Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

5. To ask the Taoiseach the engagement his Department's officials have had with the European Commission's Brexit negotiating team led by Mr. Michel Barnier. [36336/16]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

6. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his engagements with the European Commission negotiating team on Brexit and Mr. Michel Barnier. [37413/16]

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I previously reported to the House, I welcomed the European Commission's chief Brexit negotiator, Mr. Michel Barnier, to Government Buildings on 12 October. His visit to Dublin was one of a series of engagements in EU capitals in order to prepare for the forthcoming negotiations. During the visit he also met the Tánaiste, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister of State with responsibility for European Affairs, as well as senior officials.

Under the political guidance of the European Council, that is, EU Heads of State or Government, Mr. Barnier will lead the Commission team in the withdrawal negotiations with the United Kingdom once Article 50 has been triggered.

During my discussions with him, I took the opportunity to explain in some detail Ireland’s unique set of concerns relating to Northern Ireland that arise from Brexit, including the peace process and citizenship issues, the common travel area and Border issues, and the depth of our economic and trade relationship with the United Kingdom. We also discussed Ireland’s strong commitment to EU membership and our intention to play a full and constructive part in the negotiations process. In this context, I briefed Mr. Barnier on the various strands of work that are advancing at political and official levels here to prepare Ireland to the maximum extent possible for the period ahead. Deputies will note Mr. Barnier's comments yesterday in respect of his support for the Good Friday Agreement and the conditions that apply to it.

Given the critical role of Mr. Barnier and the Commission, it was also useful to exchange views about the process and how negotiations might be handled. There was a commitment to continue to work closely with the Commission and its team in the period ahead and this has been proceeding, including the holding of further meetings between senior officials from Dublin and the task force in Brussels in November.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sure the Taoiseach welcomes, as do I, the statement this morning by the European Commission's chief negotiator, Mr. Michel Barnier, that he would do his utmost to preserve the success of the Good Friday process. Mr. Barnier also pointed out, as we all know, that Brexit will have consequences for the EU's external borders, including that on this island. The Government must redouble its efforts to ensure that this does not happen. We would argue strongly that this can best be achieved by a diplomatic offensive to build support for designated special status for the North within the European Union. Mr. Barnier also spoke of the possibility of a transitional period as a means of avoiding what is called a hard Brexit. There is sense in that possibility and I am interested to hear the Taoiseach's view on it.

Has the Government obtained any legal advice on the implications of the potential judgment by the British Supreme Court on Prime Minister May's decision to trigger Brexit by the end of May? We have seen the welcome decision of the people of Austria to reject the far right presidential candidate as well as the decision of the people in Italy to reject the proposed reforms by Prime Minister Renzi, which has refocused speculation on the future of the euro and the EU itself.

The Minister for Finance has stated that he does not believe there will be any financial crisis here because of his view that the Irish banks are very strong. This seems to be at odds with the summer stress test carried out by the European Banking Authority on Allied Irish Banks and Bank of Ireland. Both these banks were among the worst suffering of the 51 financial institutions. Does the Taoiseach agree with the Minister or does he agree with the European Banking Authority, which stated that more work was needed to put these Irish banks on a firmer footing? I remind the Taoiseach that only last week these banks were exposed as dragging their feet on restoring tracker mortgages for thousands of people, including some who have lost their homes.

What measures will the Government introduce to protect Irish households and businesses that are at risk from further exchange rate fluctuations? Will the Taoiseach outline the Government's strategy for engaging with other EU Governments at this critical time?

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Every time I listen to either a spokesperson from any of the negotiating teams, whether it is that of the Commission or the Parliament, or any British commentator, there seems to be a complete misunderstanding of how this will work out. As Deputy Adams has stated, Michel Barnier, when asked today if he believed there would be a hard border on the island of Ireland, replied, "The UK's decisions to leave the European Union will have consequences, in particular, perhaps, for what are the EU external borders". That would imply that his understanding is that there will have to be some sort of border on the island of Ireland, although he did go on to say that he is personally very well versed in the Good Friday Agreement. As Commissioner with responsibility for regional affairs, he was involved in negotiating funding for the PEACE programmes. He also said that the four freedoms of the Single Market are indivisible and that cherry picking is not an option. However, as we have seen from the photograph taken of officials leaving Downing Street last week, cherry picking or, as Britain would put it, having one's cake and eating it seems to be on someone's menu in the United Kingdom.

I have a number of questions. From speaking directly to Mr. Barnier, who is an astute and experienced European parliamentarian, Commissioner and politician, does the Taoiseach have any sense of where this will land? It cannot be that we will have free movement and a hard border, as both of these are incompatible. Has Mr. Barnier thought out or has the Taoiseach worked out some sort of mechanism that will achieve those two objectives which, on the face of it, are irreconcilable?

As we understand it, the triggering of the exit of the United Kingdom under the mechanism provided for in article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is to happen by the end of March 2017. Mr. Barnier stated that the process should be completed by October 2018 in order to get the timeframe within the two years so that it is endorsed by the European Parliament. Most people who have examined the process, including all the leaks from Britain, would say that October 2018 is an impossible deadline given all the complications associated with the negotiations. There is also the prospect of an interim arrangement. How will the issues on the table, which are on the face of it irreconcilable, be addressed? What is the Taoiseach's view of the timing aspect? Will there be, if one likes, an interim solution? Is that now the preferred option? Does the Taoiseach have any thoughts on that possibility since, on the face of it, it is impossible to have the negotiation completed within two years?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On that very point, at the moment, shaping is going on on all sides, although it is difficult to discern what is going on within the British Government.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is having its cake and eating it.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is having its cake and eating it. For example, it seems to be unaware of the difference between the Single Market and the customs union. One Minister wants to be outside the customs union but inside the Single Market and so on. The point about a transitional arrangement is the one that interests me. There was a hint of it from the Prime Minister some weeks ago, although she came out strongly afterwards to dismiss it. I agree with Deputy Howlin in that the bottom line is that few people see this being concluded in two years given the enormity of what has to be negotiated. This begs the question of whether a transitional phase or arrangement could be entered into.

Has the Taoiseach considered taking an initiative to change the paradigm? At the moment, it seems as if Europe is ganging up to ensure it does not give Britain a soft exit because it does not want to jeopardise the overall integrity of the union. On the other side, Britain seems to be saying it wants to control everything while having access to the Single Market, etc., but not having freedom of movement. If the realpolitikis that a transitional arrangement is what emerges, which could stretch this out for a couple of years, there is an imperative on both the European and the British sides to start knocking heads together and to ensure that the best possible arrangement can be arrived at, which is one that guarantees the future of the European Union and puts it on a firm footing while at the same time minimising trade disruption.

There are enough shocks to the system globally now and we do not need the clearly damaging impact that Brexit represents. Brexit will damage the European, Irish and United Kingdom economies, of that there is no doubt. Every economist's analysis of its impact has been negative.

People need to change their mindsets about this issue and go about it in a different way. How can we minimise disruption and damage and inject a bit of common sense into the issue? While the recent by-election was in a London constituency, nevertheless the Liberal Democrats overturned a 25,000 vote majority the Conservatives had enjoyed just a short number of years ago. This is a straw in the wind which indicates that the reality that Brexit is not all it was cracked up to be is seeping into the British public. Europe would do well if it changed its approach. I ask the Taoiseach, as the leader of the country, to take an initiative to move people to that sort of a pathway, as opposed to the very negative stuff that is going on at the moment.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In respect of Deputy Adams's question, it is good the Commissioner said he supports the Good Friday Agreement. I have explained this to all the leaders at European level and it was reflected in the conversations between Chancellor Merkel, President Hollande and Prime Minister May in respect of the importance of the Border and Good Friday Agreement.

We have had an argument before about what Deputy Adams described as an alternative strategy or a special status. What I prefer to say is that we have a particular circumstance here in that we have a peace process, a Border and PEACE and INTERREG funds. This circumstance is special and different and does not apply anywhere else. We want to grow that in the time ahead. The Deputy can put whatever term he likes on it. We need to make everybody aware that the particular circumstances that apply are important in terms of the peace process supported by Europe and move on with that.

I do not want to comment on the outcome of the Supreme Court case in Britain. It is not my business. Obviously, the court will make a decision to back or overrule the High Court. In any event, I understand the Prime Minister intends to move Article 50 in due course.

The Deputy referred to Italy. The three parties involved in the Italian opposition cannot agree among themselves on most issues. The referendum was on institutional and constitutional issues within Italy, not on the future of the European Union.

Stress tests are carried out by the banks and changes have been made at European Central Bank level in regard to the collapse of banks and all that. These changes provide strengthened defences for taxpayers in Europe. While there is clearly an issue with some of the major banks in Italy, I hope the stability reflected in the markets following the decision of the Italian people and the announcement by Prime Minister Renzi of his resignation speak for an opportunity to move on.

The engagement with others is taking place today and it is continuous with all the different Ministers. For example, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, is at the ECOFIN meeting.

Deputy Howlin asked questions on whether there is a misunderstanding about how Brexit will work, a hard and soft Border, the Single Market and the four freedoms. All I can say is that the decision on Brexit has been made and the British Prime Minister has said she is moving on to implement it. At a European level, there have been no discussions or negotiations about this issue, other than a reflection on a strategy of the other 27 member states when they met in Bratislava. Leader after leader has made clear that when Article 50 is triggered, if Britain wants to control its borders and withdraw from the Single Market, it will not have access to particular sectors of the Single Market. While there are no formal negotiations, it has been made perfectly clear that if one wants access to the Single Market, one must allow freedom of movement of people. If one considers that Britain must build 1 million houses, proposes to build a nuclear power station, may build a third runway at Heathrow Airport and wants to restore and repair large segments of the motorway system, serious numbers of people will be required to build all of that.

Timing is an issue. I believe the matter cannot be addressed in the time that is set out in the European Union treaties. No country has ever left the European Union and we have had 50 years of directives, regulations and legislation. As Deputy Micheál Martin pointed out, Article 50 will be triggered by a letter to the Commission, after which we will have exit negotiations. My belief, however, is that a transition period extending beyond two years will be necessary because the issue is far too complicated.

Commissioner Barnier stated he would like the process to be completed within 18 months in order that we could have reflection before ratification by the European Parliament. My belief is that we will go well beyond that timeframe. The Commissioner made clear that he would not and cannot make any decisions without the imprimatur and oversight of the political Heads of State and Government of the European Council.

On changing attitudes, I agree that the European Union should focus on its future. People in the United Kingdom have made a decision and the Prime Minister has stated she will implement Brexit. Britain will leave and the letter will be written before the end of March 2017. The European Union should look to its own future. It cannot continue with 50% unemployment rates among young people. We must have infrastructure and the capacity to invest in it. I am glad to be able to say that we will open a European Investment Bank office in Dublin this week, which will, I hope, lead to the people's bank, which the EIB is, becoming far more active in supporting many pieces of infrastructure around the country, either as part of the Juncker plan or as a new development.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The State cannot spend under the rules.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with Deputy Micheál Martin that there is no point in having a viciousness or very trenchant view from leaders at a European level because Britain is leaving the EU. On the other hand, it cannot be that when a country leaves the European Union it is seen to be advantaged by so doing. There is a balance to be struck. If we want to continue without a disruption of trade, the best outcome would be one which is as close as possible to what we have now. We could then deal with our political problems at a European level.