Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to say a few words on Fifth Stage. Most of us expected Fifth Stage to be reached much later in the evening, if it was reached at all today. That it has been reached now underscores the extent of co-operation and preparation in advance of the presentation of this Bill. We hope this legislation is comprehensive. I love the acronym "BOB" that has been coined to describe the Brexit omnibus Bill. We hope that as an omnibus Bill, it captures all the issues that might arise in the event of a hard Brexit. We all hope there will not be a need to face the implications for the nation, and indeed for the island of Ireland and the EU as a whole, of a disorderly UK departure.

For more than four decades, the UK's relationship with the EU has bound it intrinsically into the legal structure of the Union. During the referendum, people advocated the notion that it would be simple to bring this relationship to an end, as if it were like leaving some sort of club. We have not yet foreseen all of the extraordinary difficulties that will, regardless of the eventual outcome of this process, ultimately be caused by the UK's decision to extricate itself from everything that has been completely integrated for more than four decades, including trade, business, finance, laws and environmental controls. I have no doubt that we will have to revisit issues that we thought we had agreed on and dealt with. Equally, I have no doubt that issues which have not yet occurred to us will arise and need to be addressed.

As the Tánaiste will be aware, I raised two broad issues in the course of the debate on this Bill. The Labour Party did not table any amendments on Committee Stage because, in essence, it did not want to bolt anything onto the Bill. There was nothing fatal in the Bill that, in our judgment, needed to be amended. The first issue I would like to return to is the constitutionality of vesting powers in the Minister for Health to change primary legislation. The Minister has given me very strong assurances, reinforced by the views of the Attorney General, that the idea of this provision is simply to preserve the status quo. It is not new. We will see. I hope it is robust.

I will return briefly to a second issue. I have yet to comprehend fully how we will deal with the UK differently in relation to the General Agreement on Trade in Services without being required to give exactly the same treatment to every other non-EU member state that is bound by the same general agreement. As I have said, these things will play out if and when they need to be played out.

I would like to reinforce some questions I put to the Taoiseach this week. I genuinely believe we are now in the endgame of finding the solution that is going to be found to provide for the type of withdrawal from the EU that the UK will have. I do not want to sound alarmist when I say this is a point of heightened peril for us. It is unfortunate, if perhaps inevitable, that the backstop is the issue that is presented as causing the final and insurmountable obstacle to a majority in the House of Commons supporting the negotiated withdrawal agreement. The Attorney General for England and Wales is in Brussels again this week to find a legally binding way of changing his advices. I do not believe he will compromise himself by giving advices he does not believe. If he is to change his advices, it is self-evident that he will need to have something that he can convince his colleagues in the House of Commons marks a fundamental change. It seems to me that this could be arrived at in a number of ways, most of which have already been ruled out. My understanding is that everybody, including the British, agrees and understands that there can be no change in the withdrawal agreement itself. That is a closed shop. I had thought there might be some amendment to the political declaration, but I now understand that is not the way. Perhaps the Tánaiste can advise us on that.

What other means are there? There was speculation yesterday that there could be a new arbitration system. If Britain determines at some stage after the triggering of the backstop agreement that it wants to withdraw, is it envisaged that some third party arbitration will take place? If so, I do not understand the impact it would have. Would it diminish the bulletproof guarantees we currently have?

The final way of doing this would be the way we dealt with the post-Lisbon treaty situation, when a declaration was made by the Council of Ministers and the legal services of the Council determined that the declaration had legal validity. In our case, it was subsequently added as a protocol to the Lisbon treaty. Obviously, that had legal certainty. If the avenue that is sought is a legally binding declaration, without question it will undermine the robustness of our guarantee. I have not yet got my mind around how Mr. Cox is to be satisfied without weakening the guarantee that cannot be weakened. I would welcome an answer to that question. I understand that the Tánaiste probably does not know the full answer to it. Perhaps he will give his understanding of where the negotiations are at. I read yesterday that they have returned to the tunnel, which is always a worry. There is a code of silence around these discussions. It is too important, sensitive and critical to our well-being and that of our people on the island of Ireland for it to remain in some Brussels tunnel. I would like to hear more on this.

The Bill we have been dealing with in recent days is a legislative response, insofar as such a response can be crafted, to a disorderly withdrawal of the UK from the EU. As every other Member of the House has strongly underscored, the legislative response is just one arm of the comprehensive response we need to give. I am still very concerned about the level of investment in ports, for example. I have visited Rosslare and I know about the congestion that will be caused there. I am looking at the impact of the minor work to rule that is going on in France today. If the UK landbridge fundamentally breaks down and is so slow as to be unusable for some types of goods, there will be a lack of robust connectivity between Ireland and the Continent. There is an unquestionable concentration of dependency on Dublin Port, through which 90% of the imports and exports of this State are now channelled. All of these things cause me concern, as do other issues like supports to small and medium-sized enterprises and the agriculture sector. I will raise those matters at a different time.

I look forward to the speedy passage of the legislation and our further debates as we move towards whatever will happen by the end of the month.

See this speech in context