Shared island and Northern Ireland
Deputy Matt Shanahan raised the shared island initiative and warned against delays in building co-operation before constitutional change. The Tánaiste rejected Steve Baker's comments, defended the Good Friday Agreement, and said any referendum would need a majority.
There is much to admire in the shared island initiative as it gingerly tries to figure out how we can all live on this island together. Given the demographic destiny that is beating like a Lambeg drum now, it might prove to have been a little too slow and too careful in getting the well-meaning enhanced co-operation, connection and mutual understanding in place before events take over. Citing personal experience of the undisciplined carnage of the UK's Brexit process, the Minister of State at the Northern Ireland Office, Mr. Steve Baker, suggested that major constitutional upheavals like Brexit, Scottish independence, or a Border poll should require a so-called super-majority. I ask the Tánaiste for his view on this.
Comment on this
I do not agree with Mr. Baker on this. I made that clear yesterday in media comments that I made. The Good Friday Agreement is very clear in the provision in respect of the constitutional future of Northern Ireland. I do not accept Mr. Baker's suggestion at all. If one has a referendum, it has to be by a majority in my view. Even though I disagreed totally with Brexit, it was a majority decision, and a narrow majority at that. That said, Ministers are entitled to reflect. Maybe Mr. Baker is reflecting on the Brexit decision and the impact it has had more generally. The British people were entitled to make their decision but it is no harm for people to reflect on decisions made, to inform the future.