the Government's commitment to arts policy that its first meeting was this week and it has not met since June. There are enormous issues to be covered by the arts committee. We had an earlier debate about the sense of marginalisation of the arts community in the reconstruction and reconfiguration of the Department dealing with arts, rural and Gaeltacht affairs. It was not the centrepiece of that and there is a sense that the arts is not central to Government policy in any shape or form. The artistic community felt marginalised. The idea that the Cabinet committee has only met once in that period - and that was in the past week - is a shocking indictment of the Government's commitment to the arts, the Irish language and the Gaeltacht. That is probably reflective of the fact that at the Cabinet table we do not have a strong philosophy or focus on the arts in general.
In addition, it is arguable that if the committee had met earlier, it might have had a better influence on the budgetary position of the arts. I know the Department had significant expenditure in the subhead resulting from the investment in 2016 and the commemoration of the 1916 Rising, and this represented a major opportunity for the Department and the Government to maintain that base of funding and apply much of it to the artistic organisations across the country and artistic endeavour generally. There has been a 16% reduction in the Department's allocation. The Arts Council got some additional funding this year but we felt it should have got more.
We think that multi-annual funding for some of the key arts organisations is essential.
The Taoiseach will also know that Culture 2025 in its existing draft form is currently being revised by the Oireachtas committee. An explanation is required in terms of the purpose and the modalities of an implementation body relating to cultural policy, something that has yet to be finalised. Furthermore, in terms of Culture Ireland and the legacy programme coming out of 2016, will the Taoiseach indicate whether the Cabinet committee has confirmed separate mechanisms for arts funding in terms of legacy funding? Will that conclude in 2017 or what is the intention of Government in that regard? Did the Cabinet committee give any consideration to maintaining the existing expenditure base in the Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs for the arts in particular? This is the funding that would have gone to a lot of the events pertaining to the 1916 Commemoration. Did the committee look at the idea of using that money for funding the arts and for the various arts organisations, including the Arts Council, the Heritage Council, the Film Board and Culture Ireland, to give them a substantial allocation which would have maintained the same base of expenditure in the Department but with the moneys going to the arts world and the arts community?
Will the Taoiseach explain why the committee has only met once since 8 June and then only last week? Why did it not meet from the time of its establishment on 8 June until 13 October?
On a similar theme, it is quite extraordinary that the committee dealing with the arts should only have met after the budget. That says it all in terms of the commitment of the Government to the arts, in that there was no discussion whatsoever prior to the budget about properly resourcing and funding the arts. This was after we had a major discussion in this House in which Members on all sides pledged their verbal and rhetorical commitment to the arts. When it came to allocating money that would make a difference, however, and turning words into reality, the committee did not even meet until after the event. Is it any wonder that we had the pretty shocking decision of the Government to cut the arts, culture and film budget by 16% and to cut the Irish language budget by 9%? We had a €30 million cut in the case of arts, film and culture and €5 million in the case of the Irish language.
I have heard the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs since saying that there was an extra €50 million provided for the Centenary which was a once-off allocation, thus justifying the 16% cut. Surely the Taoiseach knew and if the Cabinet committee had met it would have acknowledged the fact the National Campaign for the Arts had very specifically asked in its pre-budget submission that the entire €50 million that had been allocated to the arts for the Centenary would be retained. That was a very modest ask because, as the Taoiseach knows - I do not know why he finds this particularly amusing - the debate in this House and the argument put forward by the National Campaign for the Arts was that we should move from the miserable 0.1% of GDP that is spent on the arts in this country in the direction, at least, of 0.6% which is the average spend on the arts in Europe. There was no move at all, despite all the rhetorical commitments. There was no actual move. Members of the Government are happy to jump in front of the cameras when there is a photo opportunity for the Centenary or some other arts event but when it comes to listening to the artists and giving resources, there is no meeting and an actual cut in the budget. I do not see how the Taoiseach can possibly justify this. The National Campaign for the Arts is asking the Government to reconsider and I ask the same. Will the Taoiseach reconsider? Will this committee meet and take seriously arts, culture and heritage which is one of the greatest assets of this country but which has been treated as a very poor second cousin when it comes to the allocation of resources?
I, too, would ask the Taoiseach to reconsider the disgraceful decision to cut €30 million from the programme for arts, culture and film. We should not be surprised that the Cabinet sub-committee has only met once. That reflects the Government's historical attitude to the areas of arts, heritage, the Irish language, Gaeltacht affairs and so on. The capital would have been a good investment in our museums, libraries, galleries and institutions, our artists could have been offered security of tenure in urban centres, we could have helped the growth in animation and the Irish film industry and also, particularly, the Irish language.
For all of the jumping up and down by Fianna Fáil, it supported and endorsed this budget. With their budgetary choices, especially in relation to the language, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have rejected the investment plan put forward by 80 Irish language and Gaeltacht groups which could have created 1,175 jobs and which would have enhanced the used of the language and improved access for Irish speakers. I appeal to the Taoiseach to reconsider the Government decision in this matter and to treat the arts, our language and culture with the respect and the investment they deserve. This also makes very good economic sense. There will be a return, not just in terms of art for the sake of art but also in terms of jobs and meaningful employment for the people involved.
I go to a lot of meetings. If I had attended six or eight meetings of this committee, people might wonder what I was at as well. The committee met just once. We discussed the téarmaí tagartha of the coiste. We discussed the beartais oideachais Gaeltachta 2017-2022. We discussed Bille na dteangacha oifigiúla and we discussed Culture 2025 - Éire Ildánach. I imagine I am not supposed to say those things, but that was the work of the committee. We set out the terms of reference which were to support the advancement of action in the arts, culture and heritage sectors in line with the vision and priorities that are set out in the framework policy Culture 2025 - Éire Ildánach to support the implementation of the 20 year strategy for the Irish language, particularly in the context of facilitating the delivery of the objectives that require cross-departmental action; and to maintain oversight of policy areas such as education and broadcasting that have the potential to impact significantly on the arts and Irish language sectors.
Obviously a specific €50 million was made available last year for very important work this year involving the improvement of infrastructural facilities in Dublin at the GPO, on Moore Street, Kilmainham Courthouse, Cathal Brugha Barracks, the restoration of tenement buildings, Richmond Hospital and so on. These are lasting legacies that will stand the test of time over the next 50 or 100 years, in their own right.
It was also very evident that the relatively small amount of money that was given to local authorities resulted in an enormous explosion of interest throughout the country, where communities showed real leadership in artistic endeavour and creative work in so many ways. For that reason, the Government has allocated a further €5 million this year for that sort of development through Creative Ireland which will continue throughout the next five years.
That is in addition to the extra moneys being given to the Arts Council and a number of other facilities, including the Film Board and the cultural institutions, to assist in the delivery of Éire Ildánach. The full-scale programme that has been worked out in this area under five pillars will enable the unlocking of the creative potential of every child in every school and community in the country. We are enabling creativity in every community by investing in our creative infrastructure. This will, for example, make Ireland a centre of excellence in media production. As a consequence, we will be able to unify our global reputation. This is being done for a very good reason. We want to harness the enormous range and capacity of the artistic and cultural creativity that exists in our communities. The Minister will bring a memorandum to the Government shortly to spell out the details of this approach. We are recognising the way communities responded in a leadership fashion to the 1916 centenary commemorative events that were conducted this year.
The policy on Gaeltacht education is another important issue that was discussed at the committee. There has been a great deal of consultation on and analysis of the policy, which has been developed over some time in the Department of Education and Skills. If we are to be serious about this, we need to do something serious about it. Clearly, the situation that applies with regard to the language in Gaeltacht schools varies widely from place to place. There is a whole new process to be put in place here. Schools will be able to register as being recognised as Gaeltacht schools with features including involvement in all subjects through Irish and immersion in the language. The facilities that will be provided as a consequence will demonstrate that the State is serious about the teaching of the language. We need to discuss this issue here and in a broader context around the country. There are many schools in Gaeltacht areas where there has been a decline in the language because of the population change or whatever else. At the same time, there is great flúirseacht in Gaelscoileanna in cities and urban areas where the language is being spoken in great quantities. We need to deal with that. I have mentioned some of the matters that were discussed by the committee.
Cabinet Committee Meetings
Ceisteanna (3, 4, 5)
Gerry Adams
Ceist:3. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on health last met. [28719/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraGerry Adams
Ceist:4. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on health last met. [30553/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraRichard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:5. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet sub-committee on health last met. [30616/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (29 píosaí cainte)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 5, inclusive, together.
The Cabinet committee on health last met on 22 September 2016.
I know the Taoiseach is limited in what he can say on these matters. I wonder what consideration has been given to the crisis in health and the ongoing issues in that regard. Approximately €14.7 billion in real terms is being put into health. This clearly cannot sustain the hospitals or the clinics.
I would like to look at the issue of mental health, in particular. It has been the Cinderella of the health services for a long time. Will it suffer again when we are told at the end of the year that the health budget has been spent? What will happen if the EU says the Government cannot bail it out? Will mental health services be targeted again? I know the Taoiseach cannot talk about the detail of what is discussed at the Cabinet committee, but I suggest that this issue be brought to the committee for its consideration.
Last week, I visited the Ladywell mental health centre in Dundalk, which provides services for much of north Louth. The staff are very dedicated, as we would expect, but the conditions in which they are forced to treat patients are absolutely unsuitable. The building is over 70 years old and is inappropriate for staff and patients. Additional members of staff were allocated to the centre some time ago, which was very welcome, but there were no facilities in Ladywell to accommodate them. Instead, they are working out of St. Brigid's Hospital in Ardee. Patients have to travel from as far away as Carlingford for appointments there.
Is the need for strategic investment in the development and enhancement of mental health services the type of issue the Cabinet committee looks at? The Government loudly announced its decision to set up 14 new primary care centres, and the European Investment Bank cleared a loan of €70 million to that end, but none of the centres are in the north-east region. If one omits the Dublin region, including the constituency of the former Minister for Health, there will be no centres at all in the north east. I would like to know why this is the case. Do citizens and mental health staff in the region not have an entitlement to first-class modern mental health services?
I will conclude by mentioning that there are 444 hospital patients on hospital trolleys today. That is a huge number. Despite the significant efforts of the staff at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda, the hospital has one of the highest numbers of patients on trolleys. This is the responsibility of the Government. How does the Government expect to cope or deal with such problems if it is not budgeting properly in the health sector? The persistent under-resourcing of primary and community care, which results from Government failures, means that more and more people who do not need to end up in hospital are ending up in hospital. Will the Taoiseach give the House a commitment that the need to tackle primary and community health care, and particularly the issue of mental health facilities, will be raised at the next meeting of the Cabinet committee on health?
Of course the Cabinet committee on health can deal with a particular issue. Deputy Martin asked a question earlier on about the allocation of money to the mental health area. I support his specific suggestion that there should be a subhead dealing with how it is proposed to spend this money and the effectiveness of such expenditure. We have had ring-fenced allocations for mental health for some years, but I do not think it has ever been possible to spend the amount that was allocated. When money is in the budget, there is a need to identify and monitor the outcome and the output of the spend. I am answering the Deputy's question by confirming that the issues he raised are relevant to the general work of the Cabinet committee on health. We can talk about these particular areas at our meetings.
An increase of nearly €500 million was announced in the Estimates for 2017. This will bring the total spend to €14.6 billion. The Minister for Health has pointed out that this is the largest allocation ever made to the health area, taking into account that various Departments were associated with health and children over the years. An additional €1 billion is being provided for health spending compared to the budget for 2016. This represents an increase of 7.4%. Investment priorities include the development of the national children's hospital and the national plan for radiation oncology. The new national forensic mental health service facility is being built in Portrane. The Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, is responsible for this project. An additional €3 million is being provided to support drugs and social inclusion measures. Some €5 million is being provided for the establishment of the Healthy Ireland fund. This fund, for which the Minister of State, Deputy Corcoran Kennedy, is responsible, is important for the well-being and outlook of our people. It will lead to enormous savings over a five-year or ten-year period. The €35 million that is being provided for new mental health services in 2017 is in addition to the €35 million that was provided in 2016.
In the absence of the Minister for Health, who is now present, we were talking about a specific subhead to identify the spend and output. That is an issue of which most people would be supportive. This will enable improvements and better outcomes for the mental health services across a number of age groups and specialties and it will assist the continuing development of an integrated approach to youth mental health and suicide reduction initiatives. As Deputy Adams knows, these are particularly tragic and common, unfortunately. This is the reason the money was put in by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform following discussions with the Minister for Health and this is why we have a specific Minister of State post to deal with the mental health area.
I hope those responsible get the message out. It is important to talk to young people in colleges and secondary schools and to get the message out that those who have difficulties from time to time should not be afraid to talk, ask or tell people about it. There has never been more help available. Yet people, given the world we live in, have never felt more lonely, isolated or vulnerable. It is a case of facing up to a tragic phenomenon and encouraging all young people to work with those in their age groups and to highlight that if something is wrong, help is available. That is why there is a specific allocation in the health budget for mental health. That is why there is a specifically appointed Minister of State to work with all of the organisations, including voluntary and NGO organisations as well as statutory agencies to deal with this in the best way possible. If only one life is saved as a result, is that not a benefit?
I always try to say to students in secondary schools in particular that if one in four is to be affected by mental health challenges at some stage during their lives, then it is only right and proper that the State should put facilities in place to encourage these young people and let them know and understand that they can use these facilities and opportunities without fear, anxiety or concern. That is what they are there for. Moreover, just as people get physically sick, so too can they have mental challenges. Young people should understand that. There is nothing new in this. However, it should be understood that we want to help them in so many ways and there are so people who can do that. It is a case of not being afraid to say it, tell it or ask for it. In that sense we are keen to continue to work with them at all times.
There are some supplementary questions.
My question is not a supplementary question.
It is a question. Do you want to ask a question?
It is not a supplementary question. It is a question.
It is a question - my apologies.
I am keen for some clarity on the health budget and the allocations. Can the Taoiseach repeat the date the sub-committee last met? Did he say it was 23 September?
No.
What was the date for the meeting of the sub-committee?
It was 22 September.
Excellent, that is clarity, at least, although I doubt if I will get clarity in response to the rest of my question.
Today the Taoiseach repeated something the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform said on the day of the budget. It was the assertion that this budget includes the biggest health allocation in the history of the State. That was challenged within minutes of the claim being made during the budget by Susan Mitchell, a journalist with the Sunday Business Post. She also stripped out - I heard the Taoiseach make reference to this - the reduction in the budget that would have resulted from taking out the allocation for the Department of Children and Youth Affairs. She pointed out that the total and absolute budget was bigger in 2008 than it was this year. It is important that we have clarity on who is correct and to have clear figures, comparisons and explanations that stand up in respect of what was taken out of the Department of Health. There was considerable messing around with figures last year on the health budget. I put it to the Taoiseach that we need clarity on this. We deserve that and the public deserves clarity on the health budget. We should also have the honest admission - again this has been asserted by many - that the allocation, if it is an increase, is almost certainly not an increase in real terms when we strip out Lansdowne Road arrangements, the inclusion of the €500 million cost over-run from last year as well as the demographic pressures that would have required extra budget resources in any event. The question is about what service delivery is going to be like. In other words, do we now have additional resources that will lead to additional and improved quality of services? The doctors came out today and criticised the €15 million to deal with the crisis in accident and emergency departments. One group called the allocation pathetic and said it would not deal with the crisis at all.
I would like clarity on mental health. I have just heard a reference to €35 million which the Taoiseach said has been allocated. However, in the Budget Statement reference to additional funding for health, there is no reference to mental health whatsoever. Instead, there is reference to the level of mental health services being delivered within the available funding. Is it the same? That is what I want to know. Have we given additional funding to mental health? The commitment of the Government and of the House is to the full implementation of A Vision for Change to deal with the fact that our mental health teams are at 48% of the staffing levels they should have and that we need 24/7 emergency mental health services.
My next question is on home care packages. I have asked this question several times, including during the budget debate and in respect of specific people. There was crowing about the fact that there will be 950 extra home care packages, but this is still 6,000 home care packages south or less than it was before the cuts started in 2008. I want a simple answer from the Minister for Health, who is sitting near the Taoiseach. It relates to the cases that I have on my desk - I suspect others have them as well - involving people whose need for home care packages is acknowledged. Are they going to continue to be told that the budget is not there? That is what I want to know.
Deputy, if you want an answer you will have to give way. I am trying to be helpful. If you want a response, the Taoiseach has 30 seconds.
I have 30 seconds. Is that correct?
You have 30 seconds.
God almighty.
Time is expired.
The first thing I will say is that Deputy Boyd Barrett should wait until these questions are finished because the Minister for Health is in the House to answer questions presently. He will provide Deputy Boyd Barrett with the detail of all these things, including a detailed statement on the website of the Department of Health which deals specifically with the question from Deputy Boyd Barrett.
Unfortunately, I do not have speaking time during Priority Questions.
Once all the appropriate adjustments are made on a like-for-like comparison, for 2017 the allocation is €14.607 billion.
It was €15 billion in 2008.
That is €566 million greater than the 2008 allocation, which was the previous highest year. If Deputy Boyd Barrett checks that, he will find out it is the case.
I have checked it.
I want to move on because time is expired.
I could give Deputy Boyd Barrett more details if he wishes.
You will have to do it in another way.
What about my question on mental health?
You will have to find another way, Taoiseach.
Brexit Issues
Ceisteanna (6, 7, 8, 9)
Joan Burton
Ceist:6. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach if he has spoken to or conversed with the British Prime Minister or other members of the United Kingdom Government since the announcement by the British Prime Minister of the timescale for Brexit and the commitment by the UK Government to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to withdraw from the European Union by the end of March 2017. [29299/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraJoan Burton
Ceist:7. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach if he has had discussions with the Northern Ireland First Minister and deputy First Minister, the Scottish First Minister and Welsh First Minister concerning the announcement by the UK Prime Minister Teresa May of a timetable for Brexit and the commitment by the UK Government to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to withdraw from the European Union by the end of March 2017. [29300/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraMicheál Martin
Ceist:8. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the way he and his Government plan to make Northern Ireland a special case in the context of Brexit; if he has discussed or written to Prime Minister May in relation to the plan; and if discussions have taken place with the Secretary of State in Northern Ireland. [30528/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraMicheál Martin
Ceist:9. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the detail of any formal contacts he has had with the First Minister of Northern Ireland, Ms Arlene Foster, regarding the Government's proposed all-island civic forum on Brexit. [30751/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (15 píosaí cainte)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 9, inclusive, together.
I noted the comments of the UK Prime Minister, Ms May, on Article 50 on 2 November and I welcomed her clarification on the timing of Article 50.
Since then, the Government has reviewed action to date and has intensified its preparations. There is ongoing close political and official engagement, including with the British Government, Northern Ireland and the EU member states and institutions as well as through broadening dialogue with civic society. The week following Prime Minister May's announcement, the annual summit of Secretaries General with UK Permanent Secretaries took place in London.
This well established forum served as a valuable vehicle for discussion and exploration of Brexit implications, impacts and options, in addition to providing for consideration of the broad areas of co-operation under the joint work programme.
The Government also continues to work closely with the Northern Ireland Executive and the First and deputy First Minister through the North-South Ministerial Council. At the plenary meeting of the council in July, a set of ten specific actions was agreed to optimise North-South joint planning for Brexit, including a full audit of key North-South work programmes. I will meet with First Minister Arlene Foster and deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness at the November meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council when we will progress these actions. I will meet with Prime Minister May later this week in Brussels, at what will be her first European Council meeting. She is expected to provide an update on the timing of the UK’s triggering of Article 50 at that meeting. I understand that Scottish First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, is planning to visit Dublin soon and I hope to meet with her when that visit takes place. I will also meet with the Scottish First Minister and the Welsh First Minister again at the British-Irish Council meeting next month where we will continue our work on the implications of Brexit for all member administrations.
The invitations to the all island civic dialogue on 2 November are being issued today. This event will give a voice to the many organisations and individuals across the island of Ireland who are outside the political establishment and who wish to be heard on Brexit. To ensure the widest representation possible, invitations will be extended to a broad range of civic society groups, trade unions, business groups and non-governmental organisations. In addition to this, representatives from political parties on the island will be invited to attend, including the Democratic Unionist Party, DUP. It will primarily be a listening exercise to hear the voices of those who will be most affected by Brexit. Views expressed will be used to help inform the Government position on issues arising from the UK decision to leave the EU and the overall negotiation process. The Government will seek to ensure that future EU-UK and Ireland-UK negotiations give priority attention to the Northern Ireland dimension, including issues relating to the Border and EU funding. It is vital that the benefits of the peace process are safeguarded and built upon for future generations, in whatever arrangements are negotiated.
The continued stability of Northern Ireland remains a priority for this Government. It has been raised in bilateral discussions with Secretary of State Brokenshire at the British-Irish Association and, indeed, with our counterparts in other EU member states by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Flanagan, and the Minister of State at that Department, Deputy Dara Murphy, and myself. The importance of protecting the peace process, and of Europe’s contribution to peace in Ireland, resonates strongly with those with whom we have spoken. We will continue to work through the North-South planning for Brexit through the work of the North-South Ministerial Council as I have outlined, and will continue to work with the UK Government and the Northern Ireland Executive as co-guarantors of the peace process. The civic society discussion which will take place on 2 November is one of a series that will take place in the ensuing months. It is not a one off, one day affair.
It is not in Standing Orders but in view of the fact that there are eight and a half minutes left in this slot, is it acceptable to the Taoiseach that he answer further questions? Is that acceptable to both Deputies? Agreed.
Does the Taoiseach agree that Brexit is the biggest challenge to face Ireland since the collapse of the banks and the collapse of employment in the country? If he agrees, does he also see that we need to intensify and deepen our preparations? Some weeks ago the Taoiseach, here in the Dáil Chamber, told me with some excitement in his voice that a senior member would be appointed to the cabinet of Michel Barnier, one of the key negotiators dealing with Brexit. I have been quite surprised not to have seen any mention of who is the senior appointee. I presume the person will be one of several people at cabinet level in the Commission, a former senior official of the Commission or a senior diplomat. Does the Taoiseach appreciate that, notwithstanding that all of the senior people in Brussels understand that Ireland is very much an independent and separate country, nonetheless, psychologically and culturally, they see us as being tied into the UK? In fact, many of them have difficulty understanding exactly how complex and difficult the Brexit situation is for us with the multiple dimensions of its impact on the Republic, particularly the issue of sterling. I read in the newspaper yesterday about somebody having a wedding in Donegal and already the cost of the wedding has risen from €20,000 to €23,000 owing to the fall in sterling.
In respect of Northern Ireland and the civic forum, has the Government determined that it will argue for the North to be a special case? We hear a lot of conversation about the North but we are not seeing any roadmap of how the Government proposes to deal with the North, particularly in the context of Mrs. May advocating on some days a hard Brexit and on other days, in respect of passporting financial services, indicating that she is open to a soft Brexit for the City of London as a region. These are critical issues on which we need to hear the Government’s view. Where is this member of Mr. Barnier’s team and who is that person? Mr. Verhofstadt has a very senior position as well. Are we going to have a senior Irish person? While I know this is fraught with difficulties, there should also be a senior person from the North of Ireland and from Scotland but that is the matter for the Scottish executive. In terms of the island of Ireland, we need the maximum input in order to allay the greatest threat to the Irish economy since the collapse of the banks and of the construction industry in 2007 and 2008.
I concur with the Deputy that this is without question the most significant challenge to face the country in many a day because the impact will not be transient but long term. I hear from the Taoiseach’s reply that there is a close relationship with the British Government but I have to question to what degree there is close engagement between the two Governments because of what is emanating from the British Prime Minister.
I welcome the civic forum. I suggested it at our meetings and think it is a very good idea to listen to civic dialogue on an all island basis. Nonetheless, Prime Minister May’s decision to exclude Northern Ireland from permanent membership of the cabinet group overseeing Brexit should cause real concern and raise immediate warning signals. The group has 12 permanent members, including the Tory party chairman, but the Northern Ireland Secretary of State is simply to be called in from time to time. It is clearly more important for the Tories to manage their internal affairs than to follow up on the commitment to give top priority to the huge impact of Brexit on the island of Ireland.
What specific steps have been taken to follow up on the promise of close co-operation with us in the Brexit negotiations? As we speak, the cabinet sub-committee is considering the idea of work permits for non-British citizens. That raises the prospect that anyone going from Ireland to Britain to work in the foreseeable future will have to go through a work permit regime. Scotland is looking for a halfway house between membership of the European Union and of the UK. That may very well trigger a Scottish independence referendum if the choice is a hard Brexit versus a soft one. That is a very real concern. It is also being suggested that Britain may try to have a deal with Europe on a sectoral or geographic region basis. The Mayor of London has been very clear about asking whether it is possible for London to have a separate arrangement with the European Union.
Much of that is fantasy. What is of major concern is the statements made by Ministers and the Prime Minister at the Tory party conference because that all speaks to a hard Brexit and a World Trade Organization, WTO, type trade deal, which would mean tariffs on Irish beef and many other products going into Britain, and would be the worst possible scenario that could unfold.
I put it to the Taoiseach that all the language we are hearing is of the wishful kind such as "We all want a soft Brexit" or "We do not want any hard borders between the North and the Republic". Obviously, we do not want the latter but saying it is not enough. We are saying that things will work out on the night but, increasingly, we are getting the wrong story in the sense of what is coming out of Britain. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is now being cornered and identified by the Brexiteers as someone who is asking too many awkward questions, that he is not pro-Brexit, etc.
We need to up our game in terms of our relationship with the British Government and I put it to the Taoiseach that he needs to seek a formal summit meeting with the British Prime Minister to lay on the line our perspective on it and to try to ascertain the real story in terms of the island of Ireland and Brexit, and what the British Government intends to do in terms of the European Union.
The Taoiseach has 30 seconds, and 30 seconds only.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle gives me these impossible tasks.
It is Standing Orders.
How am I to respond to the Brexit argument in 30 seconds? There is no question that this issue, and not just the banking collapse, is one of the major political questions of the past 50 years-----
The economic war in the 1930s.
-----and it has implications not just for Ireland but globally. Mr. Barnier was appointed on 1 October. He has not appointed his team yet. I met him here last week. I have known him for quite a number of years from the political parties we represent and from his service both as a Commissioner and as French Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries. He was very helpful to Ireland. He has agreed to work very closely with us. I will chair these meetings in the sense of being able to call in any of our Ministers at Cabinet level, Ministers of State or whomever to give that the status it deserves. I made the point to Mr. Barnier that Ireland needs a representative on his task force. My understanding from the Commission is that these will not all be high-level people. Mr. Barnier will conduct the proceedings himself in the main way and will report directly to the European Council. Deputy Burton should know that he made the point that he will not do anything unless it has the full support of the European Council because that is where the political imprimatur lies. That was on my suggestion at the European Council. The Heads of Government will make the political decisions here.
I am sorry. The time has been exceeded but the questions coming up are important.
Ah, go on. Gabh mo leithscéal. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle might give me another 30 seconds. With regard to the North-South civic forum-----
I am too generous.
-----we need clarity, as Deputies Martin, Adams and Burton pointed out. Secretary of State Davis, Secretary of State Fox and Secretary of State Johnson have made different comments and have had to be slapped down, reined in or had their remarks commented upon in respect of what the Prime Minister has said. We know that politics are politics, and the Conservative Party had to hear the Prime Minister make her case, but we need clarity as to what we want, which is why I said to Deputy Adams earlier that we will not have any particular circumstances made available to Northern Ireland unless we know our objective. If that objective is moving from day to day, either from a Northern Ireland or a British point of view, we may get further clarification on Thursday in Brussels-----
(Interruptions).
-----and I hope we do.
Finally, in respect of Deputy Martin's question, it is true that we have had comments about hard borders, soft borders and sector areas to be cherry-picked out of Brussels. These are all moving targets and until such time as the British Government has drilled down through all the arguments and made its case as to what it is seeking, it is very difficult for us to negotiate with certainty on what we want in terms of our citizens, our economy, our relations with Northern Ireland, no return to a hard border, and the protection of the common travel area. On the last two points, the Prime Minister was clear. We do not want and will not tolerate a return to a hard border and we do not want any diminution of the common travel area, which has been in place since 1922.