Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Micheál Martin has just left for Brussels where he will be meeting the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, ALDE, to discuss Brexit and other issues. He will be wearing the green jersey, so to speak, as he highlights the issues that are important to the country in the context of the forthcoming Brexit negotiations. As has been said before, this is a moment of great uncertainty for the future of the EU, yet this week's summit involves no significant move to address any major challenge. It is a business as usual summit in which all the items on the agenda appear to have been agreed in advance and no new ideas will be considered. For all those who wish the EU well and want it to be more dynamic and effective, this summit is far from encouraging.

Inevitably the decision of the UK to leave the Union has led to a huge amount of uncertainty about future policies. The arrogant and blustering approach of the London Government over the past eight months has made a bad situation worse. There is no clarity whatsoever on how relations with the UK will be conducted. While Ms May has said she wants a "red, white and blue Brexit", she and her colleagues fail to understand that this is exactly the narrow, backward-looking type of approach designed to minimise the chance of a constructive deal. Why on earth would any other country want to agree to a "red, white and blue Brexit"? Mr. John Major’s excellent speech in Chatham House made the case very persuasively that the London Government has to start showing some respect for the interests of others or the consequences will be grave.

We do not have the time to discuss fully the details of Ireland’s position on Brexit, but there are points that need to be made about developments in the past two weeks. From the beginning, the London Government has claimed that Northern Ireland and Scotland will have their interests listened to in the negotiations. They may have been listened to, but they certainly have not been responded to. In fact, there is no case evident of a Northern Irish or Scottish concern being reflected in the Government’s public position. Prime Minister May has now said that she is not proposing to transfer any power repatriated from the EU to the devolved Administrations.

If we take this, along with the stated objective of the White Paper, that is to say, "Strengthening the Union", it appears Brexit is seen as a way of increasing London's control over the devolved Administrations. Assuming that the DUP-Sinn Féin axis can re-establish the Northern Ireland Assembly and Northern Ireland Executive and that Northern Ireland has political leadership again, the powers of the Assembly and Executive are not to be decided on unilaterally in London. The complex architecture of powers, as reflected in the peace settlement, is a matter for negotiations between the Governments and with the parties. This explicitly reflects the position of policies currently decided at EU level. The Northern Ireland Act, which was the product of negotiations, reflects this.

I am putting it clearly to the Taoiseach that he has an obligation to say to the UK Prime Minister, Ms May, when he meets her on Thursday, that London is directly undermining the spirit and letter of the settlement by failing to negotiate on how the repatriation of policies will be treated for Northern Ireland.

This reinforces the fact that we need to begin substantive discussions immediately on the impact of Brexit on the Agreement and the Northern Ireland Act. The Article 50 negotiations do not have to be completed for us to proceed with these discussions. The 1998 referendums reflect the established will of the people and they must be respected. Unlike others, I fail to see how, legally, they can prevent Brexit. However, they certainly prevent London from taking any unilateral action in a series of areas. Human rights law is the most important of these areas.

These matters are entirely distinct from the common travel area and potential special status for Northern Ireland. The longer we go on without a definitive statement from London to the effect that it accepts the need to negotiate before changing past agreements on Northern Ireland, the longer we risk a major crisis. The House should note that the Tory Government appears increasingly likely to use Brexit as an opportunity to squeeze regulations that protect workers and consumers. Indeed, there is already a push to expand free trade greatly with lower wage economies. All of this makes the support of Brexit on the part of the hard left here all the more striking. Given that Sinn Féin has decided that it hates everything the EU does but is fully committed to keeping Northern Ireland in the EU, I hope it will work to persuade its uniformly anti-EU group in the European Parliament to change its mind.

Last week, the European Commission President, Mr. Juncker, published the Commission document on where the Union should go from here. It is called a White Paper but in reality it is nothing of the sort. It is a short document that contains some useful perspectives but actually proposes nothing concrete. A total of five general options have been presented. Effectively, these are the same options that have been on the table for 30 years. More helpful would be the presentation of hard evidence on how a reformed Union could help to a greater extent. Instead of ratcheting up the rhetoric, we need to undertake the far harder work of identifying the areas where enhanced or reduced activity would deliver a quantifiable benefit to citizens. If that document is the basis for further discussions, then we risk another return of the frustrating, technical and ineffective negotiations of the past.

We must also be careful of the approach of deciding on something simply because it is possible to do. A good example of this is in the area of security and defence. The current arrangements are effective and allow member states to co-operate on a basis that respects the particular tradition of everyone. The predictions of nuclear weapons being paraded down O'Connell Street that were made during numerous referendum campaigns have been shown to be bogus. Instead, we have states working closely to serve humanitarian causes. This co-operation has strengthened the wonderful work of Óglaigh na hÉireann.

The case for change in respect of the security and defence agenda has not yet been made. Before the agenda moves from generalities to specifics, we should make it abundantly clear that we are content with the current strategy. The summit is due to discuss the outcome of the semester process and responses to country-specific recommendations. The greater flexibility of the Commission is to be welcomed, as is the change of its tone.

Unfortunately, there has not yet been a change of policy on Greece. Syriza has long since abandoned its original approach of demanding the right to abandon debts, receive more money and implement a vast expansion in spending. Greece needs significant debt relief, whether by a freezing of debt or some other measure. Greece cannot achieve sustainable growth without further relief. Allowing this issue to continue to roll along risks a return to the debt crisis of recent years. Its impact will be felt by all through rising costs of borrowing. Ireland should speak against the drift and call for a new urgency on this issue.

Donald Tusk has filled the role of President of the European Council excellently. He has shown strength in moving the agenda forward as much as he can and he has shown an ability to speak hard truths. I have been particularly impressed by how he has been consistent in speaking up for the rights of small nations, especially those threatened by outside aggression. The Fianna Fáil position is that President Tusk absolutely deserves a new term and that Ireland should actively support him.

The summit will briefly discuss external affairs. The humanitarian crisis caused by the Syrian Government, with the active aid of the Russian Federation, remains as acute as ever. To read and watch families in Mosul under consistent attack is heart-breaking. An entire generation of children will never be able to have a normal life after seeing indiscriminate bombings, shootings and random assassinations. Historians will look back and ask why Europe did not do more to stop it at this time in our history.

Given the position of the Trump Administration on refugees in the USA and its intention to cut overseas aid significantly, Europe must take a different route. The case for a significant increase in direct humanitarian aid remains overwhelming.

The awkwardness of holding an anniversary celebration at the moment when a member state begins the process of leaving is obvious. I would hope that the Treaty of Rome events to be held on 25 March will have some substance and that they will be a demonstration of respect and solidarity. Europe has achieved incredibly positive progress in the past 60 years and rejected the destruction of the ideological extremes. It is worth renewing. However, to achieve this we need leadership, urgency and ambition.

See this speech in context