We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Dáil
‹ Leaders' Questions

Brexit transition and safeguards

Summary

Deputy McGrath and Deputy Mary Lou McDonald press the Tánaiste on the EU Council, phase two negotiations, and protections against any UK backsliding from the phase one agreement. The Tánaiste says the EU will insist commitments are honoured in legal form and that a longer transition period, closer to four or five years, is preferable.

Over the course of discussions today and tomorrow, the European Council is expected to give formal endorsement to the move from the first to the second phase of negotiations on the United Kingdom's departure from the Union. Although we hardly need it, we had another reminder last night of how divisive this issue is in the UK with an embarrassing parliamentary defeat for its Government. One consequence of this vote is that the timeframe for agreeing a deal is potentially compressed even further, even though it was already tight.

Fianna Fáil broadly welcomes last week's deal as it pertains to the island of Ireland. However, given the vastly different interpretations being put on that deal, we must accept that the most difficult Brexit negotiations are still ahead of us. The putting into effect of the commitments secured last week as part of a final, legally binding written agreement will be a major challenge. The clock is ticking and with the UK set to leave the EU in just over 15 months time, the imperative in the coming months will be to achieve as much certainty as possible for Irish businesses trading with the UK. It is generally accepted that there is less than a year to agree a transition agreement and the framework of a future relationship.

In her speech in Florence last August, the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May, called for a transition period of two years. Given the level of complexity involved across different sectors and the amount of detail that must be worked out as part of that process, two years is nowhere near adequate or realistic. If one takes the aviation sector, for example, where forward planning has to be done many years in advance, it is clear that the business community must be afforded a long lead-in period to whatever the new trade arrangements will be. Will the Tánaiste confirm what length of transition period the Government will seek as part of the phase 2 negotiations? Will he give an assurance that throughout the transition phase, however long it is, the UK will remain part of the Single Market and the customs union and that the terms of trade, on both a North-South basis and an east-west basis, will remain unchanged and unimpeded?

On the question of what can be achieved in phase 2, the President of the European Council, Mr. Donald Tusk, has said that while an agreement on a future relationship can only be finalised and concluded once the UK has become a third country, the EU will be ready to engage in preliminary and preparatory discussions with the aim of identifying an overall understanding of the framework for that relationship. People will want to know what this means in practice. Is it the Tánaiste's understanding that there will be no talks at all on the details of a future trade deal until the UK leaves the Union in March 2019? It is undoubtedly the case that the EU stood by Ireland in phase 1. What reassurances has the Government received that the same solidarity will apply in phase 2 on the critical question of trade, given the enormous economic exposure of the State to changes in that area?

Comment on this
Simon Coveney The Tánaiste Fine Gael

First, when people see the text of the guidelines agreed by leaders, which are to be published tomorrow morning, they will clearly see the determination on the EU side to ensure there is no slide-back from the commitments that were made in phase 1. This applies to issues of particular Irish concern, as well as other issues. It is very clear in the wording that the negotiations in the second phase will not proceed or continue unless there is clear evidence that the commitments which were made in phase 1 will be followed though and given legal effect. I expect to see the EU develop, early next year, a draft withdrawal agreement which offers reassurance that the commitments made under phase 1 will be implemented.

I agree with the Deputy that we need to give businesses certainty as soon as we can. While I have very strong views on what I would like to see as the outcome of the phase 2 process, regardless of that outcome, businesses need time to adapt to any new realities. I have said a number of times that if there is a significant difference between the trading environment today and the trading environment post Brexit, then we will need a number of years to allow businesses to adapt to that change. We need time, too, to negotiate the detail of a new trade deal. Any expectation that the full detail of a new trade partnership or arrangement will be concluded in full and be in place by next October or November, as some parties are suggesting, is simply not realistic. What is possible by next October is to have a framework agreement within which we can set the parameters for a new trading environment between the United Kingdom and the EU. The Government's position is that we want this framework to deliver an environment as close as possible to the status quo, with no barriers to trade between the EU and the United Kingdom.

In the absence of agreement, and if the British Government decides to pursue the course of action it has outlined many times, namely, to leave the Single Market and customs union as well as the EU, there will, of course, be problems to address. Such an approach would mean that some of the commitments made in phase 1 in the context of those decisions will be triggered and will have to be part of any withdrawal agreement.

I expect the transition period will take longer than two years. There is nothing in the guidelines that commits the EU to a specific time period, although there is a recognition that the UK has requested approximately two years. An agreement on that matter will be part of the discussions early next year.

Comment on this

The Government is right to guard against any potential backsliding away from the deal that was announced last week. Translating it into binding legal text in a draft written agreement would be an important step in that regard.

What has been said over the past number of days makes that even more important. I am seeking to clarify the Government's position on the question of the transition period. Ireland is now, hopefully, about to commence the phase two negotiations. The Tánaiste has said that he favours a transition period of up to five years. Perhaps the Tánaiste will clarify this and confirm it as the formal position of the Government as we enter into the phase two negotiations. However long the transition period will be, is it the EU and the Government's position that the UK would remain within the Single Market and the customs union during that period so there is a defined transition window? We know what we are working towards but while that window is open, firms and businesses could have that certainty. My key point is to clarify the Government's position on the duration of the transition period as we go in to these negotiations.

Comment on this
Simon Coveney The Tánaiste Fine Gael

The Government and I believe that the longer the transition period, the better. That period will need to be closer to four or five years than two years. The time that is needed for a transition period will also be determined by the approach of the United Kingdom towards these negotiations. If the UK wants to negotiate a Canada style free trade agreement, it will take a number of years. If the UK wants or chooses an option that keeps the United Kingdom much closer to the Single Market and the customs union in the future, it may not involve as much change, and therefore may not involve as long a transition period.

Let me be very clear that the transition period, however long it is, or the adaptation period as some people call it, will involve Britain remaining as part of the Single Market and customs union as it is today. The guidelines will be crystal clear on this at tomorrow's meeting. The full EU acquis will apply. The only difference will be that Britain will not have a presence within the EU institutions as it has today. Everything else remains intact. This will give certainty during that period for businesses operating between Ireland and the UK.

Comment on this

Today and tomorrow, the Taoiseach will attend the meeting of the European Council in Brussels. We are all aware that this meeting is absolutely crucial to our economic, political and social future. The Government has decided to endorse the joint report from the EU Commission and the British Government and last Friday morning the Taoiseach described that report as “rock solid and cast iron”. While acknowledging the positive language in the joint report, Sinn Féin warned that it fell far short of what is needed to truly protect the national interest, North and South.

Sinn Féin also cautioned that the commitments made were not legally binding and that the Government needed to be very careful in its dealings with the Tory Government. Over the days that followed, our caution was proven to be well founded. The British Government spokesperson on Brexit, David Davis, went on television last Sunday and stated that the joint report was merely a “statement of intent”. Senior officials from the Department for Exiting the European Union at Westminster have already rowed back on the British commitments. They have claimed that full alignment will only apply to six areas of North-South co-operation as set out in the Good Friday Agreement. The looseness of the joint report was further highlighted when, on Monday the EU Commission confirmed that the joint report is not legally binding. They described it as “a deal between gentlemen”. This is hardly the language of rock solid and cast iron agreements. The backsliding the Tánaiste referred to earlier has already started.

We are left with a set of contradictions. The first is the claim that there will be no hard border in Ireland, but Britain is leaving customs union and the Single Market and wishes to drag the North of Ireland with them. The second contradiction is the claim that there will be no denudation of rights for citizens, but Britain is leaving the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. The third contradiction is the claim that there is no threat to the Good Friday Agreement, but we are facing the biggest social and political rupture to impact on our island in generations. There is a huge square to be circled here and relatively little time in which to do it.

I met with cross-community sectoral groups in Belfast last Monday. I can tell the Tánaiste that they are feeling far from assured, clear or certain about their future. We have clarity only on one aspect; that nothing is cast iron or rock solid. The Tánaiste referred to negotiating guidelines and the possibility of a draft withdrawal agreement being published next year. I want to ask the Tánaiste about a more immediate concern. Will the Tánaiste indicate whether the Taoiseach will seek additional assurances from the British Prime Minister and our EU partners before allowing the talks to move onto phase two? Will the Tánaiste seek these assurances over the next two days? Will any such assurances be put in writing and published? Will these assurances be legally binding?

Comment on this
Simon Coveney The Tánaiste Fine Gael

I would caution against taking a line from some political commentary as outline facts. What we have in writing is what people should look at and see. This is the commitment the British Government has made to 27 EU countries, not only to Ireland, and to EU institutions at the most senior level. Those commitments are cast iron in my view and in the view of the EU negotiators and the EU institutions within the EU Union at Council and Commission level. The Deputies have seen very strong commentary in response to the ambiguous comments that were made last weekend, which created concern in Ireland and elsewhere. David Davis has subsequently clarified those comments and unfortunately Deputy McDonald has chosen to not quote him in that regard. Rather than trying to raise unfounded fears, we need to reassure communities living in the Border regions. This is what the Government is trying to do. We received very clear assurances in writing last week. As of tomorrow morning we will also have clear reassurance in the EU guidelines around how the EU is going to approach phase two to make sure the commitments will be honoured in full. The wording on that in the first paragraph of the guidelines will be very clear to ensure no back sliding from the commitments made last week. If that was to happen, it would prevent phase two from going ahead. It is not a question of whether phase two can be completed in the absence of the commitments being honoured; it would not progress at all if there is no evidence to show that the phase one commitments are being faithfully translated into legal terms as quickly as possible.

I share some of the concerns of many people in the Border counties. It is the Government's job to make sure we can reassure people on the basis of what has been agreed, in black and white and in writing. We intend to ensure that the hard won negotiating successes of last week in respect of the wording agreed between the British Government and the EU task force is factored into the phase two process so that we can provide reassurance for people who live in the Border counties, and to reassure the many others on the island of Ireland who are concerned about it.

Comment on this

The remarks I have made to the Tánaiste are based in full on exactly what he has secured in writing. I have simply reflected to him the fact that no sooner was the ink dry on those agreements and assurances that the British side was rowing back, or backsliding to use the term from earlier. I am not seeking to cause a difficulty for the Tánaiste, I am seeking to get the very assurance that he says he also seeks. The Taoiseach will attend the EU Council and it is clear that matters will now advance to phase two. This fact is not being contested.

Will the Taoiseach ask for additional assurances over the next two days? Will any such assurances be legally binding? Will any such assurances be contained in the conclusions of the European Council? Under no circumstances should the fate of this island, its economic, political or social well-being, be left to whims of the British Conservatives and the vagaries of whatever position it might or might not take on any given day. I am sure the Tánaiste will agree that it would be irresponsible to allow a scenario like that to play out. Will the Taoiseach ask this of the Council and will we have, by close of business tomorrow, legally binding assurances which would be welcomed across the island?

Comment on this
Simon Coveney The Tánaiste Fine Gael

The European Union works on the basis of rules, treaties, precedent and negotiated agreements. What does not work is negotiation where a third party changes mid-stream or does not follow through on commitments made in writing. We have had very strong messaging this week from the European Parliament, from European institutions, from the General Affairs Council, from Michel Barnier himself in terms of the task force, all saying the same thing about what the EU side understands was agreed last week. Let me be very clear, Ireland's strength is being part of the EU team, 27 countries acting together, ensuring that we move ahead together. We will not look for bilateral agreements with the UK in the context of the broad negotiations-----

Comment on this

I did not suggest that.

Comment on this
Simon Coveney The Tánaiste Fine Gael

What we will look for and get is a very strong set of guidelines tomorrow which will ensure that if phase 2 is to progress, the commitments made during phase 1 will be fully followed through and, where appropriate, will need to be translated faithfully into legal terms as soon as possible.

Comment on this