Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

At the beginning of this month, the people of Northern Ireland voted in Assembly elections but as the Minister rightly tells the House, they are no closer to having a functioning government because the largest unionist party is now absenting itself from the very institutions that were so carefully and painstakingly crafted. Just as they are here, people in Northern Ireland are suffering from a cost-of-living crisis. The same issues that needed solutions in February, when the DUP left the Executive, are now even worse and crying out more to be addressed. These are questions of health and housing, education and normal bread-and-butter matters in politics.

The unresolved fallout from Brexit continues to cast a long shadow and the British Government is exploiting the issue of the protocol, abetted by the DUP for its own political purposes. For the first time, a nationalist party has won the most seats in the Northern Ireland Assembly but the overall votes cast for either designation did not substantially change. The electoral earthquake has been the growth and consolidation of the centre ground around the Alliance Party, which nearly doubled its number of seats from nine to 17. This has come at the expense of two seats from the DUP and mostly gains made from other centre-ground parties, such as the SDLP, the UUP and the Greens, which all lost seats to the Alliance Party.

We must consider what this will mean for the future of Northern Ireland. I hope it can deliver a more progressive form of politics but there is also a challenge for us to consider the basic structure of power-sharing, which was last significantly altered in the discussions that led to the St. Andrews Agreement. What will happen if the largest or second-largest party does not declare itself as representing either community? It is an eventuality that must be addressed.

The result also complicates the often binary discussion on a border poll or unity referendum. The Labour Party aspires to a united and shared island but we also recognise that very detailed work involving difficult choices is needed in advance of presenting any referendum, and groundwork is needed for the approach to be put to the people ultimately. Calls for a border poll will not bring about a fundamental focus and analysis. Calling on the Irish Government to establish a citizens' assembly is also an incomplete idea if it is not matched with some similar process in Northern Ireland. Getting such an initiative approved by Stormont will require engagement with the growing centre ground there, which by its definition steers clear of constitutional issues. Simplistic slogans are no substitute for a detailed analysis of the institutional and constitutional compromises that will be required for the fundamental change that many of us aspire to on this island. However, the growth of the Alliance Party has created a real prospect of normalised politics emerging in the North and we must consider how to accommodate the growing non-aligned groupings of the centre.

Meanwhile, the Conservative Party Government in the United Kingdom is intent on imposing its political solutions on the North. The introduction of cultural legislation today in Westminster that will officially recognise the Irish language is long overdue and welcome. It will help towards building trust. However, it does not excuse the political games now being played with the protocol and with legacy matters. What is being given with one hand is being taken back in spades by the other. It is no coincidence the British Government is threatening legislative action on the protocol just as the British Prime Minister comes under renewed political pressure over the so-called "partygate" and the report of Ms Sue Gray on it, which was published today.

Invoking unilateral legislation on both the protocol and the legacy question is a clear breach of the Good Friday Agreement and will cause immense damage to the peace process and the space so painstakingly created for political negotiation and compromise. The British foreign secretary has a self-serving opinion piece in today's The Irish Timeson proposals to disapply the protocol. I say as an aside that one of the suggestions she makes is that the mandate given by the European Commission to Vice President Maroš Šefčovič is inadequate. If Mr. Šefčovič or the Minister in the Chamber said the mandate given to Ms Truss is inadequate and she should get a different mandate in Westminster before we dealt with her, what would be the reaction from Tory backbenchers? What would they think if that was the Minister's view or that of the European Commission? This is lost sometimes on some members of the current Tory Government.

If the UK Government put as much effort into working with the EU on implementing what they negotiated and agreed 18 months ago instead of playing political brinkmanship, many of the legitimate issues that I have come across in my discussions with people running businesses in Northern Ireland could be addressed. I sat down in Belfast and visited Belfast Port, as well as ports on the other side, such as in Liverpool and north Wales, to see what the difficulties are.

They can all be overcome with an open mind and a willingness to negotiate. It is ludicrous to claim the internationally binding agreement it willingly entered into is now threatening the Good Friday Agreement. As has been made clear by all parties here, by the EU and by the US, pragmatic and flexible solutions can be found. Moving unilaterally to simply wipe away or alter fundamental agreements is neither sustainable nor consistent with the British Government's role as co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement.

The approach of the DUP must also be called out. It claims the protocol is a breach of the principles of consent and consensus. Throughout Brexit it sought and advocated the hardest possible deal. As Mark Durkan pointed out yesterday, the DUP flatly rejected calls for a devolved consent on the terms of Brexit. It was explicit in its demands that the consent of the Northern Ireland Assembly was to be avoided to prevent a case for invoking cross-community support. It opposed the Good Friday Agreement originally and now claims it requires parallel consent for decisions, which is simply not the case. It is holding the assembly hostage over the protocol when the outcome it now opposes is a result of the very approach it had to Brexit when it failed to provide leadership or find solutions.

Three months ago in February we spent significant time in the Chamber debating the many issues of legacy and the New Decade, New Approach deal. We are no closer to delivering solutions on these outstanding issues. The Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill had its Second Reading in Westminster. It has been deemed by academics and the Committee on the Administration of Justice as unworkable, in breach of the Good Friday Agreement and international human rights law and incapable of delivering for victims or survivors. All parties in Northern Ireland have condemned the Bill as it would deny victims closure and access to justice. In my long parliamentary career one of the very few meetings I ever attended was a meeting last August in City Hall in Belfast. An agreed approach on the issue was signed by every political party on the island, including Sinn Féin, the DUP and every party represented in this House, to oppose the original legacy Bill and command paper. Something similar is now being presented. It is quite clear the British Government must rethink its approach to these fundamental issues. Those of us who have worked very hard to bring about a decent relationship, as is appropriate and proper between the governments and parliaments of these islands, must redouble our own efforts to change this attitude of mind.

See this speech in context