Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This session is taking place at a moment when we do not have a final text and most of us do not have full knowledge of what specifics will be discussed at this week's summit. As such, we are holding this debate in a relative vacuum and are reliant on the incomplete briefings the Government has provided to the media.

One thing which has become very clear in the last three years is that it is important to step back from the frenzy of commentary during and immediately after negotiations. We need to look at the overall picture and understand its implications for Ireland and Europe. The position of this new Tory Government has become very clear in regard to the long-term relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union. It has essentially embraced the idea of a hard Brexit. The biggest changes in recent weeks, some relating to the political declaration, have all been to copper-fasten the UK's exit from the customs union and Single Market. In fact, the Johnson position is to move away from a commitment that future trading relations would respect the need for a fair level playing field. This is because the UK has explicitly moved to a position of Brexit being about cutting regulations, including worker protections, in order to obtain a competitive advantage.

As far back as July and August 2017, the Taoiseach and Tánaiste, as well as various Fine Gael representatives, criticised Fianna Fáil and other parties for making proposals in regard to Brexit which were specific to Northern Ireland. The avoidance of a chaotic Brexit is very important, particularly as many urgent preparations are not yet complete and the Government has only just hired consultants to check vital contingencies. However, let us try to avoid the narrow focus which has got in the way of a clear assessment of critical stages of this process.

The Johnson model for future relations between the UK as a whole and the European Union will hardwire in 80% of the damage to Ireland of a hard Brexit. It will not be a successful conclusion to the negotiations as a whole if this is the final outcome. We need to be aware of that. On this point, we need immediate clarity from our Government about the assumptions it will make relating to the impact of this deal. In a response to a question during Leaders' Questions, the Taoiseach confirmed it would be a harder Brexit with more dealignment than the withdrawal agreement negotiated by Theresa May. While conflicting positions are being adopted by the British Prime Minister, that seems to be a fact emerging from the current discussions.

Based on various independent reports and last week's budget documents, the economic impact of this hard Brexit will be less severe in the coming months but will be nearly as damaging in the medium and long term as a no-deal scenario. Ireland will get another year to prepare for the new customs and regulatory barriers, but the worst-case scenario would then kick in. It appears that the bulk of the Brexit reserve funding will be required to help those already badly affected by Brexit and those who need to more urgently diversify markets and products.

In regard to Northern Ireland the news is changing regularly. For the obvious reasons outlined by the Taoiseach, we have again not received a substantive briefing from the Government on the specifics. The idea that Northern Ireland would be treated as a special customs zone is one which has been around for three years and would address core concerns relating to the operation of the Border. Given that it was basically dismissed as an idea early in 2018, there has been relatively little work done on how it might operate. It appears to be something that would be unique in terms of administration and there are complexities in regard to the origins of components of finished products, something about which many questions have been raised and no answers offered, at least in public. It is not clear how the VAT regime will work, something which is obviously extremely important to cross-Border trade, or the treatment of different types of economic activities such as services. However, in regard to the issues of Border infrastructure and access to both markets, it appears to be a balanced and reasonable idea which has the potential to be a permanent solution rather than simply a route to further negotiations.

In terms of democratic consent, this is an issue which only arises because the pro-Remain majority in the Assembly has been silenced for nearly three years because Sinn Féin decided Northern Ireland did not need a democratic assembly at this critical moment when it collapsed the Assembly.

Whatever is proposed on consent cannot become a source for keeping alive permanently the tensions we have seen in the past two years. We need to get beyond Brexit and back to focusing on restoring people's faith in the idea that democratic institutions can work. As I and my colleagues have said on many occasions in the past, most of the democratic parties in Dáil Éireann are not in any way using this issue to undermine the constitutional status of Northern Ireland enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement. That is an important point. The constitutional status of Northern Ireland is underpinned by the Good Friday Agreement and what is transpiring now does not in any way seek to undermine that.

A special economic status will be of benefit to all communities in Northern Ireland. If handled correctly and given the right type of long-term support, it could provide a new economic future for Northern Ireland. I once again call on the DUP to see just how much Northern Ireland has to gain and to realise that the UK now involves a significant amount of devolution. The standard of every part of the UK being treated the same is not relevant and is not a sustainable constitutional argument.

We need to see the hard details before we can assess if this proposal is indeed an all-weather solution which provides a stable future for relations on this island. However, the basic fact is that the majority in Northern Ireland wants a positive outcome and to be relieved of the ongoing Brexit saga. At some point when the current fog of commentary has risen, we should take the time to look at ways of never repeating the collapse of North-South and east-west relations which caused so much trouble in the past number of years.

A major mistake in the past two years has been to focus on parts of the process rather than its completion. The premature celebrations in Government Buildings of last year's withdrawal agreement are a case in point. We have no idea yet if what is being discussed can be negotiated to a conclusion, ratified in the House of Commons and workable in the long-term.

The Johnson Government's priority today remains the winning of a general election. After three months of talking up no deal, the emphasis for the past week has been to get a deal which involves a hard Brexit for Britain with a special status on customs and regulatory alignment for Northern Ireland. Who knows what his priority will be next week or how long it will take to reach an outcome. What we need here is full transparency from the Government about the implications of the final proposal for Ireland and an understanding that the proposed hard Brexit involves an almost worst-case scenario.

I will briefly mention two other matters which are due to be discussed at the summit. The EU should categorically condemn the actions of Turkey, Syria and Russia in the Kurdish region of north Syria. This was prompted by President Trump's appalling decision to withdraw troops who had helped to stabilise the region and were holding ISIS linked prisoners. The abandonment of the Kurdish people is shameful in the extreme. The Kurdish forces and parties in northern Syria have been by far the most moderate and democratic of all of the many groups fighting in Syria and were central to tackling the savage ISIS group. For them to be attacked by Turkey and forced to accept the support of countries which were until recently attacking them must be condemned in the clearest possible terms. We must also note the human rights emergency which has been involved in the systematic attack on Kurdish organisations in Turkey in recent years. It is striking that Brexit-obsessed Britain lifted its boycott of the Foreign Affairs Council in order to try to water down action against Turkey.

Separately, it has been reported that Ireland was one of the main countries seeking to dramatically water down President Macron's proposal for a new budget instrument to tackle recessions in the eurozone. What has emerged is a tiny intervention incapable of delivering the core objective of helping countries when they need it most. This, and the proposal to limit the overall EU budget to 1% of member states' total combined GDP, shows that some countries and our Government simply have not learned the key lessons from the recession. Ireland should be supporting a significant increase in the EU budget, not standing in the way of important reforms. Yet again, the Government has shown that it is not forward-looking or progressive in terms of the future role and abilities of the EU.

See this speech in context