Mr. Barry Andrews:

Members will be aware of the memorandum of understanding between the EU and the UK on financial services. It is, however, merely an opportunity for dialogue and does not move things along very much. Looking at the narrative around this, it remains to be seen whether the City of London is enthused about equivalence and all of the restrictions that might come with it. There is a feeling that the lack of equivalence is already priced in to the way in which the city is now operating. Relocation is taking place and investment is being reassessed. Changes are being felt in the City of London but whether there is an enthusiasm to set down the rules for the conditions for equivalence remains to be seen. The memorandum has to be formally ratified by the two parties, which is expected to take place in the next few months. It is also contingent on many other issues, be they the protocol, energy or other issues related to the level playing field, and all of them are connected and mutually reinforcing.

If we talk about where to go to try to create a better relationship between the EU and the UK, obviously, these things have to be settled quickly and as soon as possible, and the sooner the better. It is critically important for Ireland. For example, 65% of funds held in Dublin are managed funds out of the UK or the US and consequently, we have a financial services system that is more Anglo-American than European. It is in our interests that there is a financial equivalence. We will certainly drive that.

The speech that I gave before Christmas - I thank Deputy Richmond for remembering that - was based on the assessment that a majority of young people in the UK supports being members of the European Union and all of its values, as does a majority in Scotland, a majority in Northern Ireland and a majority in many of the big cities across the UK. It was to try to remind those people that they had not been forgotten and there would always be a voice in the European Parliament to ensure that they understood that if there was a change of government at the least and a change of hearts there I, for one, would be advocating for readmission of the UK. We also have to remember the UK was a difficult member of the European Parliament. It was slightly semi-detached all the time by being outside Schengen, with opt-outs on freedom, security and justice, not being in the eurozone and not being involved in all the big issues such as the eurozone crisis and the migrant crisis. I am not sure there is a massive enthusiasm. It depends now on what happens with the constitutional set-up of the UK, whether there is a Scottish referendum and whether Scotland comes in. All of those issues remain to be seen. We are still in a holding pattern in that respect.

I mentioned earlier what I think the member states can do. I mentioned the structure. The Good Friday Agreement is important. The scrutiny function of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs is an important aspect of that. We all have links with Northern Ireland. We all have links, culturally and socially. We have family in Northern Ireland. It is important that we tailor our rhetoric in order that it is understood that we are interested in representing all of the communities and that we really are about bringing people together. That is why I support the shared island vision. That language that we use is critically important.

As well, the committee might think about the joint consultative working group, which is an element of the withdrawal agreement, by figuring out who are the officials who are dealing with that, who are inputting into that and thereby being able to call on them to answer a question that the committee might have. That is a group that is meeting on a monthly basis that feeds into the joint committee on the withdrawal agreement. Identifying those officials and being able to call on their insight would be useful for the committee.