Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

It would be wrong to consider Brexit in isolation from the broad political context of a very aggressive pursuit of the European integration project over past decades. Dissatisfaction and disaffection with the European Union is not a new phenomenon nor is it a uniquely British or English phenomenon. The rejection of EU treaties by those of us who have a vote in referendums in the cases of the Nice treaty in 2001 and the Lisbon treaty in 2008 should have sounded alarm bells for EU leaders. More to the point, the very spectacular rejection of the EU constitutional treaty in 2005 by the French and Dutch spelt out for anyone interested in listening to the voices of the electorates that the relentless pursuit of ever closer union, the stubborn pursuit of a federal or united states of Europe, did not command widespread democratic support, including in the core states whose political elites force the issue. They will meet in conclave in the coming days to force the same agenda again.

The setting aside of democratic votes, the rerunning of referendums and the manner in which citizens were ignored or talked down to was the most dramatic manifestation of what is called the democratic deficit. Frustration with the eurocrats is by no means a limited phenomenon, nor is the frustration that is felt towards the timid and sometimes negligent politicians who facilitate those eurocrats.

It would equally be wrong to consider Brexit in isolation from the consequences of an EU that favours the market above all else and the corporates over the citizens, an EU in which the banks were too big to fail and the citizens were too small to matter, and a Union in which austerity, the political and economic orthodoxy of the EU, has laid communities and towns low.

The rage of the ravaged industrial north of England and the Welsh valleys can only be understood in that context. It would be wrong and perhaps our biggest mistake if we imagined that the Brexit debate was about confronting or resolving any of those critical issues. I make my remarks as a person who is absolutely European to the core and deeply critical of the current direction of the EU project. That reflects the position of my political party.

The Brexit debate was not sparked by a demand for radical democratic reform or a partnership of equals in Europe. It was not initiated to champion the needs of workers or those out of work or to advocate for social justice - on the contrary or au contraire, as one might say. Small-minded, Tory, public school boys jockeying for political position is what sparked this debate and referendum. If ever the 1% was made flesh, it is in the case of Mr. Boris Johnson and Mr. David Cameron. They reached for the playbook of racist, divisive and lowest common denominator political tactics to get their way. They got their way. It is astonishing to hear from those who claim to speak for the left as they align themselves with such cheap, narrow and elitist tactics and motivations.

I suggest there are three lessons we need to learn from Brexit. The first lesson is that the EU can only proceed in a manner and at a pace that is democratically sanctioned by the electorates of Europe. That means that when there is a "No" to federalism, the super-state comes off the table. The second lesson is that there are consequences for governments and institutions which refuse to listen or refuse to accept the verdict of the people when the people put the brakes on the ambition of the political elites. In other words, we need political leadership and not political coercion. The third lesson is that if the popular instinct for radical reform is denied and the reformers stonewalled, the wreckers will have their day. In my view, the wreckers have had their day across the water and are set to continue with their wrecking.

I listened to many here who claim to be on my political left. I am alarmed that they would try to suggest that the Brexit result is a good result for the working class. As a person from a party that represents the Irish working class North and South, I say that that is not the case. The Brexit decision will not herald a great dawn of democratic empowerment, prosperity and equality for anybody in the EU or outside it, that is, in Britain.

The die is now cast. The votes are counted. England and Wales have decided to exit. That is their democratic prerogative. Scotland has voted to stay and the Scottish administration has made it clear that they will ensure that that democratic decision is honoured. The North of Ireland has also voted to stay. That is the democratic mandate of the people of all political persuasions. I am not convinced for one moment of the argument that suggests that a referendum at this stage on Irish unity would simply be a sectarian headcount. I do not accept that. Neither do I accept that it would be divisive or destabilising. As a matter of fact, a referendum on Irish unity is the only available mechanism that we now have to allow the majority, the people of the North of Ireland, to stay within the EU. In effect, the referendum is not simply about Irish unity. It is about affording to the people of the North an honouring of their democratic decision.

I detect, and I hope it is not deliberate, an almost laissez-faireor hands-off view of Irish citizens living in the North. Consider the Northern farmers and the prospect of the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, being torn from under their feet. Consider any of our students in third level academic institutions who stand to lose very substantial funding and support for research and development. Consider not just a hardening of the Border between North and South, but the nightmare and frankly ludicrous scenario in which Ireland is at the one time inside and outside the EU, with all the regulatory, legislative and practical contradictions that entails. It is not good enough to say that the people of the North voted to stay and then simply step back and not assist them in that ambition. Their democratic decision is clear.

I regard the position adopted by the DUP and its leader, Ms Arlene Foster, to have been utterly reckless in this regard. They have conceded the right to speak for anybody, or certainly the majority, in the North on these issues. Ms Theresa Villiers certainly does not represent the considered and democratically arrived at view of the people in the North. Ms Villiers represents the Tories, the Conservatives, their position and their view, at least that of the Leave faction of the party. In no way is she prepared to advance the rights and the interests of citizens in the North.

Now is the time for calm. I believe that is true. I am very calm.

See this speech in context