Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I was criticised earlier by Deputy Crowe for not giving more detail. I must inform him that, in view of the time constraints, I was anxious to let some of my colleagues contribute. As I have time now, I wish to respond to some of the concerns outlined by colleagues.

In terms of the politics of this Dáil, I thank all parties for their patience and co-operation on what has been a testing period due to Brexit negotiations and the intensification in recent weeks and months of no-deal contingency planning.

I have heard colleagues opposite express frustration - both here and elsewhere - that they are not getting information or detail quickly enough. If people have genuine concerns and they want information or briefings, if they contact my office, if we have them, they will get them straight away. I mean that. The relationship with Fianna Fáil is very important but so are those with Sinn Féin and others. That is why I made a point after the Cabinet meeting on Tuesday of briefing Fianna Fáil as the main Opposition party and then briefing others before we gave anything to the media. That is what we will try to continue to do. This is not a political game. This is not about the Government trying to look good and taking tough positions on Brexit. This is about a national interest. We might not be in government in a year's time; it could be somebody else. There are core issues that we need to be careful that we protect and defend. In many ways, what we are witnessing here and what we are part of is history unfolding week by week before our eyes in terms of our relationship with our closest neighbour and in terms of the United Kingdom's relationship with the EU.

6 o’clock

Decisions will be taken in the coming weeks and months which will change the direction of that relationship. We need to work together to make sure that, through that process, we focus on the priorities I think we all have, which are to try to maintain the closest possible relationship with the UK, to protect core Irish interests, our businesses, farmers and fishermen, Irish citizens in Britain and Northern Ireland, and to protect the peace process and the progress that has been made in the past 20 years, which has been reinforced by the absence of any physical Border infrastructure as an impediment to the free movement of people or goods, or anything else for that matter.

Those are the priorities I have outlined many times. We are, unfortunately, in a position where, with some 70 days to go, we still do not know what a majority in the British Parliament want. This has made preparations difficult to plan across the EU but in Ireland in particular because of our exposure and vulnerability to Brexit and its fallout. We are planning for all eventualities across all sectors. We are working in a collaborative way with industry, trade unions, representative organisations for different sectors and other political parties. While I hear accusations that we are not open about that, in fact, I have faced down people who suggested we should not have had, for example, Opposition political parties in our stakeholders group. I insisted from the very start that we should have every political group or party there that wants to be there, and I think that has been the right decision and has helped to create consensus.

Nonetheless, every now and then we have different approaches. For example, I have been critical of Sinn Féin's position on having a debate on a border poll in the midst of all of this. I do not think that is helpful and it has added a lot of tension and polarisation to the debate in Northern Ireland. However, I respect that everybody in Northern Ireland has a right to dream and to aspire to the kind of future they believe they want for themselves and their families, whether a person is a nationalist or a unionist. I have my own views on that. However, what we are trying to do right now is protect the status quoso we can create some stability to be able to have debates like that in the future in a non-heated environment. We have enough challenges to overcome right now in an atmosphere where we do not have devolved government, we do not have North-South structures and, effectively, we do not have a functioning Good Friday Agreement in terms of its structures. We do not want to add the pressure of a very divisive, difficult and emotive debate, which could create huge fears among some communities at a time we are trying to achieve compromise on both sides to find a way forward on Brexit in both London and Belfast.

Having said that, to Sinn Féin's credit, it has not made life difficult for me at times when we have had to plan to get things done, despite the fact we have different perspectives on certain approaches. I want to recognise that contribution.

The next few weeks will be challenging for Ireland and we need to work together, unlike what is happening in Westminster, where the two main parties are refusing to even talk to each other without preconditions despite the fact their country is rolling towards a cliff edge. It is unbelievable. I say that because my country is being impacted by their inability to talk to each other in terms of no-deal Brexit planning and, of course, all of the stress and strife, and fears and rumours, that will filter through communities in Border counties, which are wondering what is going to happen. I hope we will see mature politics developing and a middle ground emerge within Westminster that puts this issue of a no-deal Brexit to bed as soon as possible, although that is a matter for Britain and Westminster. While we have to deal with the consequences, it is a sovereign parliament and it needs to make decisions in the way it does.

In terms of what we can do here, we can continue to prepare for the worst-case scenario, which we are doing. I do not accept the glib criticism that the document we published in December did not have any detail in it. There is a lot of detail in that document. If anybody wants to sit down with me for a few hours and go through it section by section, I will point out the detail to them. However, it is true there are parts of the document that are light. That is because there are certain things that do not have contingency plans yet, including EU competence, which we cannot deal with even if we want to, given there are certain areas where the EU has yet to decide how it would approach the consequences of a no-deal Brexit. Fishing is a good example of that.

This is hugely complex. People may call for answers, assuming I have them in a briefcase somewhere and I am not giving them out. This is an evolving process. What we published in December was essentially a framework document for dealing with contingency planning. It deals with 20 different sectoral areas. What we did at the Cabinet meeting this week was to provide a lot more detail to Ministers on four of those areas and we then gave initial briefings to Opposition parties, although we probably need to give more detailed briefings, for example, on how we are going to deliver on the common travel area so Irish citizens and British citizens in each other's countries in the future will be able to enjoy the kind of privileges they enjoy today. That was there long before either of us joined the EU and it will be there long after Britain leaves.

We also did this in regard to medicines because I know, as the Minister, Deputy Harris, knows, this is a sensitive area and we need to reassure people. That is why we wanted to prioritise it and to do it early in January. There are no medicines on a risk list that we predict will not be available post Brexit. Of course, that could develop so we have a team of people working on it. In fact, conversations have been under way on that issue for two years between the HSE and the other relevant stakeholders and bodies. The Minister for Health's memo to Government this week was convincing and persuasive. While there is undoubtedly work to do in this regard, we do not have anything fundamental to worry about.

We also did this in regard to legislation, which is where we had probably the longest element of the briefing the other day. We are essentially going to have to introduce 17 Bills in one omnibus Bill, and we are going to have to do that before the middle of March - just in case. While I think it is unlikely, we are doing this just in case Britain crashes out on 29 March and just in case the British political system is unable to deal with this issue and it happens almost by default. That is possible, if unlikely, so we have to plan for it. We will be ready from a legislative point of view, with the help of this House, and we will be totally open about this legislation with the House. Next week, hopefully, we will be able to publish the heads of that legislation, which, as I said, has 17 different sections in different areas and involves nine Departments. We will have another 28 secondary Bills in regard to ministerial orders and statutory instruments. We will go through that again in detail with anybody who is interested.

I ask that people would please not put out the accusation that there is no detail going on here. We have itemised 28 statutory instruments that are potentially required to be introduced over the next few weeks and we have 17 different sectoral areas within one omnibus Bill, the heads of which will, hopefully, be ready for Cabinet next week and will certainly be published by the end of next week. This will then go to the parliamentary draftspersons to draft one of the largest pieces of legislation this House may ever have passed to be ready to publish it on 22 February, so we can then take it to Second Stage in this House and debate it. We need to agree procedures with the Opposition, given this is not about big parties dominating or anything like that. This will mean we can get this thing done, if we have to, to protect our country. Based on my initial discussions, again, I have to say that people could not have been more co-operative in terms of wanting to help us get that done on time in a way that allows us to effectively pass legislation to protect the status quofor our citizens in different areas.

With regard to the backstop, there are a number of valid questions.

The assumption that if there is a no-deal Brexit, our obligation to protect the EU Single Market and customs union will force us by default to reintroduce border infrastructure is one I do not accept because when it comes to the Border, we have competing responsibilities. These include the peace process, peaceful relationships and an all-island economy as well as EU membership. While that is understood in London and Brussels, it does not support the narrative we sometimes hear from Brexiteers that if Dublin, London and Brussels do not want it, there is nothing to worry about and there will be no border. It is a bogus argument. To assume it will not happen because we do not want it does not deliver what we need, namely a legal agreement which provides a guarantee that no physical border infrastructure will re-emerge as an unintended consequence of Brexit, whether in a no-deal or planned scenario. There is an obligation on the British Government just as there is one on the Irish Government as co-guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement to ensure these matters are planned for, even in the case of a no-deal Brexit. I note some of the language the British Prime Minister used: "...in all circumstances, we have an obligation to avoid hard border infrastructure". The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has said that deal or no deal, the British Government must prevent border infrastructure on the island of Ireland.

We will have to be mature enough to ensure contingency planning is in place should it be necessary to prevent border infrastructure even in a no-deal Brexit scenario. Of course, it will be challenging should it happen, which is why we remain strong advocates of the backstop as a mechanism to provide the guarantees we need. It is an approach the British Government supported along with the Irish Government and 26 other EU member states. We will continue to advocate for that as, in my view, will Michel Barnier, President Tusk and President Juncker. There is strong solidarity on this issue which I do not see dissipating any time soon because it is the right argument. Those who argue against the backstop, which is about ensuring border infrastructure is unnecessary through regulatory alignment in the areas required, should realise that it is a different approach to the issue than that of those who seem to think it can be dealt with through technology or slick camera systems. That is not a credible argument, if people are being honest. That is the context of any comments I have been quoted as having made this week and it is the Government's position as firmly stated by the Taoiseach in the House on Tuesday.

We must demonstrate some patience over the next few days. Ireland must hold its nerve as I have said a number of times this week. While we are impatient for the answers and solutions which need to come from London, we will have to show some patience in terms of the political solutions in the context of the pace at which those solutions will, I hope, be put together and agreed. We cannot solve this problem or contribute to its solution until we know what a majority of people in Westminster want and will vote for. In the meantime, we must focus on what we control, namely contingency planning with the Commission and domestically. That is what Members will see a major focus on next week on the part of Government as we move to publish heads of legislation, which I hope will not be needed ultimately but which are needed to help us prepare in the weeks ahead.

See this speech in context