Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

As the Taoiseach will recall, this is the third occasion on which I have requested a briefing from his officials in advance of an EU Council. I hope in future we will be able to receive comprehensive briefings on the agenda for meetings in advance. I appreciate that in recent weeks the Taoiseach has been very busy, but the challenges and the future of Europe are core concerns for us in the months and years ahead. It is important, before we have debates like this one, that we have a deeper understanding of the position Ireland takes on each agenda item.

While Brexit will dominate the Article 50 Council on 15 December, the meeting on Thursday will discuss a number of other important issues. I understand the Estonian Prime Minister is to provide an overview on the implementation of the earlier Council conclusions. The Taoiseach might furnish us with the details of those as soon as they come to hand.

The first official item on the agenda on Thursday is defence, welcoming the launch of Permanent Structured Co-operation. Since the Dáil rushed through the ratification last week, after little public debate or engagement on what is a very important issue, Ireland will now take part in PESCO. Alongside the original 23 members announced in November, Ireland and Portugal have now signed up but as I said previously, Malta and Denmark have chosen not to, while the United Kingdom will be exiting the EU. The Danes have had a defence opt-out since 1992. Separately, Malta has decided to take a wait and see approach, one that might have been wise counsel for us, as it believes certain operations may be in breach of the neutrality clause of their constitution. It is a shame that Ireland did not take the same approach as Malta.

There are 17 joint projects which will fall under the scope of PESCO. The Government should tell us which ones it intends to sign up for so that we can have absolute clarity on these matters. It is interesting that the key point for discussion under defence is a review of progress in other fields, notably EU-NATO co-operation. Ireland is not a member of NATO but the direction of future travel intended by some member states is becoming increasingly clear.

On Monday, Jean Claude Juncker tweeted that the Sleeping Beauty of the Lisbon treaty is happening. He welcomed the operational steps being taken today by member states to lay the foundation of a European Defence Union. While the Government may protest that PESCO has nothing to do with a European army, it is clearly the intent of many states to proceed down that track. The French President has said he wants an EU army, and now PESCO will provide the stepping stone to that.

The second agenda item relates to social, education and culture. I am not clear what the conclusions referred to are, following on from the Gothenburg Social Summit. The Minister of State, who is to address the House later, might elaborate on that. There has been a focus on the ERASMUS programme as it celebrates 30 years in existence, one that would be recognised and celebrated across all member states. There is a proposal from the leaders' agenda to "envisage" an ERASMUS for young artists. That is a exciting and interesting prospect. It would be a very welcome and tangible benefit for EU citizens into the future.

The Party of European Socialists, through its Act For Youth campaign, has called for a widening of the accessibility and increased funding for the ERASMUS+ programme. That would allow secondary school students and technical and professional apprentices to benefit also from ERASMUS. That would be very welcome, particularly when growing nationalism is a countervailing argument to the benefits we have enjoyed for many decades of growing integration in our European homeland. I hope the Government will take these proposals on board.

The agenda also states that in light of events the Council may address specific foreign policy issues. The Taoiseach might report back to us, or the Minister of State in her address later, on what the Government intends to raise in these matters but I raise a very important issue that I hope the Taoiseach will take the opportunity to raise when the broader foreign policy issues are being discussed at the Council. This is the decision by the United States to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move its embassy from Tel Aviv to that city, what the leaders jointly will say about that and the action they propose to take in the light of the reaction across not only the broader Arab world, but the entire Muslim world at that very negative decision.

Turning to Brexit, I believe a number of significant developments have opened up the prospect of a soft Brexit. I have repeated many times my view and that of my party that only the UK staying in the Single Market and the customs union can deliver the type of border and future trade arrangements that Ireland needs and the consensus in this House requires. Any other arrangement less than the maintenance of the United Kingdom as a whole within the Single Market and the customs union will present real challenges to maintaining the integrated economy we now have.

As others have said, the joint report published on Friday marks the start of a process, not an end. As I said on the day, the devil is very much in the detail. The commitment in the agreed text that the British Government will maintain full alignment with Internal Market rules on the island of Ireland in the absence of a satisfactory UK-EU agreement is a strong backstop, but I am worried. I listened to the Taoiseach carefully today again during Leaders' Questions when he maintained that the backstop was a stand alone position. Is that the case when the repeated view expressed in the British House of Commons is that until everything is agreed, nothing is agreed? In other words, the backstop is not really a backstop in the event of there being no fundamental agreement. That is the fundament point we need clarity upon because if it is to be a firewall, it should not be a flammable one.

Full alignment on this island and between the two islands implies a particular kind of Brexit outcome that may not satisfy hard Brexiteers in the UK, although I believe there is a growing sense of reality dawning on even those who are the most trenchant in their views. As we saw in the Brexit referendum, the level of debate and plain untruths told about leaving the EU now continue to infect the debate on these very important issues. The internal politics of the British Conservative Party could derail the prospects of the best outcome for both the British and Irish peoples, and that is what we saw in the discussions particularly in Britain last weekend. It was deeply disappointing but not surprising to hear the comments from a number of cabinet members that the agreement arrived at with the EU and Ireland was "meaningless, "not binding" or somehow limited.

I am well aware of the complex negotiations that are involved in these processes and that there are many staging posts along the way. The Taoiseach said there will be many spinners of words but there has to be a common understanding between the negotiating parties of what is meant. When hard-won negotiations arrive at an agreed text, there cannot be different interpretations of a fundamental nature as to the meaning of those texts. I hope that what we have seen over the last weekend is the last of that. UK politicians and officials need to realise that the melodrama that has been played out publicly in Britain has huge negative impacts on our understanding of the capacity of the British negotiators to act in good faith and to deliver a deal that is delivered upon.

A weak and divided British Government remains charged with squaring a very difficult circle. Importantly, phase two negotiations still stand ahead of us and in reality there is now less than ten months left to finalise whatever detail will be accommodated before the actual exit proposals are put to the European Parliament at the end of next year.

Donald Tusk circulated draft guidelines for the second phase of Brexit negotiations on Friday. According to reports, EU countries have sought changes to those guidelines. As I said, the devil will be in the detail and we will see all of that.

Ireland needs to discuss not only the details that will emerge from the arrangements that will be negotiated between Ireland and Britain, but we also needs time to discuss the future of Europe because there is a parallel agenda. I hope the suggestion made by the leader of Fianna Fáil, that we have more time and more engagement with officials in advance of these debates to deal with both of those important tracks for our future, is adopted.

See this speech in context