Debate contribution: EU Relationship

Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on 18 November 2024.

MLA

Mr Colin McGrath

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 4656496

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Maybe I will pledge not to wind people up but to wind up the debate and see how we get on with that. It is great to hear so many people complaining about not having enough time to participate in the debate. Maybe, if we go back to a having a smaller number of motions, more people will participate, and we will be able to use fully the time that is available. In tabling a motion on the North's future relationship with the EU, we, as the most pro-European party in the Assembly, did so to rectify the destabilisation that was brought about as a result of Brexit. In 2016, the tactics of Farage, Johnson and the European Research Group (ERG) were effective and worked on their target audience. They sowed the seeds of division, fear and deep mistrust. Also, they promised their target audience a utopia. They promised them that everything would be great and sunny. What they delivered, however, was a wrecking ball without an operator, with more-honest politicians left to pick up the pieces. Since the referendum vote in 2016, in acknowledging the democratic wishes of the UK as a whole, our drive, loyalty and priority has been to fight the worst excesses of Brexit and ensure that the people here — the ones whom we represent and who voted overwhelmingly to remain in Europe — would not be heinously impacted on. None of us believes that the EU is some sort of utopia. There is much about the EU that needs to be reformed, but it has always been our view that we are better placed inside that body, where such reforms can take place. There has been much discussion on that relationship with the EU, but we spent most of the debate talking about the democratic consent motion that is coming up. However, there is so much more to the motion. We were talking about helping young people to learn and share their lives with others across Europe. We were talking about helping our tourism industry by facilitating easier travel. We were talking about our voice being heard in a democratic fashion and about helping our farming sector and our food processors to ensure that they can access better arrangements. That was what we were trying to do, but it descended into a little bit of a farce from some people. That is unhelpful, and we do not believe that it manages to bring out the arguments that we could make. Some Members highlighted the fact that the debate was simply a dry run for the Windsor framework debate. I am sorry that that has happened, because there is so much more that we could talk about. Some who mentioned that imitation was the greatest form of flattery simply rehashed their own arguments from years ago. They are simply imitating themselves by constantly discussing pro-Brexit arguments.

Thank you very much. The motion is about the EU and our relationship with it. It is about us being able to have our voice heard where those decisions are taken so that people cannot say that their voice is not being heard. People seem to be completely averse to our having a seat at the European Parliament in order to be able to articulate our views on those laws that impact on here, which, in so doing, would enable businesses here to continue to have access both to the UK and EU markets and would remove the sense that your voice was not being heard or that you were having laws thrust upon you. If you were actually there participating and giving your views, you would be part of that process. It seems that you are not prepared to countenance that, but it would be constructive in trying to resolve the issues. Sometimes the arguments that are presented are a monumental example of cutting off your nose to spite your face. It goes back to that political territory of, "No, no, no" and, "Never, never, never" while forgetting that it is actually the businesses and communities that we represent that get hurt the most. However, do not let that get in the way of your being able to stand up and make a pointless argument. People here and in Ireland as a whole have not bought into the false promises that Farage, Johnson and their ilk made, as they know what the EU delivered to us, which was an opportunity for seamless trade and to be part of a wider international community. It was about the promotion and propagation of our peace process through many hundreds of millions of pounds of Peace moneys. It was not about Little England nationalism. In acknowledging what has come before, the SDLP remains the most pro-Europe party in the Assembly. We have our sights set firmly on the future. As we make the case for exploiting the benefits of the Windsor framework, improving access to Erasmus and having representation in the European Parliament, the SDLP will continue to make the case that, ultimately, our best days lie ahead of us in a new, unified and reconciled Ireland that is at peace with itself and prosperous in the EU and on the wider world stage. I hope that all parties will support our motion, although I will not bank on it.

896 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