Dáil debates

Tuesday, 12 March 2019

Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders' Questions

 

2:35 pm

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

There are a lot of questions there and I will try to address them. First, however, I wish to address the Taoiseach's comments this morning. He stated that for the remainder of the day the Houses should be conscious that another Parliament will vote on this deal this evening and Members should, therefore, be careful what we say. He is correct in that regard. I do not want to see debates in this House contributing negatively to the capacity for a fair deal to be ratified this evening in Westminster. That could easily happen if the debate in this House were to exaggerate or emphasise elements of the deal that may suit our political arguments but may make the political arguments in Westminster far more difficult. We need to deal with the facts rather than try to spin this in any direction. I am not saying that anybody has done so, but that was the context of the Taoiseach's statement this morning.

On whether the EU would give full consideration to alternative arrangements, we have always said we would. That the EU does not accept alternative arrangements does not mean that it is not acting in good faith; it just means that the alternative arrangements do not do the job or stand up to full scrutiny. It may be the case that convincing alternative arrangements will be developed and work. If that is the case and they are agreed between the two sides, they can replace the backstop as long as that gives us the desired outcome of protecting the Good Friday Agreement, avoiding a hard border and so on. We now have a clear structure and a timeline within which to consider those alternative arrangements during a transition period before a backstop would ever be triggered. In addition, of course, we have the good faith of both sides to continue to work on those alternative arrangements - potentially as technology changes in the future and so on - should the backstop ever be triggered and need to be replaced over time. Of course, the EU will act in good faith, work with the UK side and consider fully alternative arrangements. I suspect it may offer ideas, as it should. However, at the moment, after two years of negotiation, the only backstop, guarantee or insurance mechanism that really works to reassure people on this island that there will not be border infrastructure as an unintended consequence of Brexit is the backstop. That does not mean that alternative arrangements cannot necessarily be found.

On the Good Friday Agreement, the text and the backstop, Deputy Micheál Martin earlier referred to the Prime Minister's good faith towards the Good Friday Agreement. It is important to state that the UK's unilateral declaration is very clear in its final lines about the obligations of the UK under the 1998 agreement in all its dimensions and under all circumstances to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland. That is in the context of trying to get out of a backstop through an arbitration process. It is important to recognise that because it is of great importance to this House.

On whether it is possible under the existing arrangements and the declarations made last night to replace parts or elements of the backstop, yes, it is. That is already catered for clearly in the withdrawal agreement whereby a backstop can be replaced in full or in part as long as the outcome of that change continues to deliver the desired effect, which is the avoidance of a hard border. That is already catered for in some detail in the existing text of the Irish protocol of the withdrawal agreement.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.