Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity for a discussion on Brexit. While the Bill is specific, it provides us with an opportunity to discuss the wider implications of Brexit and how matters are progressing. Fianna Fáil is not supporting this Sinn Féin Bill that would compel the Government to report to the Oireachtas on negotiations regarding the UK's intention to withdraw from the European Union. While we believe that both Houses of the Oireachtas should be kept up to speed on the status of the Brexit negotiations, we regard this Bill in the context of the ongoing negotiations as inappropriate and untimely. Ultimately, it could endanger our position in terms of negotiating. We are also cognisant that there is already an opportunity to discuss Brexit and European related matters in the Dáil by way of pre and post European Council statements.

The irony of Sinn Féin bringing forward this Bill is not lost on us. This is the same party that campaigned against joining the EU and against every referendum held within the State. It is the same party who during the 2016 general election signed up to the right to change manifesto which called for Ireland to hold a referendum on its membership of the European Union should the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, TTIP, be signed without it first going before the Irish people and, moreover and most important, this is the same party that collapsed the Executive in Northern Ireland and left the region most affected by Brexit without a voice in the negotiations. Through its actions and policy of absenteeism, Sinn Féin has played its part in creating a toxic environment in Northern Ireland that has not only undermined the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process but has also left the people of Northern Ireland, the majority of whom voted in the Brexit referendum to remain, without a voice at this most critical time.

Coupled with this, Sinn Féin has continually called for a Border poll, which has only served to reverse the progress made in Northern Ireland and sow seeds of division and mistrust, which has prevented the parties from working together to restore the Executive and to achieve the best Brexit deal possible. Therefore, it is ironic that Sinn Féin wants the Government to report to the Oireachtas on Brexit negotiations in the Republic while simultaneously it fails to take any responsibility for Brexit in Northern Ireland. In our view, they have very little credibility when it comes to Brexit.

This Bill seeks to amend section 5 of the European Communities Act 1972 which states that the Government shall make a report twice yearly to each House on the Oireachtas on development in the European Communities. The Sinn Féin Bill, at section 5(1), states that in each year the Government shall make a report, such that it proposes a reduction from two to one the number of reports to this House. Subsection (2) further states that notwithstanding the generality of the foregoing the Taoiseach shall report to the Dáil the Government's approach to the negotiations surrounding the United Kingdom's intention to leave the European Union in advance of the commencement of such negotiations. This Bill is out of date and irrelevant. It makes no sense because negotiations have already commenced. Subsection (3), with which Fianna Fáil does not have a difficulty, states that the Government shall make a report to each House of the Oireachtas on developments in negotiations. As I said, pre and post Council statements allow us to do this.

I fail to see the purpose of this Bill given it is almost one year out of date in that negotiations have commenced. As I said, it seeks to reduce the number of reports that are made to this House, which is regressive step. The Bill was first introduced in February 2017. As I said, it is out of date and I am not sure why we are discussing it but I do welcome the opportunity to have a wider discussion on Brexit and its implications. Sinn Féin's hypocrisy on this matter cannot be overlooked. The Executive in Northern Ireland remains in a state of limbo. The people of Northern Ireland need their voice. While the Irish Government and Fianna Fáil have been very strong in providing that voice, the people of Northern Ireland feel let down by the parties in the North in terms of their failure to come together and restore the institutions and actively participate in the Brexit negotiations rather than grandstanding and virtue signalling in the Republic. Given Sinn Féin collapsed the Executive and it continues its policy of absenteeism, the people of Northern Ireland are left without representation at one of the most critical times in their history. It baffles me that we are now almost 16 months without an Executive. Brexit is raging and this Bill, which is a year a half out of date, seeks to update the Dáil on what is happening in Brexit yet we have no institutions in the North. This needs to be called out for what it is.

The ultimate aim of Fianna Fáil is to secure the best Brexit deal possible for the entire Island of Ireland, including a trading relationship that is as close as feasibly possible to what we have at present, to ensure that progress is made in Northern Ireland and that Anglo-Irish relations are not regressed as a result of Brexit. We recognise this is a tense time but it is important that those relations are maintained and that foundations are put in place to continue maintenance of those relations post-Brexit. Fianna Fáil is a constitutional republican party that wants to see a united Ireland but we will not exploit Brexit as a means of achieving this goal. Sinn Féin's call for a Border poll has not in any way helped the Brexit negotiations. It has only served to harden the position of the DUP and create levels of distrust and discord in Northern Ireland that we have not seen since prior to the Good Friday Agreement. Sinn Féin has, in our view, certainly not covered itself in glory when it comes to putting Ireland’s interests to the fore in the Brexit negotiations.

Fianna Fáil has been generally supportive of the Government’s Brexit negotiation. Despite suggestions from the Government party that it has not been supportive, it is our view that we have been supportive but this support is conditional on the Government doing a good job. At an International level, we have raised serious concerns about the Government’s domestic preparedness for Brexit, which I will speaker a further later. I would like to raise some of the ongoing issues in terms of the negotiations. I know that the Taoiseach met Prime Minister, Theresa May, today and that discussions took place in recent days on a third option in terms of what has been termed "maximum facilitation plus delay". While Fianna Fail welcomes Theresa May proposing that the entire United Kingdom remain within the Customs Union, we are concerned that this is being couched in language of it being a temporary solution such that we are kicking the can down the road with a view to at some point in the future having some type of border facilitated by technology that does not yet exist. If we allow this to progress to the point where we are talking about maintaining the UK in the Customs Union or some type of customs arrangement for a period of, say, six or seven years and so on what will happen when we reach the end of that process? It should be borne in mind that at that time Michel Barnier, Guy Verhofstadt and we may not be around. We do not know who will be on the Irish Government, European or UK teams. We are playing a serious game of Russian roulette with the future of this country if we are willing to rely on what might happen years down the road, something over which we have no control. For this reason, the backstop is important. I acknowledge that progress was made last December, although I believe it was over-sold and that the language used at that time over-egged it. Very strong language was used, including cast-iron, bulletproof and so on, because that was not the case. When the wording was put before the British Parliament and Theresa May and she outright rejected it, this showed that the British Government, the Irish Government and the EU negotiating team had different interpretations of what that backstop and protocol 49 meant. We cannot afford to facilitate the UK, Theresa May and the Tory Party to the detriment of our own party.

It is very important that this is nailed down in June and that we have absolute clarity in October because we are edging towards a situation where nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, as the Tánaiste has said. If we do not have a withdrawal treaty we do not have a transition period and if we do not have a transition period we have a cliff edge exit next March. I know that the Tánaiste knows this. I issue one warning on this. If the European research group that is headed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and his 60 Brexiteers comes on board to support the idea put forward by Theresa May, then alarm bells should ring across this island. Only a couple of days ago the same MP said that they are fully committed to a hard Brexit, that they want no ties or links to the European Union, that they want the ability to trade freely with other nations and that they do not support maintaining the UK as part of the customs union. If there is a change of heart and they are suddenly, somehow, on board with the proposals then we need to be very cautious in working with that. I appreciate the difficulties with the negotiation but I fear that if we allow this can to be kicked down the road the negotiations may tick on for months and years to come. We cannot predict what might happen in six or seven years' time. This is so important for the future of the island of Ireland, and especially for the citizens in the North of Ireland with regard to their rights to access the European Courts of Justice and for the free movement of people, services, goods and trade, including trade North and South. We really need to see this negotiation locked down and absolutely clear. While I cautiously welcome Theresa May's remarks today we certainly need to see text on a page. In very basic terms, we need to see in writing exactly what is being proposed before we can support the so-called "third option".

See this speech in context