Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the chance to add a few comments, primarily on Brexit, to this debate on the European Council meeting. The meeting was not a key moment in the whole Brexit process and the work really needs to be done away from Councils prior to a final decision, hopefully at a special European Council meeting in November, December, or, as some people are now suggesting, in January. However, it provides a staging post where we can consider where we are. I happen to have been in London yesterday and the day before speaking at various events on Brexit and these have informed my thinking here.

It seems that we have ended up in a very unsatisfactory position in the sense that we are now the last item on the table to be resolved. It seems as though what the Prime Minister, Theresa May, says is true, namely, that 95% or 96% is done, and much of that is good work. There has been a satisfactory level of progress around arrangements regarding the free movement of people and so on. However, it is very unfortunate that this is the last unresolved issue. All along, I recall the Taoiseach and others saying that the key was to get it resolved early - last December, then in the spring, in March, before the return - but we missed every deadline. This is the last issue between a deal and no deal. In any negotiation, that is not the position in which one wants to be. I do not blame the Irish Government for that, but merely recognise that things have not worked out as we would have wished.

We should stick to our principles, the primary principle being that when the people signed up to and voted for the Good Friday Agreement, and amended our Constitution by revising Articles 2 and 3, that was a hugely significant constitutional moment for this country. It was a very positive one, in recognising that a return to a united Ireland would only be delivered in the context of a majority of the people in Northern Ireland desiring such an outcome and a willingness to work and co-operate with the North through the various structures which were established, recognising the Unionist position and tradition and their rights to their constitutional position. It was a very progressive step and one which probably took 12 years to negotiate with the UK Government. It is one that we have been trying to implement for 20 years, for good and ill, but it is an agreement that it is right to hold to. It is not only that we hold to the Border, it is holding to that constitutional decision that we made as a people, in amending Articles 2 and 3 which was no small or insignificant thing. It is right for us to stand by that and it is right that this House has been unified in that central position that we bring to the negotiations. It is good that we have had almost universal support for this position from our European neighbours and I do not believe that we should cede it at this late stage. That should not mean that we do not seek a deal, because that would be better. When one considers that we have had difficulty negotiating a withdrawal agreement, imagine what it will be like negotiating a permanent agreement when a whole range of commercial and other vested national interests are at play. It will be even more difficult.

It is very hard to understand what the precise nature of the final deal will be, although it seems clear that the officials on both sides seem to have it in place and all that is left to happen is the final political management. From what I hear, the resolution to the backstop deal will be some sort of two-phase process where we agree something along the lines of what was agreed in December or March, namely, that we have a backstop guarantee that is not time dated within the withdrawal agreement and that protects us from any introduction of a hard border. However, I imagine that within the political declaration, which accompanies the withdrawal agreement, there will be some sort of commitment towards engaging during the transitional period in more detailed negotiations on what regulatory alignment and customs arrangement approach might apply on an all-UK basis - not only Northern Ireland - and that we would signal that we would be willing to engage in that process. That would be with a view to having a slightly revised, or different, agreement. That might not be necessary if we had a full agreement, but there might be two phases with the prospect of a second backstop which would recognise the outcome of that negotiated process over a period, perhaps two or three years, depending on the length of the transition.

It is very hard to read between the lines and one reads so many views.

I read The Timesthe other day, which featured comments such as "Theresa May puts it up to Europe". Denis Staunton from The Irish Timescovered the same speech from Westminster, and he read the situation much more accurately, to my mind. It interpreted the speech as being indicative that there is a real mechanism in place now for resolving the backstop issue. If that is the approach to be taken we should be willing to be flexible and engage with it in a creative way. We should hold the line on our constitutional position, but that does not require us to have something today which will be engraved in stone for the next 20 or 30 years. We should be willing to engage in that two-stage process if it will help to break the deadlock. Other parties on this side of the House have said the same, which perhaps should give the Government flexibility and room for manoeuvre because it knows it would maintain support here. It is important that we maintain that united position.

What I heard in London was scary, because it seems that the prospect of a no-deal crash-out is something the UK is increasingly willing to countenance. In some ways it exposes some of the underlying objectives of those seeking a hard Brexit. The UK Government produced a paper on 12 October showing the likely consequences for the areas of climate and energy in a no-deal, crash-out Brexit. It seems to be considering leaving the European Union emission trading scheme, ETS, and taking the deregulated route, thinking that would cushion the hardships that would come from the breach that would occur in faith, relations and trade with their European Union partners. It exposes the underlying philosophy behind the Brexit deal. I mention that because there was another event in these Houses today which informed my thinking. In the audiovisual room today, a series of Northern Ireland environmental campaigning groups presented an analysis of what is actually happening. The reality is that our Border is becoming a dirty border in a dirty Brexit, and that there is unregulated illegal dumping, development of pig and poultry farming where there is a disregard for the polluting effects of ammonia and slurry used, and uncertainty as to where the materials used in such activity are going, and mining licences are being considered in the absence of any political administration to assess the strategic direction being taken. We have debates in this House and are concerned when we hear that a Minister has met a developer without a civil servant being present. We are hearing that in the North, civil servants are meeting developers with no politicians present, which is just as worrying. Legislation is being passed in London today. It is a very black day for Northern Irish politics; politics are being written out as administrative civil servants are being given ultimate power. It is a very bad day for Ireland and for Europe, and one we cannot ignore.

I do not know if this was raised in the European Council but perhaps we have been blinded by Brexit to everything else going on in Europe. The Italian Government seems to be in direct conflict with the European Commission about its budget. There are concerns about what may happen to the Italian economy, and we are not going to be immune from any fallout of that. I do not know whether the Irish Government has taken a public position on that, but it should. We cannot just fixate on Brexit. We have to return to thinking about where Europe is going and where we are going within Europe. Brexit is blinding us to that, and that is another problem it has brought. We cannot ignore that.

See this speech in context