Brendan Smith
Ceist:1. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent visit to Northern Ireland for discussions with the political parties there. [4220/23]
Amharc ar fhreagraWednesday, 1 February 2023
Ceisteanna (1, 2, 3, 4)
Brendan Smith
Ceist:2. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent telephone conversation with the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. [4221/23]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Seán Haughey
Ceist:3. Deputy Seán Haughey asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent phone conversation with the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. [4223/23]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Bríd Smith
Ceist:4. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Taoiseach if he will provide an update on his most recent engagement with political representatives and groups from Northern Ireland since he returned to Oifig an Taoisigh. [4423/23]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (6 píosaí cainte)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.
On 12 January I visited Belfast where I had constructive discussions with the leaders of the main political parties. The main focus of the meetings was on restoration of the democratic institutions in Northern Ireland and on the EU-UK negotiations on the protocol. I emphasised the Government's commitment to assist efforts at Executive formation, to get the Assembly functioning and to see the North-South Ministerial Council operating again. We also discussed concerns around the UK legacy Bill and the proposed new electronic travel authorisation, ETA, which is problematic for third country nationals resident here and for tourists. We also noted the forthcoming 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement in April.
I concluded my trip with a useful meeting with the Northern Ireland Brexit business working group, which reiterated the value of consulting with the business community on any new approaches.
I had a substantive call with the British Prime Minister on Monday, 23 January where we discussed a range of issues, including restoration of the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement. We also discussed the ongoing EU-UK negotiations on the protocol and our shared wish to strengthen British-Irish relations. We both recognised the importance of the ongoing engagement between the EU and the UK on the protocol, and I welcomed the more constructive nature of the current discussions. I reiterated the need for a solution that avoids a hard border on the island of Ireland and protects the integrity of the Single Market. It is important that these talks can now take place in confidentiality with a view to reaching joint solutions on these issues. We also spoke about the positive co-operation between the EU, UK and the US in respect of the war in Ukraine and I took the opportunity to acknowledge the UK's leadership role in this regard.
During my call with the Prime Minister, I reiterated the Government's concern about the UK's legacy legislation and the impact of the proposed introduction of electronic travel authorisation on third country nationals travelling across the Border. The Prime Minister and I agreed to remain in ongoing contact.
I thank An Taoiseach for his reply and I welcome the fact that he has had engagement with the political parties in Northern Ireland and the British Government. I also welcome that an Tánaiste and other members of the Government attended the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference in mid-January. All those meetings are important, particularly in the absence of the North-South institutions functioning.
I was in Belfast with other Fianna Fáil parliamentary colleagues in early January. Among the people and groups we met were political parties; Wave Trauma, which is a powerful organisation that advocates for victims of the Troubles; Linda Ervine and the east Belfast Irish language group in the East Belfast Mission; the Greater Shankill Partnership; and Paul Doherty of Foodstock community homeless hub in west Belfast. There was a clear message from all those groups that they want the institutions and the Assembly back up and running. They want the Executive in place and the North-South bodies functioning as designed and agreed in the Good Friday Agreement. From speaking to many businesses in my neighbouring counties north of the Border, I know they want any outstanding issues relating to the protocol resolved as soon as possible. Any interruption to trade in Northern Ireland is a disadvantage for us as well. I sincerely hope progress can be made in resolving outstanding issues.
On the legacy issues, since I last spoke on Northern Ireland issues in this House, I attended a solemn and appropriate commemoration in Belturbet on 28 December last to mark the 50th anniversary of the Belturbet bombing. That is one of the many legacy issues that has not been resolved. Neither the O'Reilly or Stanley families have got the truth about who carried out that heinous crime which killed two young teenagers: Geraldine O'Reilly and Paddy Stanley. There are other instances in my constituency of such issues that need to be resolved. Those families know the chances of getting a prosecution are slim but the least they deserve is the truth. The present British Government proposals are absolutely unacceptable.
I am glad the Taoiseach had an opportunity to discuss several important issues with the new British Prime Minister, including the full implementation and effective operation of all the institutions established under the Good Friday Agreement, the implementation of the Northern Ireland protocol and the British Government's legacy Bill. The war in Ukraine was among other issues the Taoiseach discussed.
The appointment of Rishi Sunak has set the relationship between Britain and Ireland and it is clear these relations have improved significantly. Will the Taoiseach bring the House up to date on the protocol issue and the restoration of the political institutions in Northern Ireland? RTÉ's European editor, Tony Connelly, tweeted this morning that EU sources are denying a report in the London Times that a deal on the Northern Ireland protocol has been struck between the UK and the EU. It was noteworthy that the Taoiseach suggested last month that mistakes had been made on all sides in the handling of Brexit and that the post-Brexit protocol might be too strict.
He was in Belfast last month for talks with the main parties in Stormont. Does he believe the agreement reached on EU access to UK customs and IT systems is significant? Can he say where we are at now as regards the technical negotiations between the UK, and on the protocol issue? I appreciate the parties to the negotiations need time and space. He may not want to, but will he also comment on the report in the London Times?
Across the UK today, more than 2 million workers are on strike, including teachers, rail workers, higher-education workers, people who work on border checks in the North, and University and College Union, UCU, members. This follows a series of strikes by health workers. Some of the key issues driving this huge revolt of working people are issues they have in common with many workers in Ireland, namely pay increases that are, in effect, pay cuts because of the spiralling cost of living.
When one considers the recent report by Oxfam, about which there was a briefing this week, which identified the fact that if the absolutely extraordinary growth in the wealth of the very richest people, the millionaires and billionaires in this country, was modestly taxed it could raise €8 billion in extra revenue, it could be used towards paying decent wages to workers, addressing the housing crisis and public services. Oxfam is arguing for this internationally. When one looks at the strikes and the cost-of-living crisis and how it is impacting on nurses, teachers and healthcare workers in Ireland, as well as in the UK and across Europe, will the Government look at taxing the wealth, which has seen extraordinary growth, the very richest people are enjoying and using it to address the cost-of-living crisis that the vast numbers of workers struggling to pay the bills and rent are facing?
We have a very impressive display of workers' power in Britain today, the largest co-ordinated strike action in more than a decade, with teachers, train drivers, civil servants and many others withdrawing their labour. In the North, UCU members working in higher education are on strike, a strike that is about pay and the investment in the future of higher education. The workers have realised that serious and militant strike action is the way to go after years of a series of one-day, intermittent strike action. In the North, that comes after a wave of strike action involving hospital staff and a coming wave including teachers, firefighters and others.
Is the Taoiseach concerned that workers in the South may look to the North, and across the water, and say that they need to use their power here too, they need to prepare the ground to take on the idea of a 24-hour general strike, and they need pay increases that are at least in line with inflation to stop people losing out and their incomes being reduced?
I thank the Deputies for their questions. I will start by responding to Deputies Haughey and Brendan Smith on the Northern Ireland protocol. I welcome the continued positive UK-EU engagement aided at finding joint solutions to concerns about the implementation of the protocol.
When I met the Northern Ireland parties and business representatives last month, I got a real sense of a widely-held desire to see a joint resolution and to refocus on other pressures facing people across Northern Ireland, including the cost of living and resolving the various strikes under way. As I said to President von der Leyen, when we spoke on 11 January, the approach taken by the European Commission is the right one. The Commission has listened carefully to people in Northern Ireland and is willing to show flexibility in the search for an agreement. I also discussed the protocol with Prime Minister Sunak, when we spoke on the phone on 23 January, and expressed my belief that it should be possible to find joint solutions.
I said that I was encouraged by the constructive nature of the discussions and I believe both sides want to reach agreement. The best support we can offer them is to provide the time and space for them to get there. I can confirm that notwithstanding newspaper reports, no deal has yet been done between the EU and the UK but I agree with Deputy Haughey that the agreement on customs information is significant and helpful.
Regarding the UK's legacy bill, I very much endorse Deputy Brendan Smith's remarks on Belturbet and agree those families deserve truth. There might never be prosecutions, although I would never like that to be ruled out, but what they want and deserve is truth - to know what happened and who did it. The Government continues to communicate its deep concerns about what is happening and the unilateral approach by the UK Government. I raised this directly with Prime Minister Sunak during our call last Monday and with the party leaders in Belfast recently. The Tánaiste raised it with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland at the British–Irish Intergovernmental Conference in Dublin on 19 January. There is consistent opposition to the Bill across the board and that continues to grow.
I am very aware of the strikes in Northern Ireland and Great Britain. I make a point of watching British news any day I can. Listening to the Deputies opposite, they almost sound as though they are glad the strikes are under way and are sad that they are not happening here, notwithstanding the impact they have on people who use public services. A trade union leader once said something to me with which I really identify. I recall him telling me that any strike is a failure of industrial relations and that while it is easy to go out on strike, it is much harder to settle a dispute because that means having to sell to your members something that is less than what they have been demanding. I thought that was a pertinent comment. That was not from me; it was from a trade union leader.
There are very big differences between what is happening here and what is happening in Great Britain. For a prolonged period, we had pay rises that were higher than inflation. We do not have that at the moment but we have a public sector pay deal that at least goes part of the way towards compensating workers for the rising cost of living, while in Great Britain, they are effectively back to austerity and are increasing taxes and reining in public spending. Because we have managed the economy so well and because the public finances have been managed so well, we are in a very different position and have been able to reduce income tax and put in place cost-of-living measures that have helped soften the blow. However, I hear the concerns workers have that prices are rising faster than wages. I acknowledge that this is a problem but the best way to resolve that is by negotiation with unions, not strikes. Strikes are a failure of industrial relations.
I did have a chance to look at the Oxfam report. I acknowledge that it is based on net wealth instead of gross wealth. That is something I am glad was clarified. I heard the Deputy use the term "modest tax rates". My reading of it was that it was proposing tax rates of 60% or more. I do not think most people in the country would regard a 60% tax on anything or anyone as being modest. The biggest risk of taxes of that nature is they drive people, wealth and investment abroad. That is why wealth taxes generally have not been successful where they have been tried.