Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am disappointed that my amendments were ruled out of order. I know that is not a matter for the Leas-Cheann Comhairle or the Minister of State. I will be challenging the decision, however. I do not accept the explanation I received from the Ceann Comhairle's office. We will be looking to bring forward these amendments, or a version of them, when the Bill is taken in the Seanad. As discussed at some length on Second Stage, whatever other Members may think of them, our amendments are a sincere and genuine attempt to deal with a significant issue, namely, that people in the North of Ireland voted against Brexit. Accordingly, we want to ensure they continue to have a voice in the European Parliament and their democratic view is respected.

Much of what is in the Bill is straightforward and technical in nature. It is just trying to deal with a difficult situation that is not the making of anybody in this jurisdiction or in this House. There is a possibility of an extension of Article 50. While people are currently talking about a short extension, it could be a lengthy extension. We know from previous crises in the European Union that it has a tendency to prolong crises and fudge crucial decisions if that is the easier of options.

From his discussions of these matters with his officials and the Attorney General, will the Minister of State explain what impact a longer extension of Article 50 could have on these amendments? To what extent could it result in a legal challenge from somebody, for example, who currently has an entitlement to stand as a candidate or vote in European elections prior to exit? If there is an extended period, strictly speaking, somebody from the North of Ireland, England or Scotland who does not yet have Irish citizenship could still have EU citizenship during that period.. Have the legal implications been properly teased out? It is important that those of us who understand the logic of some of these amendments are not seen to be supporting provisions which might have significant legal consequences in the context of a legal challenge.

See this speech in context