Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and welcome his constructive and collaborative approach to the Bill. I will make a couple of specific suggestions. First, I acknowledge the work that has been done by his Department and all of the other Departments that have been involved in the Bill and the Brexit preparations. That large amount of work is a credit to our public service and is something of which we can all be proud. I also acknowledge the work being done at EU level, including by its negotiators, who have been strong in supporting Ireland during the entire process.

I wish to raise an issue regarding UK citizens living in Ireland, some of whom have been here for several decades. I do not know whether it can be addressed within the scope of the Bill or elsewhere, but will the Minister examine it? Some of the UK citizens in question are married and their children are Irish citizens. Due to the issues that Brexit will cause them, they have applied for Irish citizenship. However, they have been waiting on their applications for several years. They have received no feedback or any indication as to when a decision will be made. They applied in good time hoping that their citizenship would be in place in advance of the UK's withdrawal.

There have been a number of significant developments with Brexit recently. First, there was the heavy defeat of the internal market Bill, which would breach international law, by a vote of 433 to 165 in the House of Lords. The internal market Bill has been criticised by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission and the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland for undermining the equality and human rights outlined in and guaranteed by the Good Friday Agreement.

Second, the election of Joe Biden in the US is significant, as is the defeat it signals of the politics of hate and division. It sends a signal against the kind of politics that values bluster, brinkmanship and buffoonery instead of the kind of politics that many of us support, namely, mutual co-operation and social cohesion. US President-elect Biden has told Boris Johnson that the implementation of Brexit must uphold the Good Friday Agreement and that there is no chance of a US-UK trade deal if the implementation undermines the peace process.

We should be clear when discussing the other trade agreements being pursued by the UK, including the one with the US. Where the UK's trade and economic positions are concerned, such agreements would in no way be a substitute for a trade deal with the EU, which is the UK's closest neighbour. A failure to agree a deal would be devastating for the UK in terms of investment and jobs. It would also be devastating for the EU. The Halle Institute for Economic Research projects a potential 700,000 job losses across the EU, including 35,000 in Ireland, or almost 2% of our workforce. It is in all of our interests to do everything we can to ensure that a deal is agreed over the next number of weeks.

It is worth nothing that, of our exports, approximately 50% of our beef, 80% of our mushrooms and 34% of our dairy, representing 82% of our milk and approximately 80% of our cheddar, go to the UK. The impact on our food sector of reverting to WTO rules and tariffs would be considerable.

In addition to WTO tariffs and the disruption to transport, Irish businesses could be affected if they are undercut by lax protections for workers' rights and climate change in the UK. There are reports of sweatshop labour conditions in the UK, with some clothes manufacturers paying as little as £3.50 per hour.

That lack of enforcement of employment law relating to the minimum wage could undermine conditions in Ireland. The enforcement mechanisms will be key in terms of negotiations and the level playing field.

I wish to comment on the land bridge. I took a look at the Irish Maritime Development Office report. I share some of the concerns outlined by other Deputies who spoke before me with regard to the report. I know the Government and the Minister have been engaging with the ferry companies. I know what the ferry companies have been saying in terms of having capacity. It is welcome that there will be additional and daily direct routes to mainland Europe. At the same time, we know from the Irish Road Haulage Association and the Freight Transport Association of Ireland, both of which are credible and relevant actors in this, that they have serious and ongoing concerns on our connectivity. The Freight and Transport Association of Ireland asserts that the routes the ferry companies are offering will not be sufficient in terms of the access the operators are looking for. They have said clearly that they need access into ports closer to key markets in Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany as well as into either Calais or Dunkirk. They have asked specifically for such access.

I am concerned that the report from the Irish Maritime Development Office does not deal with those concerns in depth and that the assurances given by the ferry companies do not meet the expectations of those closely involved on a daily basis in logistics, moving goods, ensuring quick supply of food and imports and exports.

We know that the connectivity of the ferry services is needed not only for perishable goods but also, as the report makes clear, in terms of high value goods and goods in respect of which we are competing in terms of connectivity efficiency. I am concerned about what the report says on increasing capacity in ports. It simply states that construction work is ongoing. That work should be complete by now. We are only 50 days or seven weeks out from Brexit. The timeframes are short.

If there is a no-trade-deal Brexit it will not only impact on business. One area that has not been mentioned and is not covered in this Bill is the impact on low-income households. This has not been mentioned by other Deputies or the Minister. We know low-income households spend a disproportionate amount of their income on food and other necessities, including rent and utilities. They would be least able to deal with the price shock that could occur in the event of a no-trade-deal Brexit and tariffs being put on goods. They would be least able to deal with the price shock that would place on food on our supermarket shelves. We all hope an agreement will be made but in the event that there is no agreement, that area needs a great deal of attention either through this Bill or elsewhere. We know from analysis conducted by Social Justice Ireland that these households could be severely impacted. We also know that the people most at risk of deprivation and poverty are the very people who kept our services going at the height of the pandemic. They kept our supermarket shelves stacked, they looked after our elderly as care assistants and they kept our hospitals clean. These groups of people would be most impacted in that scenario.

It would be a mistake for us as a House to neglect this aspect of Brexit. Let us look over to the USA. All of us are absolutely right to take hope from the election results, but it would be a mistake not to realise that the kind of politics we have seen there can be exploited by people who play on fears and marginalisation. We have seen a defeat of that kind of politics in the US election but it can arise when we do not pay sufficient attention to the needs of people who are marginalised and on low incomes. That must be a key part of what we are looking at with Brexit.

Part 21 relates to construction products and a market surveillance authority. This is an important part of the Bill in that it allows for the Minister to appoint a local authority as a market surveillance authority for construction products under European Union construction products regulations. Dublin City Council is to be appointed as a market surveillance authority with a national role for the country. The council will have a role that will apply with respect to 35 product areas that have a harmonised EU standard. This will apply to new products. Anything in stock currently and placed on the market before 1 January will not require new certification from an EU-notified body. It is important that we get this right. This is an important function and this means it is essential that Dublin City Council is properly resourced to do this job.

There is a great cost to individual homeowners and the taxpayer when these things go wrong. The Minister will be aware of this from his previous role as the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government. We have seen when it goes wrong in terms of the investment that has had to go into the national pyrite remediation scheme. We have seen it in terms of what is happening now with fire safety defects. This is partly about inspection and independent regulation of buildings but some of it is also about ensuring that the products used are properly certified in safety and quality. We have seen the Grenfell Tower inquiry and the investigations and questions about some of the products used in the construction of Grenfell Tower. We have seen the potential costs at the level of human life and the other costs in terms of remediating defects when they are found. We have seen how important this is.

The Minister specifically asked for constructive proposals from us. I wish to reiterate two things. Whether they are to be in the scope of the Bill or otherwise, these matters need to be addressed either way. There is an issue with UK citizens who have been waiting - some have waited several years - for citizenship applications without any feedback or decision. These are UK citizens who have been living here for decades and who applied for citizenship because of Brexit. This needs to be looked at. There is a high level of stress and concern among these people and their families. The other point is if we fail to strike a trade agreement, the issue of how it will impact on low-income households, especially in terms of food poverty, will matter. I call on the Minister to look at those two things specifically.

See this speech in context