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

I thank both Deputies for raising a range of issues. Deputy Ó Murchú asked about the mood music relating to a deal. The Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, was very clear that he wanted a negotiated settlement and outcome. There are issues the British Government feels need to be resolved. I was satisfied coming out of those meetings and we both agreed we would remain seized of the issue. We agreed that both of us would collectively seek to get this resolved within a reasonable timeframe. The key is that flesh is put on the bones of that commitment and that substantial negotiations take place between officials in the EU and the UK Government and that they have the political oversight and imprimatur to engage in negotiations.

I also said it is important that the voice of industry and business in Northern Ireland is heard consistently on this matter. The manufacturing industry is doing very well in Northern Ireland and does not have a problem with the protocol. The food industry is very worried about the legislation the British Government has brought in because it involves a dual regulatory framework, which would be damaging to the integrity of the food chain. It is clear that the legislation was not industry-proofed or business-proofed. That is a point I have consistently made to Maroš Šefčovič and to the British Government. To be fair, both have taken that on board, as has the British ambassador here. Maroš Šefčovič has met with industry representatives in Northern Ireland and has heard about this at first-hand. There are issues around consumer goods and so on that have been legitimately raised and that we simply have to deal with.

I am very concerned about the Nationality and Borders Act. It makes no sense in the context of the North-South relationship and I raised that with Michael Gove. It will basically mean that an American tourist or anybody else coming into Ireland cannot go North without electronic travel authorisation requirements being fulfilled. The UK Government has indicated that it is going to engage with the Irish Government on that issue. Within Northern Ireland itself, that must be understood and highlighted because from a practical point of view, it is not implementable anyway. People coming into the country who may have an itinerary for the entire island do not want to break the law. Having that imposition on them could be damaging to Northern Ireland's economy in a practical sense.

Both Deputies raised the legacy issue. We have said to the British Government that we do not agree with what it is proposing. There have been discussions between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his counterpart and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in respect of that at the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference. It is not on that people should get off scot-free for terrible crimes. That applies to everybody, including paramilitaries, those involved in Provisional Sinn Féin and loyalist paramilitaries. If victims want to pursue an issue, they should be allowed do so. We have to put the needs of victims at the centre of the legacy issue. I have met many of the victims' organisations and they are very angry about this agreement. Legacy is not just for the British Government; it is for the Irish Government and for parties. I would argue that the Sinn Féin Party has a journey to travel as well in respect of the legacy issue.

I recently read through Professor Liam Kennedy's work relating to young people in the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s who were subject to punishment beatings. I also listened to an excerpt from a podcast with a young man who was severely traumatised and badly beaten as a punishment meted out to him by paramilitaries. We have to pursue legacy on all fronts. That young generation in the North seems to be the forgotten generation of young people who were traumatised by the Provisional IRA in the interests of maintaining social control or because there had been antisocial behaviour and so on. The treatments that were meted out, the kneecappings that went on and so on, are the kinds of things that need to be looked at from a legacy perspective. We have never heard from that young generation. They have never really been engaged with around the trauma that was visited upon them and have never been apologised to. There has never been an acceptance that this was a completely unacceptable way to do things. Such beatings destroyed young people physically and left mental scars, and they were stigmatised in their broader community. Professor Kennedy has done some very good work in that respect but that has never really been highlighted or profiled in any way. That speaks to the comprehensive nature of legacy and dealing with legacy. It cannot just be one-dimensional. It cannot be one-sided. For our part in the Irish Government, we have told groups that have come to us saying there was collusion involving Irish security forces or the Garda that we are open to handing files over. We did the Smithwick tribunal. I have said to the unionist community and the Orange Order to bring cases if they have specific data and an evidence base. It applies all around. There has been some degree of documentation on that generation now academically but it has never come out of the academic confines to be faced up to.

See this speech in context