The second group of questions ranges from Nos. 6 to 15.
Wednesday, 22 March 2017
Ceisteanna (6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
Freagraí ó Béal (36 píosaí cainte)
On a point of order, it makes no sense to have 15-minute slots for nine questions and 15-minute slots for two questions.
Revert to the Business Committee.
We do not group the questions, I am afraid.
Who does?
Let us go, please.
We know well who groups them.
I would not mind taking the questions individually, if that is what the Deputies want,-----
Keep going, Taoiseach.
-----but there will be overlaps on all fronts.
No. Groups just need adequate time.
We are wasting time.
I will have to try to read this in three minutes flat.
Off you go.
Micheál Martin
Ceist:6. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his trip to the USA to commemorate St. Patrick's Day 2017; the bilaterals that were held; the issues that were discussed directly with President Trump; and if the Irish undocumented were discussed. [13176/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraBrendan Howlin
Ceist:7. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with President Trump and his other engagements during his visit to the United States of America for St. Patrick’s Day. [13186/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraJoan Burton
Ceist:8. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with President Trump in Washington. [13423/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Gerry Adams
Ceist:9. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent visit to the United States of America. [13681/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Brendan Smith
Ceist:10. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach the outcome of his discussions with President Trump and with members of the US House of Representatives and Senate in relation to immigration reform. [13876/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraBrendan Smith
Ceist:11. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach if he had discussions with Irish representative organisations in relation to immigration reform during his recent visit to the US. [13877/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Mick Barry
Ceist:12. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Taoiseach if he will report on is recent visit to the Unites States of America and meetings with President Donald Trump and members of his Administration. [13921/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Eamon Ryan
Ceist:13. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his trip to the United States of America as part of his St Patrick's Day visit. [13924/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraBrendan Smith
Ceist:14. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach if discussions arose in his recent meetings in the United States in relation to the implications for the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement following Brexit. [14183/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraBrendan Smith
Ceist:15. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach if discussions arose in his recent meetings in the United States in relation to the implications of Brexit for all of the island. [14184/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 15, inclusive, together.
As the House is aware, I travelled to the United States last week for the annual St. Patrick's Day visit. My visit from 11 to 17 March encompassed four cities: Philadelphia, Boston, Washington and New York. Unfortunately, due to very adverse weather conditions, my programme in Boston was curtailed and a scheduled visit to Rhode Island had to be cancelled. Nevertheless, my programme for the visit included over 30 different engagements, including bilateral meetings, formal speaking events, and media and civic engagements.
I had an extensive set of meetings and engagements with political, business and civil society representatives. My main focus was on advancing Ireland's economic and political interests in the US, including continuing to make the case for US immigration reform, highlighting the importance of the European Union and Ireland's commitment to membership, our priorities in the context of Brexit and promoting Ireland as a location for jobs, trade, tourism and investment.
In Philadelphia, I attended the 247th St. Patrick's Day parade before meeting the board of the Irish immigration centre. At an event at the Irish Famine memorial, I announced the Government's decision to hold a referendum on the matter of Irish citizens residing outside the State voting in Irish presidential elections from 2025. In Boston, I had meetings with Mayor Walsh and Governor Baker. I participated in a number of engagements arranged by IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland with existing and potential client companies.
My political engagements in Washington DC included bilateral talks with President Trump in the Oval Office. Issues discussed included bilateral economic relations, the importance of free trade, immigration reform, the implications of Brexit and the future of the EU as well as Northern Ireland and the peace process. I highlighted the plight of the up to 50,000 undocumented Irish and the importance to us of finding a solution to regularise their situation. These issues were also discussed during my meetings with Vice President Pence, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr. Paul Ryan, Senate minority leader Mr. Chuck Schumer, Senator Patrick Leahy, the congressional Friends of Ireland group and General John Kelly of the Department of Homeland Security. I also presented President Trump with the traditional gift of a bowl of shamrock at the White House St. Patrick's Day reception.
In Washington, I attended and spoke at the American Ireland Fund dinner and the enterprise agencies economic promotion lunch, at which I launched the creative.ireland.ie portal. I also presented two SFI science medals at a Science Foundation Ireland event. While in New York, as well as attending the 255th St. Patrick’s Day parade, I attended a number of business engagements, including Ireland Day, a major event to promote Ireland at Bloomberg, as well as participating at the greening of the One World Trade Centre.
Overall, this visit to the US was extremely important. It presented a valuable opportunity to highlight Ireland’s key policy priorities and interests with the new US Administration, including on immigration, as well as to promote Ireland as a location for trade, tourism and investment. I believe I succeeded in achieving these objectives during my visit.
I thank the Taoiseach. In recent months, there has been a sense of some Deputies being almost relieved that Donald Trump is the US President because it allows them to revert to their default position of attacking the US for everything while ignoring the behaviour of other countries. Before November, I was clear about where I stood. We must manage the situation as it is.
Ireland's connection and relationship with the US is a broad, historic and deep one that does not depend on one President or electoral cycle. We do not choose other people's leaders. We must protect, enhance and nurture long-term relationships. I supported maintaining the tradition of the Taoiseach visiting the US and its President, Donald Trump. I did not join Deputy Howlin and others who sought cheap ways of attacking the Taoiseach. The Taoiseach's remarks in Congress were welcome and appropriate. The reality is that, at the moment, the US Administration is not one that accepts the idea of critical friendship.
The Taoiseach has outlined the issues that he raised. In his address, he managed to uphold our values while getting messages across and maintaining a deep relationship. In Washington, he managed what was a difficult situation well. In the overall national interest, it was important that he made the visit and conducted it in that manner.
Are there questions?
What did Congress say about some of the issues that the Taoiseach raised, for example, the benefit that countries got from current trading arrangements? Were there indications of when the US would start reducing its corporate tax rates? What practical response did the Taoiseach get on the issue of undocumented immigrants? Mayor Marty Walsh stated his belief that a special deal could not be achieved for Irish immigrants. What was the Taoiseach's response to that when he met him? What is the Taoiseach's sense of the undocumented question now?
I thank the Deputy for his comments. I said at the beginning that he understood fully the importance of maintaining the traditional links with the United States, which go beyond the occupancy of this seat by whoever or the Presidency of the United States. These are very valuable opportunities to promote the country in so many ways, given the extraordinary impact of Irish contributions to the United States over the years and the fact that Irish companies now employ over 100,000 people across 50 states.
I did notice Deputy Howlin's comments, which I think were probably issued before I ever emerged from the White House, but somebody pushes the button. In any event, let me say that my feeling is that what the Administration will follow in sequence will be the health issue arising from the original Obamacare schedule, the taxation issue and immigration, plus all of the other issues that will arise, but that seemed to be the sort of sequence of priorities that the Administration was focusing on.
I do think, a Cheann Comhairle, that we have a duty here as Members of the Oireachtas to continuously explain to American representatives the nature and the value of what the European Union actually stands for and how it does its business. This is a new Administration. There are still several thousand people to be appointed to it. It is important that, when Vice President Pence came to Brussels and Europe, he made a very good impression in the sense of wanting to understand, and showing an understanding of, the mechanics of how Europe actually worked. I hope to arrange a meeting between the President of the European Parliament and Speaker Ryan in Congress. With the European Parliament representing so many countries and so many people, these are important opportunities for people to understand each other.
I made the point directly to the President that I did feel that a proper trading relationship for the two most developed economic regions on the planet would yield several million jobs on either side of the Atlantic. I think that is a priority that we should pursue, both as Irish people and as members of the European Union.
I make no apologies at all for fulfilling my role as leader of a political party outlining the values for which this country stands, values that are the absolute opposite of those of the current President of the United States. That provides a valuable counterbalance to the role of the Taoiseach and doing otherwise would have been remiss of me and others in opposition who should set out the real values of this country, which we should assert with pride and clarity whenever we meet anyone abroad. Consider the opening of the statement by Chancellor Merkel, who is not in my political family. She outlined clearly the European and German values on which she would base her engagement with the US. That was the approach.
Interestingly too the comments of former Governor, Martin O'Malley, re-echoed those points. Those are really important things to say. One cannot always fumble in the greasy till. Commerce is not everything. We have valuable connections but they are not the only values we have.
I welcome the fact the Taoiseach raised the issue of the undocumented but what will come of that? I ask that having listened to all the commentary from Mr. Spicer and others after the visit. Does the Taoiseach have a commitment to legislative change on the undocumented?
In regard to taxation policy, did the Taoiseach raise with anybody on his visit the so-called border adjustment tax, which would be devastating for this country, or corporation tax reform? Does he have any indication of what is likely to be proposed by the Trump presidency in those regards?
I noted the comments of former Governor O’Malley, who I know well. He made attempts himself to the get to the White House but the effort was not successful.
So far.
He is entitled to his opinion. He may well decide to stand again. That is entirely his business.
I agree that commerce is not everything, which is why it is all the more important that we focus on what politics is always about, namely, people. We have some who are not in a position to contribute in the way they know they can. I do not support situations where Irish citizens, documented or undocumented, continuously break the law in other countries, nor would Deputy Howlin, but in respect of those who want to play their part and do so, it is a case of finding a method of legalisation for them.
By definition, everybody who is there who is not documented is breaking the law.
The President himself made the point to me that he wants to hear from the Democratic Party on this issue. I had a lengthy conversation with Senator Schumer, who introduced a Bill in the previous Administration for 10,500 E3 visas for Irish people on an annual basis. The Bill was passed by the Senate but did not get through to Congress. That is an issue I would like to see raised separately from immigration reform. The President himself is very interested in dealing with the number of Irish there.
I had a very good conversation with General Kelly, a four star general, who is apolitical. He is dealing with homeland security. He made his views perfectly clear. He said he put on their websites on so many occasions that legislators must find a way, as Deputy Howlin pointed out, to deal with the undocumented Irish who contribute to American society.
A Cheann Comhairle, the Taoiseach is talking the clock down.
The point is that this requires co-operation and political will from the parties involved. We had a very straightforward, constructive conversation with the President and his full team and I thank him for that. I intend to follow through very strongly on the matters we discussed and how we should go about them. I hope that is in the interests of significant numbers of Irish people and that we can proceed on that basis.
The Taoiseach is talking down the clock.
Clearly, comprehensive immigration reform was attempted by John McCain and prior to that Edward Kennedy and so many others but because it was so broad and complicated it never reached the conclusion we know could happen.
Did the Taoiseach have an opportunity to seek President Trump's views on the Good Friday Agreement? Does the President accept that it is an international agreement which has been supported by the United States? Does he have a position on the Agreement, and specifically, does he have a position or does he or his advisers have any thoughts on the consequences of Brexit, for which he has vociferously tweeted his support, as have other parties here? Could the Taoiseach enlighten us as to what the discussion was?
In regard to his interest in Northern Ireland and the continuation and development of the peace process, was there any conversation about President Trump appointing an envoy to assist with the Northern Ireland process? That approach has been very successful in the past. On occasion, the envoys do not have very much to do but at other times, they are very busy. At the moment the talks are under way in some form and the expiry date is soon. Did the Taoiseach find that the President was interested in the Good Friday Agreement and in developments specifically relating to Northern Ireland and the island of Ireland? I am aware that the President is very friendly with people such as the MP, Ian Paisley Jr., who was present, as well as others. Did he specifically reference those issues in the discussions with the Taoiseach?
If Members are amenable, I will take all the questions together and then ask the Taoiseach to respond. Is that agreed? Agreed. I ask Members to please be brief. We have just eight minutes remaining.
I will be very brief. I welcomed the Taoiseach's commitment when he was in the US to hold a referendum in respect of voting rights in presidential elections for citizens in the North and the Irish diaspora. That is long overdue. I note the Taoiseach was not in a position to respond yesterday when he was asked for a timeframe. Given that this issue was considered by the Constitutional Convention and that the Taoiseach himself was the one who made the announcement it is important that he would inform this House as to exactly how the issue will be progressed. The Taoiseach must have some notion as to how the measure will be implemented. Will he commit and explain to us even in broad terms what type of timeframe he envisages and what type of structure and process will be put in place to make that happen?
I am very pleased the Taoiseach raised immigration reform in his meeting with the President and other members of Congress. Has any structure been put in place to follow it up at political level? We all know the embassy is in ongoing contact with decision makers but does the Taoiseach propose to put a structure in place in order that this particular issue will be followed at political level between the Government here and in the United States?
With regard to Brexit, in her early days as Prime Minister, Theresa May, indicated that Britain would leave the European Convention on Human Rights. The Minister of State for Brexit, in winding up the debate in the House of Commons, indicated the opposite, namely, that the UK would remain as a member of the convention. Could the Taoiseach provide some clarity in that regard?
The Secretary of State, David Davis, stated there will be customs controls between North and South. The Taoiseach is aware we have a Border of 499 km with 300 formal crossings plus numerous informal crossings. If border controls are restored in any form they will do immense damage to trade and social and economic development. One point I made in this House on numerous occasions is that we cannot adequately quantify the progress that has been made in the Border area and all over the island as a result of the Good Friday Agreement. Let us remember that due to the lack of economic development of the Border region, predominantly due to the Troubles, our enterprises are small and medium sized and they are almost totally dependent on the sterling market to export their products. Any hindrance to trade would cause us very serious economic damage.
I gather from media reports that the Taoiseach was put out that the positive media coverage he received internationally for the speech he gave last week in President Trump's presence was not replicated in Ireland. He had the benefit of Channel 4 and The New York Times not being too well acquainted with how his fine words in Washington square up to the reality in Ireland. Conversely, the Irish media, being aware of the manner in which undocumented migrants are treated in this State, knew the ridicule to which they would be open if they were as effusive as the international media.
The reality in Ireland is that if a St. Patrick were to arrive today, depending on his country of origin, he could well find himself caught up in our inhumane, degrading and racist system of direct provision. If he was an adult, he would be permitted a pittance of €19.10 per week or €15.60 if he was a minor. He would have a 40% chance of languishing in this position for five years and a 20% chance of still being unregularised after seven years. Between this and the constant threat of deportation, it should come as no surprise that direct provision has proven to be deleterious to the physical and mental health of people caught in it. The 5,000 people in direct provision in Ireland would be equivalent to over 300,000 people in the US. The plight of 50,000 undocumented Irish in the US is bad enough but could we imagine for a moment what it would be like if an equivalent or greater amount of undocumented Irish were kept in the conditions that migrants experience here on the Taoiseach’s watch?
I put it to the Taoiseach that ending the inhumane regime of direct provision might escape the attention of Channel 4 and The New York Times but it would be an act of infinitely greater significance than the speech in Washington if it could be ended. Is it not the case that by not ending direct provision and providing a scale of amnesty the likes of which the Taoiseach correctly demands for the Irish in the US, the Taoiseach will correctly be seen by the 5,000 people in direct provision in Ireland as being two-faced and hypocritical?
I am not really interested in the comments of Deputy Barry except to say that the Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, has done quite a deal of work in respect of the Mahon report and I have asked him to consider having a conversation in the House when it is appropriate on the changes that have been made and the work that has been done in his unceasing efforts to deal with the issue of direct provision.
Deputy Brendan Smith raised a number of important points. I have set out that I do not contemplate any return to that hard Border of customs posts where they used to apply back in the time of the Troubles, as the Deputy is aware, with unapproved crossings blown up or impassable. We are well acquainted with the Deputy’s point about the impact on the economy North and South. There is an agreement and understanding of there being no return to that kind of Border. It is a political issue that requires a political solution. In my mind and that of the British Prime Minister, there must be a way found to deal with that. Until she writes her letter, we do not know the exact issue about customs union from the British perspective. We know the British Prime Minister wants as close a relationship as possible with the European Union, which we support. It will be known in the next couple of days and the Deputy’s point in that sense is valuable.
I will follow through on the issues I discussed with the US President, the US Vice President, the Speaker of the House, Mr. Ryan, and members of the Senate and House, including the Ireland caucus and Friends of Ireland. It is about contact and follow-through in respect of the issues I discussed with the US President.
Deputy Cullinane raised the point of voting for members of the diaspora, including those in Northern Ireland, in presidential elections. We will publish the options paper this week on that. There are a number of legal, policy and practical issues and we must have a debate about this. The paper will be one of the topics for discussion at the Global Irish Civic Forum to be held in Dublin in May. I will not name a date for a referendum as we must get all of that together in the first instance. We will look at how the register is compiled and how people will vote in an international setting. Would a welder in Alaska have to travel to Washington to vote? One needs to be able to do this online safely. We will publish that this week and get it moving.
Deputy Burton also raised an important point. I spent quite a deal of time in my discussions with the US President talking about the Good Friday Agreement and Northern Ireland, including how this came about with support from America when President Clinton appointed Senator Mitchell to be the lead negotiator. I asked him in the context of what happened before to have a desk in the Administration available for Northern Ireland with a person at that desk and, if necessary, to follow through with the appointment of an envoy. He was very interested in this and there was a very clear understanding of the nature of how sensitive this was and the troubles that existed which were ended by negotiation. I hope he will follow through on that.
I made the point that it is very important for the European Union to engage continuously with the US Administration on the basis of the potential of setting down trade conditions for the next 50 years between the two most economically developed regions on the planet. There are potentially millions of jobs either side of the Atlantic in this regard. That part of the conversation was very important, constructive and informative for the US President and his Administration.