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
‹ Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders' Questions

No-deal Brexit contingency planning

Summary

Deputy Ryan said Ireland could not simply say it had no plan for a no-deal Brexit and asked for clarity on specific cross-border issues, including milk movements. The Tánaiste said extensive contingency work had been done but the hardest issue was the all-island economy, and warned against publishing options before the Government had agreed a position.

We have been very sensitive on this side of the House when discussing any arrangements that may be required in the event of a no-deal Brexit for fear of inadvertently influencing the UK debate. That debate is now moving on, however. Red lines have been crossed that could not have been crossed previously. That may, hopefully, lead to some sort of collective sense and some idea of where the UK is going. In the interim, however, this House cannot just state we have no plan in response to those seeking clarity regarding what we would do in a no-deal scenario.

I refer in particular to the Taoiseach who answered questions yesterday regarding the sanitary and phytosanitary, SPS, checks we may have to do. That issue is becoming very real. If anybody in Westminster wants to quote anyone in this House stating there is no problem, we can respond by stating we will have to irradiate our wooden pallets. The idea that there is a maximum facilitation, max fac, solution is complete nonsense.

If anything, the closer we get to a no-deal Brexit and the more we prepare for it, the more obvious the case for the backstop becomes. Today the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the Taoiseach debate how to protect the Single Market in Farmleigh House, including specifics such as the management of sanitary and phytosanitary checks. We must start to give the Irish public and farmers some understanding of what that might mean. There was talk yesterday of farm gate animal checks being different because we will have to involve vets. We better try to provide some clarity so that we will not be totally unprepared for what we will have to do if the British Prime Minister, Theresa May, and the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, are unable to reach some sort of agreement and the UK inadvertently crashes out of the European Union. The Taoiseach indicated yesterday that it may be possible to apply some of these checks on an all-island basis, although he said that would require the co-operation of the UK Government. I presume it would also require the co-operation of the EU. He also suggested that issues in respect of chlorinated chicken or steroid-treated beef may be managed with checks at Dublin Port and Rosslare Europort.

Can the Tánaiste provide clarity on the matter of animal checks, which seems to be one of the most difficult issues we will have to manage if a no-deal Brexit occurs? Irish agrifood companies have set out their concerns about what needs to be done in today's newspapers. This is a public debate. This House needs and deserves some details of the plans for that specific area because it is the thorniest and most difficult challenge we will face in a no-deal scenario.

Comment on this
Simon Coveney The Tánaiste Fine Gael

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. It is no secret to this House that, while an extraordinary amount of detailed work on how Ireland and the EU collectively would respond in a no-deal scenario has been completed and published, the most difficult issue to put a contingency plan in place for was always going to be how we would manage an all-island economy in the context of a no-deal Brexit. Those who maintain the argument that this could work easily with some alternative arrangements and without the use of the backstop or the principles behind it, which involve regulatory alignment, are making false arguments and have been doing so for months. There is no easy fix.

The British Government has produced a paper in which it says that it will not implement checks or apply tariffs in respect of goods travelling from the Republic of Ireland to Northern Ireland in the context of a no-deal Brexit, but that would be a temporary arrangement until a solution was negotiated between the British and Irish Governments and the European Commission. There is no way the EU can provide the same assurance in respect of goods travelling from North to South because we cannot ignore the obligations and responsibilities that would be on the EU if Northern Ireland, as part of the United Kingdom, were to leave the European Union and therefore be outside of the Single Market and customs union. I am confident that the EU would have to apply the rules it applies to any third country outside of the EU to Northern Ireland, which would pose real difficulties on this island. That is why this week we have intensified our engagement with the European Commission on how we can work together to fulfil the dual obligations we have, first, to protect peace and relationships on this island and to prevent physical border infrastructure and, second, our obligation to protect the integrity of the EU Single Market. There is no alternative arrangement or magic solution that does the same job as the backstop, which it to keep the all-island economy functioning as it does today. Instead, we will be looking at mechanisms that will allow us to collect tariffs and which will provide reassurance to other EU member states that Ireland will not be dragged out of the Single Market by the UK crashing out of the EU. We cannot allow that to happen. We cannot protect the normal functioning of an all-island economy, which is what the backstop does, but we can certainly prevent the security issues caused by physical border checks from arising. We intend to avoid such checks.

We are working closely with the European Commission on this issue. I suspect that some of the conversation with Chancellor Merkel today will focus on this issue. I assure the Deputy that EU leaders, from Chancellor Merkel to President Macron, want to assist Ireland is solving this problem, recognising that there is a dual obligation that is very complicated and difficult to solve.

Comment on this

It is difficult, which is why I agree fully with the Tánaiste that what has been said in Westminster - that there is some easy mechanism to deal with this - is complete nonsense. We need to progress preparations and prepare our people properly. My concern is that there is still no clarity on some very specific issues. Glanbia has said today that it brings 130 million l of milk from Northern Ireland to the South every year. It would be useful for farmers on both sides of the Border to know what will happen with that milk, rather than everyone rushing to find a plan to manage the issue the day after Brexit. What happens in the case that we suspect there is chlorinated chicken in the UK market, a scenario the Taoiseach cited yesterday? How would we manage that? Would it be managed at Dublin Port, at the factory or at the Port of Larne? We should not be scrambling to answer that question on Brexit day plus one. We all agree that we want to avoid infrastructure at the Border, but if we will have to have vets carrying out checks in respect of animal movements, when will the vets be told what those checks will be and where they will take place? Leaving it until after a crash-out would not be doing a service to our people. We need some sort of internal discussion on the issue so that we will know exactly what might be ahead of us, as difficult as that might be.

Comment on this
Simon Coveney The Tánaiste Fine Gael

An internal discussion is taking place, but it is important that the options are weighed up and that we agree on something before we start informing the public. Otherwise, anything we say will be twisted by some in Westminster to get a political message across that is not accurate. That has happened over and over again with regard to alternatives to the backstop. People stand up in Parliament in Westminster and misrepresent the reality. They will continue to do that and it does not make much sense for us to continue to make comments that allow them to do that.

Having said that, the Deputy is right. We need to be ready for Brexit day plus one, as the Deputy has called it, in a no-deal scenario. We need clarity both with the European Commission and with businesses. We are working towards providing that clarity. Some of what we can and cannot do is now pretty clear but there are awkward issues that need to be dealt with arising from our obligations to avoid any infrastructure on or near the Border and, at the same time, to protect the Single Market. Unfortunately, we cannot and do not control any decisions in Northern Ireland and so checks in Larne are not in our gift. Ultimately, any protection for an all-island economy now or in the future can only be delivered with the co-operation of the British Government. I remind the House that in December 2017, long before the withdrawal agreement had been drafted or agreed, in return for the process moving on to the next stage, the British Government gave a very clear commitment to Ireland that the default position in the absence of agreement in other areas would be regulatory alignment on this island to prevent border infrastructure. We should continue to request that commitment be honoured by the British Government. It was not contingent on a withdrawal agreement being agreed.

Protecting an all-island economy now and into the future can only be done by taking a regulatory alignment approach to the problem. Anything else would be disruptive to trade. We must ensure that, in that context, we do everything we can to protect the peace process.

Comment on this