Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The ESRI recently published the finding of its macroeconomic study into the possible impact of Brexit, deal or no deal. It is a valuable contribution to our understanding of what might happen to our economy, both in the immediate future and ten years later. It is yet more evidence of the harm that Brexit, whatever form of Brexit ensues, will be for Ireland. The ESRI model finds that unemployment will rise in any Brexit scenario and participation in the labour market will also decline. Participation in the labour market declining is a very important factor. When these two effects are added together in today's terms, that could mean between 55,000 and 105,000 fewer jobs created in Ireland over the next ten years due to lower economic growth. That is only one projection, but I remain extremely cautious about the stability of employment, given all the other possible negative influences on our economy, such as housing costs. I would urge that the Government do more to consider new initiatives to prepare for a potential spike in unemployment in the years ahead. The effects of Brexit will be acutely felt in those sectors most exposed to the British economy, such as agriculture, food, tourism and hospitality. I want to see the Government confirm what studies it has commissioned into the possible employment effects in the sectors I mentioned and what preparations are being taken to alleviate any sudden rise in unemployment, not only in those sectors but also in the geographical areas the ESRI has pointed out.

This is the shadow that hangs over Ireland, and the public interest is clearly to prevent any Brexit occurring, if that is possible. I believe it is. The certain harm to Ireland should inform how we interpret the result of this European Council meeting and how we seek to influence what happens next in so far as we can.

Last week's European summit was extraordinary in every sense of the word. The sole purpose of the summit was to deal with the fallout from the third rejection of the withdrawal agreement in the British Parliament and the failure to find majority support in parliament for any alternative.

The summit was extraordinary in that it showed the strain on European leaders, as they sought to find consensus on the European response to the request for a further extension by the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May. What Europe does best is find compromises in these situations, and the offer of a flexible extension to the end of October provides a plausible middle way between competing demands for nearer or more distant exit dates.

That compromise also shows that patience is wearing thin, and I heard it in Brussels on Wednesday last, as did the Taoiseach. This week, the German foreign Minister, Mr. Heiko Maas, warned that if Britain seeks yet another extension, this will be interpreted as a desire to remain in the Union after all. This is despite the fact the German Chancellor, Dr. Merkel, was among the advocates for a longer extension.

While finding compromise among 27 European countries is no mean task, it is not always the case that the middle road is the best road. I have argued that we should offer the UK a five-year extension - that sounded extreme when I said it. I hold to that position, which I discussed with the meeting of Socialist and Social Democratic Prime Ministers and leaders in advance of the Council last week. A five-year extension would avoid the likely scenario that we could be seeing another request for a further extension in less than 200 days' time. Something that has bedevilled us is this deadline, contrived crisis, hype and then deflation with constant uncertainty.

An October request for more time could be rejected. There is a view - the Taoiseach would know better - that any extension beyond October could be rejected. The six-month extension is the lesser of a number of ones that impact badly for Ireland. Immeasurable harm would have been done if the UK crashed out on Friday last but great harm will also be done if the UK still has not found consensus, or at least a majority in its own Parliament, on its own Brexit strategy by the autumn. Every month of uncertainty damages investment in this economy and there is a real risk that the British Government will be still unable to command majority support for any Brexit policy at any time during the next six months.

That is a real prospect. What then? There is just about time for the UK to hold a general election and for a new Government to be formed but the Fixed-term Parliaments Act makes it very difficult to call a snap election. There is just about enough time for the UK to hold a new public vote but there is not a majority yet in the British Parliament demanding such a vote.

Theresa May is under intense political pressure to call off her talks with the Labour Party in Britain. At any rate, there is no evidence so far that these talks will produce a new Brexit policy that can command a majority in the UK Parliament. Neither Theresa May nor Jeremy Corbyn can guarantee the backing of their respective parties for the ongoing negotiations and I believe that is why they have not come to a conclusion.

If the British political system cannot provide the answer, perhaps Europe should offer the United Kingdom more time. It is in Ireland's public interest for the UK to remain fully engaged in the European project. It is also in our interest for the European Union to change some of its core policies on fiscal policy, inflation targets and State investment in the economy. For example, keeping investment to less than 2% has suppressed job growth whereas a more realistic mandate for the European Central Bank would be for a target of between 2% and 3% inflation with an explicit duty to seek lower unemployment. Such changes would boost job growth in the European economy in a way that would deal with some of the root causes of Brexit and the rise of populism.

I regret the tone of President Macron's recent public remarks on Brexit, some of which were doubtlessly aimed at a domestic market. He painted a bleak and false picture of British isolationism. The British media then portrayed him as a new Charles de Gaulle, denying the British entry to the European project, a frankly preposterous notion.

A great many people in Britain and British politicians are pro-European and passionately want to remain part of the future of Europe. An even greater number, certainly a majority, could be persuaded to remain in a reformed European Union. European Council President Tusk has talked of the possibility of the UK thinking again. I do not believe we can be silent on that. We have an opportunity between now and October to present a plan for European reform that is so compelling that it will entice British public opinion strongly to support remaining within the EU.

In his public remarks last week, the Taoiseach hinted that he and perhaps others could be open to offering the UK a seat at the table for future discussions on trade policy if it remained inside the Single Market and customs union but no longer a member of the EU. That would create a messy situation whereby we institutionalise a half-in, half-out membership of European institutions. It would adversely affect the ability of full members to move forward with shared initiatives as nearly every area of policy will overlap in some way with the Single Market and trade and giving the UK a say in these matters when it is outside the Union could be very problematic indeed.

A better course of action would be to make clear that the European Union is open to serious and far-reaching reform. That would mean reform of the European Central Bank to foster growth and focus on employment, reform of the fiscal rules to allow for a greater level of State investment, reducing the role of European institutions where they are not adding value and allowing greater experimentation in trade policy and national economic policies, for example in biotechnology and other technologies in which the UK has felt restricted by the slow approval processes within the current European institutions.

Europe would benefit, and Ireland certainly would, from the continued membership of the UK. The British people would undoubtedly be better off in a reformed Europe. We would not simply do this unless we are able to put concrete proposals on the table. We should seize this opportunity to forge a common position across the EU 27 to drive an ambitious reform agenda for a fairer, better Europe that will win the support of the majority of British people in any people's vote that might be held before October or afterwards.

The European elections provide the ideal opportunity to set out our reform agenda and to seek agreement in principle with this goal across the main political groupings.

See this speech in context