Debate contribution: EU Relationship

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

MLA

Mr Matthew O'Toole

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

18 November 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

EU Relationship

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4655870

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

Before the end of this year, the Assembly will have an opportunity to vote on the protocol, now often referred to as the "Windsor framework". Unlike a lot of the votes that we have in this place, this one will mean something. It is a vote that will not simply pass into the ether; it will have specific consequences. It is provided for in international law, and, assuming that it passes with a simple majority, as, most expect, it will, the UK Government have said that that will trigger a process of reviewing how the protocol works. How should that review look? What should it look at? The consent motion is short and simply acts to confirm or reject the continued application of articles 5 to 10 of the protocol. Of course, we all want to see continued efforts to ensure that the movement of goods between Britain and Northern Ireland is as smooth as possible, but, if there is to be an independent review, it must look at the challenges and opportunities of our post-Brexit arrangements in total. That means maximising the investment and growth potential of our dual market access. It means ensuring that the EU and the UK are on the same page when encouraging and facilitating that investment. I have been among the loudest and most vociferous advocates of the opportunities from dual market access, but it will take more than local politicians talking; it will need policymakers in Brussels, London and Dublin to be fully engaged in helping us to benefit from our position. We think that the independent review process, assuming that one takes place, is the perfect place to start that work, but this is not simply about pounds and pence or euros and cents; it is about the extraordinary opportunities for young people, universities and wider civic society and maximising our access to European programmes and European cooperation. For example, while it is welcome that Northern Irish students can participate in ERASMUS via higher education institutions in the South, we want to see Northern institutions fully participating again. We are, after all, bound to the EU not only by the obligations of the protocol but by the fact that our people — our citizens — have a permanent right to EU citizenship by dint of birthright. We also have another treaty right enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement and clarified by our former party leader Mark Durkan when he was an MP, which is that Northern Ireland, uniquely in the UK and, indeed, uniquely on the continent, has an automatic legal route to rejoining the EU via a referendum on a new Ireland. To be clear, that is not what today's debate is about, but it illustrates why we are entitled to speak up not just for a European future in the long term but for a joint effort by the UK and EU to maximise the benefits as we mitigate the challenges of our position. Those challenges also include a wide range of new disruptions to cross-border life in the all-island economy. Let me say briefly that we will, of course, support the Alliance Party amendment, which adds to our motion. I note that some of the wording is a little clumsy. The Alliance Party has successfully courted soft nationalist opinion, but the way that its amendment is phrased indicates that people come "to Northern Ireland from Ireland". That is interesting phrase, and, if you want to continue courting soft nationalists, I encourage you to keep using such language. That would certainly be in our interests. In any case, let us be clear: the appalling policy decision to press forward with the electronic travel authorisation (ETA), potentially devastating tourism in Ireland, is an example of why the British Government needed to be put to the pin of their collar on the original protocol. We make no bones about the fact that we did that, and we will continue to do that. There are other cross-border disruptions: financial services; data, including geo-blocking for sport fans; and other regulatory and tax problems that face frontier workers. The protocol itself, signed by the UK, promised in article 11 to ensure that the conditions for North/South cooperation were maintained. Let us hold them to that. All of those things and, indeed, getting progress on softening east-west disruption would be made more straightforward and, indeed, more accountable, if Northern Ireland had representation in the European Parliament. Our party makes no bones about being the most pro-European party in the North and, indeed, about our aspiration to rejoin the EU, but I have also listened to MLAs and others outside the Chamber, including former Members, lament what they see as the undemocratic nature of the protocol. I presume, then, that they will be happy to support our call for Northern Ireland to be represented in the European Parliament. Whether you want to rejoin the EU, as I do, or simply think that our voice should be heard, we ask for your support. There are multiple routes to this happening and multiple examples of non-member states being represented. West Berlin sent MEPs to the European Parliament despite not being in the Community, as it was then. Gibraltar has never been in the UK, but it was part of the EU and was bound by EU law until Brexit and so voted in European parliamentary elections. Multiple accession countries have enjoyed observer status. Those examples demonstrate that there are precedents and possibilities. To those who are opposed, I simply say, "Why not?". In this place, we did not —.

I will take an intervention, yes.

Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I appreciate the extra minute, and I appreciate the opportunity to outline that, yes, we should take every opportunity to maximise the benefits. I believe strongly in a European future, but I want the best for all of our citizens here. Whether they are EU citizens proudly or not, I want the best for all of our people under our unique status. In this place, we did not choose Brexit, but we have managed to protect ourselves from the worst consequences of Brexit. Let us go further. Let us maximise those opportunities, and let us ensure that our voice is heard where we need it to be heard. I commend the motion to the Assembly.

1,063 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:31 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