Debate contribution: Dual Market Access

Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on 18 June 2024.

MLA

Mr Eóin Tennyson

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

18 June 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Dual Market Access

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4496924

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The UK's decision to leave the European Union in 2016 was an enormous act of economic self-harm. Its destabilising impacts have been most acutely felt here in Northern Ireland, with borders and barriers being placed back at the centre of our politics. It has left in its wake a litany of unkept promises and unfulfilled commitments. That is no surprise to those of us on these Benches, but what never fails to surprise me is the ability of DUP members to contort themselves and U-turn on the issue and their seemingly endless willingness to trust a Conservative Party that has thrown them under the bus at every cut and turn over the past eight years. Nor is it lost on the public that the DUP held the balance of power at Westminster during a critical juncture in the Brexit negotiations and then misrepresented Northern Ireland, which overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU, voted down every possible alternative to the protocol, overplayed its hand, squandered its influence and walked us to the position in which we now find ourselves. Nor is the irony lost on anyone that those who most avidly pursued the hardest possible Brexit now shed crocodile tears at the inevitable consequences of their actions. Since 2016, we have been engaged in an exercise of damage limitation. Alliance has consistently said that there was no such thing as a good or sensible Brexit, and, despite our opposition to both Brexit and the protocol, which we voted against at Europe and at Westminster, we have continued to focus on pragmatic solutions to make leaving the EU as painless and low-impact as possible for business and the people whom we represent. However, we can deliver on those solutions only if people are willing to acknowledge that Brexit is the original sin that has caused increased friction and costs, rather than entertaining the fantasy that we can leave the EU and retain all its benefits. Whatever the deal, the fact remains that Northern Ireland requires special arrangements, and that is why Alliance's tests have remained: protecting the Good Friday Agreement, upholding our dual market access and ensuring that any agreement is legal and sustainable. There is no doubt that our dual market access creates huge economic opportunities for agriculture, manufacturing and pharmaceutical companies. Indeed, to see that, you have only to look to my constituency of Upper Bann, where Almac, a highly regulated pharmaceutical manufacturer, is reaping the huge benefits of access to both markets. However, in order to fully maximise that benefit, we owe those businesses political certainty and stability and a commitment to upholding that dual market access and to working across these islands, including with the Irish Government, to market and promote the opportunities on the international stage. I welcome the practical proposals that are set out in the motion. My colleague David Honeyford will speak in more detail about our proposals for how we can better leverage that dual market access. Dual market access, however, must not be the ceiling on our ambition. It is true that dual market access applies only to goods and not to services and that some friction exists in a number of areas. We need a focus from the next UK Government on resolving outstanding issues, such as those relating to dental amalgam and veterinary medicines, through comprehensive and bespoke agreements. Alliance would go further still. Our ambition is not only to return to the single market and the customs union but to be back in the European Union where we belong, cooperating and collaborating with our European neighbours on the big economic and environmental challenges —

— restoring opportunities for our young people and reversing the huge economic damage that has been caused. I will give way to the Member, and I can predict what he is going to ask me.

There are two routes back into the European Union.

I do not share the Member's analysis that the UK returning to the EU is unlikely. If you look at opinion polling and the UK public's opinion on the impact of Brexit, given the fact that the decision to leave the EU came about as a result of a referendum that was tainted by lies and dark money and given that people are feeling the impact of Brexit on their pocket, you will see that a huge number of people in the UK are reconsidering the decision that was taken. I will continue to argue and try to persuade counterparts in Westminster that we should return to the EU. I would not be surprised if that were to happen sooner than the Member thinks.

773 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