Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

As the Acting Chairman, Deputy Durkan, will be well aware, for centuries the history of this island has been dominated and overshadowed by its relationship with the neighbouring island. For most of that time, the relationship was poisoned because of colonialism and oppression. Fortunately, the past 100 years have been different and there have been great improvements in that relationship. Independence has enabled this country to become more than a mere provincial backwater of the United Kingdom. Despite those improvements, in the years after Independence the Irish people never fully achieved their potential. Economically, we still lived in the shadow of our dominant neighbour. That changed when the people voted in June 1972 for Ireland to become a member state of the then European Economic Community.

This country has prospered enormously as a result of its membership of the European Union. Notwithstanding the flaws and failings in a project of such magnitude, since we joined the EU we have made progress as a people. Our country and its people have attained a better quality of life. Workers’ rights have been protected through the introduction of European employment legislation. The structures of the State have been modernised to the extent that we are now recognised as a fully independent and equal member of the Union. As we joined the EEC on the same day as the UK, the progress of both countries in certain areas has been quite similar during the past 44 years. We have advanced to being a modern, successful and independent country that attracts foreign investment, encourages domestic enterprise and provides social protection for those who need it. As a result of the UK's vote to leave the EU, this country has a very important decision to make. Do we revert to aligning our destiny with the fortunes and future of our large neighbour or do we align ourselves with the future of the EU? I believe we must align ourselves with the latter. If we are ambiguous about where our future lies - if we, out of fear, decide to manoeuvre ourselves closer to the British model - we will regress economically, culturally and intellectually as a country. We will become a province once again, rather than a nation once again.

While I note and welcome the Taoiseach’s statement that Ireland’s national interest is our primary goal, we need to be very clear about what our national interest entails.

The choice facing this country is in many respects similar to the choice that faced the British people last Thursday. We can either turn our back on a European project that, although it has its faults, has changed the politics of this Continent for the better over the past 50 years. Alternatively, we can seek to emulate the narrow nationalism and insularity at the core of the “Leave” campaign in Britain.

The result of last week’s vote has particular consequences for Ireland because of our proximity to the UK. The absurdity of seeking to set up barriers on borders between European countries is exposed when one looks at Northern Ireland. We must assert unambiguously that this State will not tolerate the erection of a Donald Trump-like Border or controls between the two jurisdictions on this island.

The vote in the North was revelatory and different. In fact, for the first time many of the voters in Northern Ireland decided to vote not on the basis of their religious identity but, instead, on the basis of what they thought was best for them, their families and the North. The significance of the Northern vote has evaded many people, including Sinn Féin. On an issue which affected the constitutional position of Northern Ireland, people of a Unionist persuasion voted in significant numbers to remain unified, not just with the South but with all of Europe. Those of us who aspire to Irish unity recognise that this unity can only be achieved through co-operation and harmony and through our joint membership of the European Union. A significant percentage of the Unionist population recognises that. However, by immediately calling for a Border poll, people have diminished the significance of the vote that took place in Northern Ireland by seeking to frame the result in the traditional orthodoxy of northern politics. Sometimes sophistication is required in politics rather than orthodoxy.

Britain has taken a regressive step but such a step is not surprising considering the negative coverage given to the European Union by the British media and politicians over the past 30 years. The suggestion that Britain is not independent is simply nonsensical. It is a sign of independence that if a country wishes to leave the European Union, it can. It is a voluntary arrangement.

The British vote teaches us many lessons, two of which I want to identify. First, there is a noticeable shortage of serious English political figures at the highest level of British politics. Unfortunately, many of the significant political figures in Britain today regard politics as a game and as a means of achieving schoolboy ambitions against rivals who have similarly held views on politics. Brendan Behan reminded us about how “on the playing fields of Eton, we still do thrilling things”. It now appears that on the playing fields of Eton, they also do silly things.

The second lesson is to beware of populists. The debate in Britain was won because of the self-interested and self-promoting advocacy of populist commentators who, not long ago, had transformed themselves into politicians. People need to realise that politicians who promote simple solutions, who condemn their opponents, who refer to un-elected elites, who seek to castigate their political opponents for treason or dishonesty; these are politicians who peddle in populism, fear and false hope. Voters need to see through that type of populist politics. Unfortunately, it is too late for the people of Britain. It is important in this country, however, we see through that populism.

See this speech in context