Brendan Smith urges urgent action on Brexit, vaccines and climate

Thank you very much, Achahirleach. A quick look through the conclusions adopted by the European Council at its meeting on the 10th and 11th of December gives us a good overview of what is likely to dominate the domestic and European agenda over the coming 6 to 12 months, with one exception, which I will return to later. The five conclusion headings from the post-meeting communique were the multi-annual financial framework for 2021-2027 and the recovery plan on the next generation EU, COVID-19, climate action and security. The Taoiseach Statement and the communique itself reports progress on most of these headings, which in itself is positive news. I also heard Minister of State Borden talk in the same vein subsequent to the summit as well. I should also note that the communique itself notes that the Council paid well-deserved tributes to the former French President, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, who passed away on the 2nd of December last, and it referred to him as a driving force behind the European project who played a key role in creating the European Council. It is a fitting tribute to a good European statesman and politician, and one to which I think we should refer during this debate in a positive vein as well. On item one on the EU's finances, we should welcome the fact that Council made progress on finalising the EU's finances to 2027 and resolving the standoff on a rule of law provision between Poland and Hungary on one side and the rest of the European Union on the other. But the progress made should not be taken as proof that the real rule of law concerns held by many of us at what is happening in Hungary and Poland when it comes to interference with either the freedom of the press or judicial independence. It is long past time for real political action, and I believe that the European People's Party have to take effective measures in that respect in regard to the membership of their group and send out a clear message of their intent in this regard. The European Council's discussions around the development, purchase and the EU-wide distribution of effective COVID-19 vaccines are critical, as is the plan to take forward proposals for an EU health union. Indeed, the news yesterday that the European Medicines Agency responsible for the evaluation and supervision of medicines has brought forward its meeting to approve the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine forward to a date before Christmas is very welcome. We are all agreed that every single day counts. We work at full speed to authorise COVID-19 vaccines that are safe and effective, and get them distributed as effectively and efficiently as possible. President-elect Biden has made the point very well that vaccines alone do not save lives, vaccinations and people do. We need to vaccinate as many people as is humanly possible, as speedily as possible. This year we saw the awesome power and force of nature, so I am very happy to see that EU leaders achieved a significant breakthrough in combating climate change by committing to a binding EU reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of at least 55 per cent by 2030. This is progress. Now comes the hard part of implementing it in a way that does not penalise those who have been doing most to protect our environment. The Council's conclusions on external relations, specifically to the Eastern Mediterranean and South neighbourhood, and those in security, particularly in strengthening Europol's mandate and securing European-wide police and judicial cooperation, are important. As I said at the outset, I want to briefly address one issue that was not in the meeting conclusions, but which clearly was a part of the meeting's background discussions, namely Brexit. The fact that Brexit is not in the meeting's conclusions is confirmation that for most in Europe, Brexit is a regrettable fact of life. Contrary to the Tory spin, Europe is not trying to undermine Brexit, but rather to mitigate its impacts. As I have commented here many times previously, Brexit is a lose-lose game. Both sides suffer in Brexit. The difference is that EU governments recognise this fact now and are trying to ease its negative impact. We in this country know this better than anyone else, and the people of my Kevin Monaghan constituency and all the other border constituencies know it even better. Brexit's negative impact is not some theoretical outworking we have yet to see. We in my region have seen it impact adversely already, but we know, sadly, worse is to come. I have made the case for mitigation measures here before, and will do so again. The specifics of what we will require still depend on what emerges from the EU-British talks. What we do know for sure is that we will need to have systems and mechanisms for the maximum levels of all island cooperation, no matter what is agreed between Michel Barnier and Mr Frost. The shared island unit and substantial funding are very welcome, but practical and tangible implementations are what matter. We need to see key projects like the A5 upgrade and the narrow water bridge advance speedily. We will also need to see greater cooperation across a range of areas, such as health, transport, education, agriculture and IT infrastructure. And the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 facilitates cooperation in all of those areas, and we want to maximise the potential of that agreement. I had discussions with the Taoiseach recently in regard to progress in the Ulster Canal, and I am very glad that Taoiseach is very clear in his commitment that funding will be provided under the shared island initiative, and that it will be possible to progress that project quickly, and that funding will be made available without delay. That is an all-Ireland project that was committed to some small-scale works that have been carried out, and I look forward to it being part of that great network of inland waterways that we have right throughout our island, north and south. I urge the Taoiseach and the Taoiseach to move speedily to create the opportunities for ministers north and south, and most importantly for officials from both parts of this island to interact and meet regularly to look at the nuts and bolts of how we can ease the impact of Brexit across the border regions. And that is a thing we have to do at parliamentary level as well as well. Minister, I spoke to you previously, both in discussions at our own parliamentary party and privately, in regard to the need to ensure that the EU cross-border health care directive is protected post-Brexit. We have all helped and assisted and know of patients who have travelled to different health facilities or clinics in Northern Ireland to have different procedures or treatment carried out. We know that we know that the EU health care directive will be available to our citizens in the 26 other countries post-Brexit. But the reality is that more than 90% of people who avail of that health care directive at the present time source treatment and or procedures in Northern Ireland or Britain. So we need to ensure that the arrangements that are in place at present, that they are continued after the 1st of January. Because I have people who have begun treatment, people who are waiting dates to commence further treatment, follow-up treatment. So it is an extremely important part of our health care delivery. When the capacity is in Northern Ireland, or similarly when we have capacity in the South, that we do not deprive citizens of Northern Ireland of availing of our health care facilities either. So Minister, I am very anxious that you and your officials would ensure that the negotiations which have been ongoing for some time are brought to a successful conclusion in regard to the need to protect the cross-border health care directive. Thank you, Deputy Secretary.