Dáil debates

Thursday, 12 July 2018

Northern Ireland and Brexit: Statements

 

6:20 pm

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

Previously in this House many of us have been highly critical of the British Government for its seeming ineptitude and in-fighting, which has repeatedly confounded attempts to nail down even the most basic of positions in respect of the proposed future relationship with the EU. The past week, however, may prove to have been somewhat of a catalyst for the future of the negotiations.

The White Paper which was published this afternoon lays the foundation for the UK's position going forward and the most strident dissenters have been sidelined. Despite this, there remain a number of potential pitfalls that will need to be addressed as soon as possible. From a first reading of the White Paper there are elements that are not perfect or realistic, but crucially for Ireland it points towards a realisation that a soft Brexit is not only desirable for the UK but in many ways it is inevitable. The UK policy now seems to have re-orientated towards seeking a free trade area for goods, which would require synchronisation with EU rules - a so-called common rule book or harmonisation by another name. This would in effect mean that existing customs and regulatory arrangements for manufacturing and agricultural products would continue after Brexit but services would diverge.

A facilitated customs arrangement is proposed. This would see the UK and EU become what is referred to as a combined customs territory in which the UK would apply the EU's tariffs and trade policies for goods intended for the bloc with domestic tariffs imposed for goods heading to the UK. This proposal, regrettably, harkens back to similar UK proposals that the EU has already rejected. Most alarmingly, the White Paper seeks to end the free movement of people to the UK from EU member states. Aside from contravening the principle of no access to the free market without free movement this section is very problematic from an Irish perspective. The section of the White Paper dealing with immigration is laid out, "without prejudice to the common travel area." If I am correct in my reading this means that the UK wishes to limit EU migration to skilled workers and simultaneously keep an open border between Northern Ireland the Republic. It is not clear how this circle can be squared. Also, and with complete disregard to the Good Friday Agreement and Irish citizens in Northern Ireland, the White Paper states bluntly that the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, ECJ, in the UK will end, except in relation to the interpretation of those EU rules to which the UK has agreed to adhere as a matter of international law. We urgently need clarity on whether the Good Friday Agreement falls into this category.

As we all know Theresa May's majority in the House of Commons relies on the support of the DUP which, despite the wishes of the majority in Northern Ireland, has been one of the most vociferous voices in its support for a hard Brexit. We have not seen its reaction to the contents of the White Paper as of yet but if Theresa May is to re-establish fully her authority as Prime Minister, she must demand that the EU produce workable alternatives to what is in the document or fall into line behind her. I echo the calls of others that Sinn Féin reconsider its abstentionist policy, even temporarily, for the purposes of securing the best deal for its constituents in Northern Ireland. This is particularly pressing given the elements of the White Paper, which I have already referred to, that will affect Northern Ireland, specifically the free movement of people and the jurisdiction of the ECJ. These two issues, along with the customs proposals, should set alarm bells ringing for the Government, particularly in light of the comment by Michel Barnier on Tuesday that a Brexit deal was 80% done. We can only conclude from this that the substance of the White Paper was seen by the European Commission prior to publication. If the remaining 20% concerns the inconsistencies that I have already referred to, I urge the Tánaiste to seek assurances from the European Commission and EU leaders that these will be dealt with as a matter of urgency.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.