Debate contribution: Dual Market Access

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on 18 June 2024.

MLA

Mr Matthew O'Toole

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

18 June 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Dual Market Access

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4496889

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

First, I apologise to the Clerk for making her read out such an expansive motion. The motion is long and detailed for a specific reason: we want to nail down specifics in it. In each Opposition day so far, the SDLP Opposition have sought to use their time to effectively hold Ministers to account and to platform the most urgent policy matters. The two go hand in hand: accountability and a vision for the future; that is what being a constructive Opposition is about. In this final Opposition day before the summer recess — I am sure that some Executive colleagues will be delighted to hear me say that — the SDLP Opposition will propose three motions aimed at maximising the benefits of all-Ireland cooperation in investment and job creation, improving healthcare and building our vital tourism industry. In each of those areas, the relevant Minister has signalled a positive tone in relation to greater cross-border collaboration, but we want and need to see practical action and specific plans with timelines. Our first, admittedly very detailed, motion calls for specific actions — meat on the bones — and a rhetorical commitment to dual market access. The SDLP has been the loudest and longest champion of the unique dual market access afforded to this region under the protocol, now termed the Windsor framework. Indeed, I was the first person to use that phrase in the Assembly Chamber — yes, I am sad enough that I went and checked that in Hansard. Back then, in 2020 and 2021, the very existence of our preferential trading arrangements at the crossroads of the world's two largest markets was hugely controversial. Yes, it remains controversial today, as does Brexit itself, which was an extraordinary act of economic self-harm. The UK's official economic forecast to the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates that Brexit, specifically hard Brexit, will cost the UK around 4% of its productivity and 15% lower trade. Those might seem like dry, abstract percentages, but they will add up to tens and, ultimately, hundreds of billions of pounds of lost economic activity, which means tens of billions of pounds or more of missed tax revenue. When we add that to the existing effects of grinding austerity, it helps to explain the withered state of public services here and elsewhere.

I do not want to spend the debate lingering on the old Brexit battle, not that there really is anything to debate. Even Nigel Farage, a close personal friend — or fair-weather friend — to some in the Chamber, has admitted that Brexit is a failure. We cannot escape all the negative consequences of that failure. As I said, we are living with its consequences, with lower spending by the UK Government and the deterioration of public services. We are dealing with key labour shortages, with the movement of people being outside the protocol. We are dealing with disruptions in trading services, cross-border and into Europe. The data is clear: we are seeing tangible economic benefits from our ability, which is unique on this planet, to move goods seamlessly into both the British and European single markets. InterTradeIreland collates data published by the Central Statistics Office in Dublin and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) in Belfast. The data is stark. Before Brexit and our new trading arrangements in 2015, annual cross-border trade in goods stood at just under €3 billion, having been around that level for more than a decade. By 2023, cross-border trade had tripled in value to more than €10 billion. I quote a report from the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) last September:

"The unique status of Northern Ireland with its access to both the EU and UK markets has driven this recent substantial increase in cross-border trade and has the potential to continue to feed into broader economic linkages across the island."

Let me be clear: that is a good thing, whatever your constitutional perspective.

I will give way briefly.

I am delighted that I gave way to the Member, because he has given me the opportunity to say that I am a proud pro-European and that I would love to remove any scintilla of a lack of democracy from our arrangements by rejoining the European Union via an inclusive and reconciled new Ireland. What a great idea. To be clear, increased cross-border trade is a good thing. It may be the only good thing to have come from Brexit, even if was the last thing that some of Brexit's strongest proponents wanted. We have some canopy from the Brexit storm. Northern Ireland, traditionally one of the weakest-performing economic regions, has consistently outperformed other UK regions since we formally exited the EU. Ignoring the role played by our uniquely advantageous trading position would be daft and disingenuous. Much of that growth happened when there was no Executive at all to drive policy or strategy or when severe political instability and doubts over Ministers' commitment to pursuing the benefits of dual market access hindered investment. I can remember a time in the Chamber when Ministers for the Economy denied that there even were benefits, even as Invest NI sought to tentatively market those benefits overseas. I am glad that the Economy Minister that we now have does not share that position. Imagine what could be achieved with a focused plan and strategy in collaboration with the Irish Government and, indeed, with the support of the UK Government and the European Commission. Briefly, to anyone who thinks that we are ignoring the east-west axis: our motion is deliberately drafted so as to underline the importance of the east-west axis. By definition, supporting the dual market access benefits of the protocol is an acknowledgement of the fact that the east-west economic access is vital for Northern Ireland. Of course, our motion says that we want collaboration with the UK Department for Business and Trade to help to realise the benefits. I genuinely commend the Economy Minister for showing a commitment to growing the all-island economy as part of his economic vision and to getting additional funding for InterTradeIreland, which was deliberately left to wilt as a bit of a Cinderella among economic development agencies by some of his predecessors. We will, however, need much more than simply some extra funding and aspirations for InterTradeIreland. It needs a detailed work programme with agreed targets and, yes, bureaucratic structures for delivery and accountability. We in the SDLP believe that that should logically start with an agreed working group comprising IDA Ireland, which is known as one of the world's most successful investment agencies, and Invest NI reporting jointly to Ministers, North and South. For too long, on both sides of the border, those agencies were encouraged to view each other, narrowly and unhelpfully, as competitors rather than partners. The protocol offers a specific benefit to goods moving from Northern Ireland, but its benefits can be felt all over the island of Ireland. To give an example, if a US or Continental pharmaceutical company were wishing to avail itself of the protocol benefits of a location in the North, that would need not deter investment in the South. Indeed, it might enhance the investment potential — such potential that I am choking on my words with excitement — of existing Southern sites, given the potential for cross-border value chains. The recent review of Invest NI and the appointment of an IDA Ireland veteran as its chief executive officer offer the chance to open a new chapter. As I said, our motion also acknowledges the importance of the east-west axis in making such opportunities work, whether by resolving outstanding issues with moving goods east to west or by ensuring that, unlike under the Tories, a new British Government are willing to task their Department for Business and Trade with properly helping signpost and sell our dual market access. In early 2021, the SDLP wrote to that UK Department's predecessor, alongside the Irish Government and the EU Directorate-General for Trade. At the time, we did not have a local Minister who wanted to take that opportunity. If the rhetoric is to be believed, we do now, but we need to see a plan, on paper and with clear actions and timelines, ideally in a Programme for Government with a budget to match. The protocol's economic opportunities are no panacea, but they are, finally, a unique opportunity to turn the dual nature of this complicated place into meaningful economic potential for our people. Let us not waste that chance. I commend the Opposition motion to the Assembly.

1,436 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:37 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification