Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

As a Member of the European Parliament for about three years during the Brexit negotiations, I had a dual perspective. As an Irish MEP, I worked with others to ensure overwhelming support in the European Parliament for the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement and no hardening of the Irish Border. Equally, from a distance as it were, I could see Brexit through the eyes of MEPs from different member states. Throughout that entire process Irish politicians and officials in Dublin and Brussels were efficient and coherent. They were on top of the issues and crucially worked hand-in-glove with the EU negotiators. I believe we took the right decision and I was proud as an Irish MEP to see how our national politicians and officials played such an important role in negotiations. We often talk about punching above our weight and we certainly did that with Brexit.

In his departing address last night, President Trump spoke of the importance of luck. We were lucky with Michel Barnier as lead negotiator. Apart from his abilities and his sound judgment and that of his team, Michel Barnier had context. As Regional Affairs Commissioner, he oversaw the setting up of the PEACE funds. He knew the history and the background; he had context. That was very important when it came to issues like the Good Friday Agreement. All of that filtered through the negotiations and was vital. I am delighted that he is to be honoured by the Institute of International and European Affairs. Commissioner Sefcovic also hit the ground running. I also recognise the role of Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament's lead negotiator, who fully supported Ireland's position. I was delighted to be able to welcome him to Ireland for a few days during those negotiations when he got a real sense of the impact of Brexit and the Border on local communities, SMEs and agriculture.

However, we are where we are. Earlier the Tánaiste spoke about the Brexit fund and how well we had done from that fund. However, how we spend that money will be crucial. I have read the Commission's proposal on the fund. At 41 pages, it is not a long document. The word "territorial" is mentioned 14 times and the word "cohesion" is mentioned 31 times. The Commission's intent is clear. I will quote one short sentence from the proposal:

...it is appropriate that Member States, when designing support measures, focus in particular on the regions, areas and local communities...most negatively impacted by the withdrawal of the United Kingdom [from the Union].

It is crucial that the Government takes that into consideration. As the greatest negative impact is being felt in the north west and the Border region, that is where the bulk of this fund must be spent.

The Government must commit to territorial balance, which is what is referred to in the EU regulation. The fund, therefore, has to be largely regionally-specific. It is a fund which will support the agrifood sector, SMEs, retraining and upskilling and, hopefully, Internet access so we can be part of the digital economy. I reiterate that the Brexit support fund must be spent in a way which will help support those regions worst affected. Enterprise Ireland figures released this week show that the drop in employment nationally was 0.4% in 2020, but the highest drop in any region was in the north west, where it was 2.9%. Some of that loss of employment was because of Covid-19, but some of it was also because of Brexit. The north-west and the Border region had also been previously downgraded from a development region to a region in transition. When the Government is deciding where and how to spend these funds, I ask that it keep to the original territorial cohesion objective of the Commission. In other words, that is balanced regional development.

See this speech in context