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

The Green Party will support the Government and all the other parties in trying put this legislation in place. It is legislation that none of us want to see enacted or used but it is a necessary precaution that we must make as a result of the possibility of a no-deal, crash-out Brexit.

This morning I read something that gave me a sense of the lack of connection to reality of the British political system at this time. I regret that I must say this but they are the only words I can use to describe the situation as I see it. It was an article in The Telegraph by the very eminent and experienced former Tory leader and Foreign Secretary, William Hague. He advises his colleagues that if the EU is going to make any meaningful concession, it will only do so at the last minute because of the consequences of a no-deal Brexit. He said that the UK Government has to hold its nerve and extract change to the legal durability of the Irish backstop. That seems to be the current negotiating tactic employed by the UK Government. I scratched my head and thought how surely they must understand, as I think most people here do, that the European Union is not going to allow the extraction of such as concession.

To explain why, our party leader in the European Parliament, Mr. Philippe Lamberts, MEP, was over here recently and put it well when I questioned him on this. He said that what they do not seem to realise is that the concession they are looking for is, in effect, a concession with regard to the Single Market, or a complete weakening of it, and whatever the difficulties that would no doubt be caused by a no-deal Brexit exit, which no one wants, the European Union will not undermine the Single Market. It will not throw a concession on that because that is fundamental. The Single Market is a cornerstone of the Union and that is what is at play. I regret that such a lack of knowledge, or lack of shared understanding of what is at play, exists on the other side of the Irish Sea and I hope that in some way in the coming weeks they can turn it around to realise that this issue will not move, that having it as their great salvation out of the division they have in their Parliament will not work and that they will have to seek some other means, and fairly quickly, to manage this situation. I heard an adviser on the Irish side say today, and I have heard it said recently, that the chance of a no-deal crash out is only 10% and in all likelihood there will be an extension and then some form of agreement. I am nervous because the way I see it in the House of Commons is that there is such lack of cohesion and co-operation, even within each party, or certainly across that House, the risk is they will not even manage that process of avoiding the no-deal crash out, and we have to prepare for it.

It will be difficult for parties on this side to manage the whole process, not only because we are not in opposition to the Government on this but because of the sheer breadth of the technicalities. Given that the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade is able to bring in one Minister after another and has the Departments rowing in, it will be difficult for us to suggest amendments or to have the same resources, particularly given the timelines we have for debating this legislation. This is not an ordinary legislative process.

There are a number of areas where I would hope we could suggest further measures that will need to be taken. They might not necessarily have to be legislative but we will certainly look to see if they are, or will try to input as best we can into what is a contracted and, by its nature, a crisis legislative process. We need to strengthen - if it is not in the legislation, it needs to be put in somewhere else or there needs to be an opportunity to do so somewhere else - the preparation for the environmental consequences of a no-deal crash out Brexit.

One of the strengths of the Good Friday Agreement is it recognised the environmental reality that we share one island and pollution does not recognise borders. Councillor Mark Dearey, a colleague of mine in Dundalk, always makes the point that the water that eventually arrives at his tap has crossed the Border four or five times as the rivers wind their way through south Armagh and County Louth. Similarly, he makes the point that there is real uncertainty as to where the Border is in the likes of Carlingford Lough, and he lives on the shores of Carlingford Lough. A series of environmental campaign groups came to the Dáil late last year, largely because they had no one in the Assembly to speak to. There is no representation in Northern Ireland at present, which is shocking because the Good Friday Agreement envisaged that environmental powers would be devolved to the Assembly. In the absence of any political representation in the North, which could hear their pleas, groups such those protesting against gold mining in the Sperrin Mountains and those who were rightly concerned about the massive and seemingly fraudulent expansion of the pig sector in the North where there is a range of new environmental concerns came down here. For instance, there is the equivalent of 12 million persons' worth of sewage coming from these new anaerobic digestion plants that have been approved in the same way that the home renovation incentive, HRI, plants were approved in the North. That pollution, the ammonia and the concerns regarding water pollution from such plants are cross-Border issues. This Bill is not strong on the environmental legislation and that is something we will need to strengthen in the event that there is a crash-out Brexit. The advantage is it is not ideological. It is merely the physical reality that, as is said, pollution does not recognise borders. Good environmental management must cross borders. That is an area where we could perhaps get some co-operation with unionist parties in the North in recognising it is in their interests. It is in no one's interest to ignore transboundary pollution issues.

There is another reason it is an important area for real detailed work and consideration. One of the problems with this Brexit process and one of the fears we have is that the UK Government intends to use the Brexit process to weaken environmental standards and gain competitive advantage by diverting from the high standards the European Union has set in the Habitats Directive, the Water Framework Directive and the climate directives. All that environmental legislation is European and, as we see it, looking at the draft legislation before the House of Commons, the environmental regulations they are seeking to put in place do not include proper monitoring of what will happen, especially in Northern Ireland. It is English-centric. They are looking at weakening environmental standards and diverting away from European standards which would have particularly severe negative consequences for this island. That is one of the main reasons we must maintain a no-border approach. For farming and for environmental reasons, that has particular consequences on this side of the island.

I hate to say it but we simply do not trust the European Research Group, ERG, and its fairy tale notion that there will be fair trade deals everywhere. It wraps it up in a green ribbon that Mr. Michael Gove, MP, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, presents in terms of being the greenest of them all. Given everything we know about its philosophy, I am sorry but it seems in the legislation it is already considering deregulated lower standards in both employment and environment. That is why I would like to see a much strong emphasis in our response to protect environmental standards in whatever we do.

A second and more detailed area is in the education sector. I have been approached by a number of people involved in Irish universities who said that they are concerned about the lack of a detailed approach to the management of students, who thrive on both sides, both our students going to the UK and UK students coming here. I was told as recently as last week that they had no real certainty as to what they would do with students later this year and next year. I do not have immediate proposals or suggestions in this regard. We must look into the details of the legislation, and through the legislative process, try to ensure that it is as tight and as effective as possible. As I said at the Brexit dialogue in Dublin Castle recently, one of the areas where we might see co-operation with our unionist friends is on the rights of those holding British passports in Northern Ireland to have access to the likes of the Erasmus scheme and also to work, which applies not only to students. We must avoid, in what we are managing, the division between those carrying an Irish passport in the North and a British passport in terms of the rights they gain. We should look for concessions from the European Union post Brexit, whether it is a no-deal or a withdrawal agreement, to protect those rights because it would be deeply divisive to make what passport a person in the North holds determine his or her future. It would be deeply unfair and would undermine everything we have been working for within the Good Friday Agreement and within the peace process that we are all committed to.

There is so much more here because it is such broad legislation. Suffice it to say that we enter into the process of writing this legislation with regret. We will maintain the co-operative approach with the Government that has been evident throughout this Brexit process but we will try to maintain a critical eye and provide useful suggestions to address any flaws and to propose improvements as best we can. Time is short.

The position is tight and we will do our best to help in whatever way we can.

See this speech in context