Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

A quick look through the conclusions adopted by the European Council at its meeting on 10 and 11 December gives us a good overview of what is likely to dominate the domestic and European agenda in the coming six to 12 months, with one exception to which I will return. The five conclusion headings from the post-meeting communiqué were the multi-annual financial framework for 2021 to 2027 and the next generation EU recovery plan, Covid-19, climate action, security and external relations. The statement of the Taoiseach and the communiqué itself report progress on most of those headings. That, in itself, is positive news. I heard the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, speak in the same vein subsequent to the summit.

The communiqué notes that the Council paid well-deserved tributes to the former French President, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, who passed away on 2 December. It referred to him as a driving force behind the European project who played a key role in creating the European Council. It is a fitting tribute to a good European statesman and politician and one to which I think we should refer during this debate in a positive vein as well.

On item 1 relating to the finances of the EU, we should welcome the fact that the Council made progress on finalising the finances of the EU to 2027 and resolving the stand-off on a rule of law provision between Poland and Hungary on one side, and the rest of the European Union on the other. The progress made should not be taken as sufficient to address the real rule of law concerns held by many Deputies with regard to what is happening in Hungary and Poland when it comes to interference with freedom of the press or judicial independence. It is long past time for real political action on the issue. I believe the European People's Party must take effective measures with regard to the membership of its group and send out a clear message of its intent in this respect.

The European Council discussions around the development, purchase and EU-wide distribution of effective Covid-19 vaccines are critical, as is the plan to take forward proposals for an EU health union. The news yesterday that the European Medicines Agency, which is the EU agency responsible for the evaluation and supervision of medicines, has brought forward to a date before Christmas its meeting to approve the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is very welcome. All Members are agreed that every single day counts. We work at full speed to authorise Covid-19 vaccines that are safe and effective and to get them distributed as effectively and efficiently as possible. President-elect Biden made the point very well that vaccines alone do not save lives; vaccinations and people do. We need to vaccinate as many people as humanly possible as speedily as possible.

This year, we saw the awesome power and force of nature, so I am very happy to see that EU leaders achieved a significant breakthrough in combating climate change by committing to a binding EU reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of at least 55% by 2030. This is progress. Now comes the hard part of implementing it in a way that does not penalise those who have been doing most to protect the environment.

The conclusions of the Council on external relations, specifically with the eastern Mediterranean south neighbourhood, and those on security, particularly in strengthening the mandate of Europol and securing Europe-wide police and judicial co-operation, are important.

As I stated at the outset, I wish to briefly address one issue that did not appear in the meeting conclusions but clearly was a part of the background discussions to the meeting, namely, Brexit. The fact that Brexit is not part of the conclusions of the meeting is confirmation that, for most in Europe, Brexit is a regrettable fact of life. Contrary to the Tory spin, Europe is not trying to undermine Brexit but, rather, to mitigate its impacts. As I have commented many times previously in the House, Brexit is a lose-lose game. Both sides suffer in Brexit. The difference is that EU Governments recognise that fact now and are trying to ease its negative impact. We in Ireland know this better than anyone else, and the people of my constituency of Cavan-Monaghan and the other Border constituencies know it even better. The negative impact of Brexit is not some theoretical outworking we have yet to see. In my region, we have already seen it impact adversely, but we know, sadly, that worse is to come.

I have made the case previously in the House for mitigation measures and will do so again. The specifics of what we will require still depend on what emerges from the EU-Britain talks. What we know for sure is that we will need to have systems and mechanisms for the maximum levels of all-island co-operation no matter what is agreed between Michel Barnier and Mr. Frost.

The shared island unit and substantial funding are very welcome, but practical and tangible implementations are what matter. We need key projects such as the A5 upgrade and the Narrow Water Bridge to be advanced speedily. We also need greater co-operation across a range of areas such as health, transport, education, agriculture and IT infrastructure. The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 facilitates co-operation in all of those areas and we wish to maximise the potential of that agreement.

I had discussions with An Taoiseach recently regarding progressing the Ulster Canal. I am very glad that he is clear in his commitment that funding will be provided under the shared island initiative, that it will be possible to progress the project quickly and that funding will be made available without delay. It is an all-Ireland project that was committed to. Some small-scale works have been carried out and I look forward to it being part of the great network of inland waterways we have throughout the island, North and South.

I urge the Taoiseach and the Government to move speedily to create opportunities for ministers, North and South, as well as, most importantly, officials from both parts of this island, to interact and meet regularly to look at the nuts and bolts of how we can ease the impact of Brexit across the Border regions. That is something we must do at parliamentary level as well.

I spoke previously to the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, who is present, both in discussions at our parliamentary party and privately, regarding the need to ensure that the EU cross-border healthcare directive is protected post Brexit. All Members have helped and know patients who have travelled to various health facilities or clinics in Northern Ireland to have procedures or treatments carried out. Deputies are aware that the EU healthcare directive will be available to Irish citizens in the 26 other EU countries post Brexit, but the reality is that more than 90% of people who currently avail of that healthcare directive source treatment or procedures, or both, in Northern Ireland or in Britain. We need to ensure the arrangements that are in place at present are continued after 1 January. I know people who have begun treatment or are awaiting dates to commence further or follow-up treatment. It is an extremely important part of our healthcare delivery to be able to access capacity in Northern Ireland. Similarly, we must ensure that citizens of Northern Ireland are not deprived of the opportunity to avail of healthcare facilities in the South when there is capacity.

I urge the Minister of State and his officials to ensure that the negotiations that have been ongoing for some time are brought to a successful conclusion in regard to the need to protect the cross-border healthcare directive.

See this speech in context