Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

While a specific reference to Ireland in the conclusions of the 20 October European Council meeting is welcome, it is with growing alarm that we note a complete absence of detail regarding what the new EU external frontier will look like post Brexit. I do not know how many more times we will have to stand in the Chamber and welcome vague assertions that a hard border will be avoided. Detail and a plan are needed. Unfortunately, these seem to have been absent thus far, especially from the UK.

In her post-European Council speech in Westminster, Prime Minister May stated that significant progress had been made on Northern Ireland. She again committed to having no physical infrastructure on the Border. There is nothing new in this assertion, yet we still have no detail of how it is to work. Visualising how it could work is extremely difficult.

It has been more than six months since Article 50 was triggered and the withdrawal process began, yet the EU is still requesting that the UK "present and commit to flexible and imaginative solutions called for by the unique situation of Ireland". That this assertion on such a basic and fundamental aspect of the Brexit process still needs to be made six months after the UK began the withdrawal process is alarming.

The unpublished internal Revenue Commissioners report that came to the media earlier this month paints a stark picture. I recognise the fact that the report dates from September of last year, but we must heed the warnings contained therein, given that not much has changed since then. Despite what is being said publicly, there is a view in Revenue that the idea of a frictionless border for trade is unworkable and naive. These are Revenue's words, not mine.

Along with additional infrastructure such as storage facilities for goods at Border crossings, greatly expanded ICT capabilities and increased staffing at ports and airports, it is estimated that an external frontier would mean an 800% increase in the volume of customs declarations by companies trading with the UK. This would mean a significantly increased volume and complexity of paperwork for firms, many delays, additional costs and an inevitable knock-on effect on the wider economy, North and South. In 2015, goods worth almost €18 billion were imported from the UK and goods worth €15.5 billion were exported by Ireland to the UK. Revenue has stated that the administrative and fiscal burden on the companies involved cannot be underestimated. Any restriction on this flow of trade would have severe negative consequences for the entire island of Ireland. The impact of this could be catastrophic on particular elements of Ireland's trade. We are not being realistic about the potential damage that can be done.

While we all hope for the best, we need to do much more. We must prepare for the worst. This means having clear contingency plans in place. While I agree with the Taoiseach that it is not up to Ireland to design solutions for the UK, we must be prudent, which means being prepared for all eventualities. We do not share the belief of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Coveney, that preparing for the prospect of a hard border is a self-fulfilling prophecy. His suggestion is short-sighted and dangerous. It is critical that we have good contingency plans in place in the event of the UK exiting without a deal. This does not mean putting in place the investments that are referenced in the Revenue report, but it does mean having in place contingency plans for such facilities.

Michel Barnier was not overly optimistic about the potential to avoid a hard border when he spoke to us in the Chamber earlier this year. Whether one accepts that there is potential to address the movement of people, he was bordering on the pessimistic in respect of the movement of goods. Of course, we share the hope that these issues can be resolved as part of a trade deal that may come after the Brexit negotiations have concluded but the pace of negotiations thus far and the ongoing wrangling over the divorce bill do not inspire confidence that a full agreement will be in place before 2019.

I welcome the progress on work to secure the common travel area. The flow of our people across the two islands must be allowed to continue uninhibited. The Government and the EU seem to have secured that, which is welcome. The question then returns to the free movement of people between the UK and Ireland and between Ireland and the EU. This stumbling block is one to which we seem to return again and again. Will Ireland be forced to act as a clearing house for fellow EU nationals entering the country to ensure that they do not attempt to travel to Northern Ireland or onwards to the mainland UK? What are the full implications of that? Will Ireland be centrally involved in the design of any such arrangements or will they be handed down to us by the EU? Will there be compensation for the considerable expenditure involved for Ireland where we have to man a border to monitor the movement of people within the EU or on entry to Northern Ireland and the UK? There are many unanswered questions on Brexit and there is a great deal of concern at a level of complacency on the part of Government. That needs to stop and we need to start to get real about this. The potential is undoubtedly extremely serious for this country, which is why it is important to develop confidence among people and the business community that, in the event of things not working out to Ireland's satisfaction, there are clear contingency plans in place which can be mobilised. There is a strong sense that we are not very well prepared at this stage and that we are engaging in wishful thinking.

In its conclusions on the meeting of 19 October, the Council welcomed the significant progress being made by member states to establish closer security and defence co-operation through permanent structured co-operation, or PESCO. It noted that this programme could be launched by the end of 2017. The Taoiseach has stated that he is open to Ireland participating in this new security arrangement. I ask the Taoiseach and the Minister of State to clarify which aspects of PESCO they are open to participating in. It is important that we hear it. Our current remit within the common security and defence policy, CSDP, is limited to humanitarian missions, crisis response and peacekeeping. As it stands, PESCO alludes to closer co-operation with NATO and makes overtures on a defence industry Single Market. I urge the Taoiseach to stress Irish non-alignment in the context of the development of PESCO, thereby ensuring that our participation is limited to our current involvement with the CSDP.

See this speech in context