Skip to main content

We don’t want no border at all



The chaos surrounding Brexit reached new depths of confusion this week. Theresa May’s Plan B announced on Monday turned out to be no plan at all. She ruled out an extension of Article 50 and a second referendum. There was a lot of spin about talking to business, the devolved administrations, opposition parties and trade unions – all of whose views she ignored for the last two and half years. With a straight face May told the British Parliament on Monday that she wants to find out what MPs are demanding on the backstop! And then she will take that demand back to the EU. The EU has already ruled out any renegotiation of the Withdrawal Agreement.
At the time of writing– there are 65 days left to Brexit. It seems to me that May’s real plan is to talk the process down to the point where some MPs – frightened of the consequences of a no deal scenario – will change their vote and back her Withdrawal Agreement. She is playing for time.
The consequences of this shambolic Tory government strategy for the two economies on this island, for social cohesion, and for the Good Friday Agreement are enormous. It demands the strongest, most robust, opposition. Sinn Féin, and especially our MEP team led by Martina Anderson, have led the defence of the Agreement. However, the greater onus to defend the rights of citizens in the North rests with the Irish government.
The government’s initial response to Brexit, under a different Taoiseach, was like that of the Fianna Fáil leader, pathetic. It improved when Leo Varadkar and Simon Coveney as Taoiseach and Tánaiste. They presented a better all-island position but they avoided challenging the British Government or the EU to accept the democratic vote of the North to remain within the European Union. The Government has also acquiesced on the fundamental issue of the entitlement of Irish citizens in the North to European Union rights and the issue of rights generally.
In December 2017 in the joint report produced by the EU and British Government, paragraph 52 specifically stated that the people of the North, "who are Irish citizens will continue to enjoy rights as EU citizens, including where they reside in Northern Ireland." The Taoiseach stated everyone born in the North "will continue to have the right to Irish and therefore EU citizenship."
He also stated the joint report was rock solid, cast iron and politically bullet proof. In response to a letter signed by representatives of civic nationalism, the Taoiseach assured them the Government had protected their interests. He stated "Your birth right as Irish citizens, and therefore as EU citizens, will be protected". He added "You will never again be left behind by an Irish Government."
It was a very welcome and positive commitment. However, many now believe this promise has been broken. The specific commitment to citizens who reside in the North is missing from the withdrawal agreement.
I have raised this several times in the Dáil. The Government has yet to explain why the "rock-solid, cast iron" and "politically bullet proof" joint report commitment of December 2017 on the rights of Irish citizens in the North to enjoy rights as European Union citizens is missing from the withdrawal agreement.
The additional seats allocated by the EU to this State could have been allocated to the North but the Government said "No." Why?
In a letter to the Taoiseach last November, 1,000 civic nationalists from across the island of Ireland expressed their deep concerns at the Government’s commitment to uphold its promises and responsibilities under the Good Friday Agreement. They identified the denial of access to free healthcare in EU states and the prohibitive costs of students from the North studying at any university in the South. They said there is a real potential that partition could be reinforced and our country and our people further divided.
The Irish Government and its lobby of EU neighbours on Brexit rightly stressed the centrality of the Good Friday Agreement to the outcome of the Brexit negotiations. Yet we have the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach repeatedly dismissing a part of the agreement, which is a referendum on Irish unity. That too is a key provision and an integral part of the Good Friday Agreement.
At Queen's University two weeks ago the Tánaiste chose to claim that any debate on Irish unity would be like pouring petrol into a furnace that is already pretty hot. Once again, the Irish Government is limiting the rights of citizens to what is tolerable to a section of unionism. Has this led to unionist leaders being more friendly toward the Taoiseach and Tánaiste? No. The Tánaiste met the DUP recently. To the best of my recollection it is the first formal meeting the DUP leadership had with him since February last year despite numerous and appropriate efforts by the Government to meet them.
The Taoiseach and the Tánaiste cannot cherry-pick from the Good Friday Agreement. There is a responsibility and a constitutional obligation to promote the goal of Irish unity and to work to achieve it through democratic dialogue and negotiation. The Taoiseach and Tánaiste also persist in blaming the impasse in the North on what they refer to as the problem parties of Sinn Féin and the DUP.
While this may be popular with sections of Fine Gael support, it serves no purpose in the North, except to annoy nationalists and republicans. They will have been even more annoyed by the Tánaiste's ridiculous claim in the Dáil last Thursday that the British Government “has also recognised its own obligations under the Good Friday Agreement, to its credit”. This is stuff and nonsense and the Tánaiste knows that. The Tánaiste also knows that it is the DUP that has set its face against rights for citizens that exist in every other jurisdiction on these islands.
A few years ago, Fine Gael, under the leadership of Deputy Enda Kenny, got itself in a mess over the issue of customs posts on the Border. There were claims and counter claims of Revenue planning for and preparing sites for customs posts on the Border. Last week Minister Shane Ross, suggested Border checks are inevitable in the event of a no-deal Brexit. He is right! Unless the Government refuses to establish these checks. The Government has yet to state clearly and unequivocally that it will not erect customs posts on the Border. Watch this space. Hard border? Soft border? We don’t want no border at all.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Best International Documentary | Defend the GPO and Save Moore St. | A Week in the Life and Death of GAZA

  Best International Documentary I spent the weekend in Galway and Mayo. The weather was amazing. The countryside with its miles of stone walls separating plots of land and the lush colours of green and rocky inclines was a joy to travel through. I was in Galway on Saturday to attend the Galway Film Festival/Fleadh where Trisha Ziff’s film – A Ballymurphy Man - was receiving its world premiere. The cinema in the old Town Hall where the Festival is centred was packed to capacity for the screening. The audience was hugely attentive and very welcoming when Trisha and I went on the stage at the end of the screening to talk about the making of the documentary. The next day I was in Mayo when Trisha text me to say that ‘A Ballymurphy Man’ had taken the Festival award for Best International Documentary. So well done Trisha and her team who worked hard over five years, with very limited funding to produce this film. In Mayo I met Martin Neary, who has bequeathed his 40-acre homeste...

The murder of Nora McCabe

Nora McCabe was murdered almost 29 years ago on July 9th 1981. She was shot in the back of the head at close range by a plastic bullet fired from an RUC armoured landrover. She died the next day in hospital from her injuries. It was the same morning Joe McDonnell died on hunger strike. Nora was aged 33 and the mother of three young children, the youngest three months old. Over the years I have met her husband Jim many times. He is a quiet but very determined man who never gave up on getting the truth. Jim knew what happened, but as in so many other similar incidents, the RUC and the Director of Public Prosecutions office embarked on a cover up of the circumstances in order to protect the RUC personnel responsible for Nora’s murder. At the inquest in November 1982 several RUC people gave evidence, including James Critchley who was the senior RUC officer in west Belfast at the time. He was in one of the armoured vehicles. The RUC claimed that there were barricades on the Falls Road, tha...

There can be no preconditions

Blog January 21st 10 Apparently the DUP were sitting up at Stormont Castle on Thursday waiting for the Shinners to come and talk to them. Strange. This Blog had told Peter Robinson late the evening before that that phase of our discussions was over. I told him there would be a Sinn Féin national officer board meeting on Thursday and a report from Martin McGuinness on the negotiations would be discussed. The failure of the DUP thus far to come up to the plate during the current round of negotiations shouldn’t come as any great surprise. The DUP are looking over their shoulder at Jim Allister and then there are the ‘secret’ talks between the UUs and the DUP and talk of electoral pacts. That’s their own business and nothing to get too excited about. Except to note they told us they couldn’t do any business on the Sabbath – the very day they were busy on unionist unity business. But lest we forget the DUP was born out of the anti civil rights politics of the late 60s and the firebrand unio...