Ireland’s finance minister says his government is prepared to listen to any alternative solutions the United Kingdom may have to the question of the backstop, but stressed that so far Prime Minister Boris Johnson had failed to put any forward despite the fast-approaching deadline for Britain to leave the European Union.

Minister of State at Ireland’s Department of Finance, Michael D’Arcy, at the FCC on September 2. Photo: Sarah Graham/FCC

Speaking at the September 2 club lunch, Michael D’Arcy reiterated that the withdrawal agreement thrashed out between the European Union and former British prime minister Theresa May was now non-negotiable but said he personally felt a deal on the issue of the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland could be done after the October 31 deadline passes. He said Ireland was committed to exploring alternative agreements with the EU to avoid the return of a hard border which he said put the island’s prosperity at risk. D’Arcy added that avoiding a hard border was not just about economics, but about protecting the Good Friday Peace Agreement.

Referring to his controversial tweet last week in which he compared Prime Minister Johnson’s “anti-democratic” move to prorogue UK Parliament to Oliver Cromwell’s establishment of the Protectorate government, D’Arcy conceded he “shouldn’t interfere with UK Parliament” but added that he felt the current direction of discourse in politics internationally was “disappointing”.

Watch the video

The recent European election results actually show nothing has changed regarding Brexit in terms of how many voters want to leave the EU and how many wish to remain, says a leading British political scientist.

British political scientist, Philip Cowley, brought some clarity to the topic of Brexit when he appeared at the FCC on May 29. Photo: Sarah Graham/FCC

Despite the newly-formed Brexit Party making huge gains in the poll, taking more than 30% of the total UK votes, the country is still almost evenly split on the issue and the results mirror those of the 2016 referendum.

“It’s British politics as it has been played out since 2014, just in its latest manifestation,” said Philip Cowley, Professor of Politics at Queen Mary University of London.

But what the results of last week’s elections did show was that voters want simple and powerful messages, as was seen from the two parties to gain the most: the Brexit Party’s push to simply leave Europe, and the Liberal Democrats’ adoption of the slogan, Bollocks To Brexit., said Cowley, author of a series of books on British general elections. The parties with the biggest losses – the Conservatives and Labour – campaigned on messages that were too nuanced, he suggested.

As a Conservative leadership contest kicked off with 11 names in the ring so far – “we’ve already hit a football team and I think we’ve got more to come” – Cowley said that although Boris Johnson was the bookies favourite to win, in every Tory leadership contest since 1965, the favourite has failed to be elected.

Watch the full video here

Ireland will not be following Britain’s lead and leaving the European Union next year, said its deputy prime minister, who described the United Kingdom’s decision to leave as a ‘tragedy’.

Tánaiste Simon Coveney spoke passionately about Ireland’s position on Brexit. Photo: Sarah Graham/FCC

The threat to the Good Friday Peace Agreement, coupled with the economic chaos that leaving the EU would bring, were the two biggest reasons for Ireland to stand firm on the difficult Brexit negotiations currently being undertaken by the British government, Tánaiste Simon Coveney, who also has special responsibility for the Brexit negotiations, told FCC members at the March 12 club lunch.

A month ahead of the 20th anniversary of the historic peace agreement, which brought about an end to decades of violence between Catholic and Protestant groups by introducing a devolved government of eight political parties and cross-border co-operation between the governments of Ireland and Northern Ireland, Coveney said the most clear manifestation of that peace process in terms of success “has been the fact that the border on the island of Ireland has become invisible: there is no physical infrastructure any more on that border”.

Leaving the European Union could mean the return of a hard border. Although the British government is trying to strike a divorce deal that would avoid a hard border, a solution agreed by all parties is yet to materialise.

“The British government has agreed to facilitate that but they just don’t know how yet. And I don’t mean that in any kind of a facetious or patronising way. It’s very difficult to come up with an agreed political solution to prevent border infrastructure re-emerging in the island of Ireland if the British government strategy remains as it is today which is that Britain is not only going to leave the European Union and its institutions but is also determined to leave the single market and the customs union as well,” he said.

Coveney said that having lived in Britain for four years, he understood why people voted for Brexit in 2016. “There are many people in England in particular who feel that the European Union was compromising British sovereignty, and their view was and is that Britain can be stronger and more effective and more successful without being part of the European Union institution. And let’s wait and see how that works out,” he said.

But he added that the decision has huge implications for the island of Ireland. “We have a €65billion trade relationship east/west between Britain and Ireland; 38,000 companies in Ireland trade with Britain every month – that’s 200,000 jobs, it’s 10% of the Irish workforce. And the numbers are the same on the other side of the Irish sea in Britain.”

Set against the backdrop of growing political instability within Ireland due to rising frictions between Unionists and Nationalists, an exit from Europe would also threaten the communities and businesses that have built trust since the peace agreement which has allowed the economy to flourish.

He said: “And this is the core problem of Brexit: it fundamentally raises identity issues in Northern Ireland between Nationalists and Unionists and we have spent the last 20 years trying to break down those identity barriers successfully – part of which was the removal of any type of border infrastructure.

“But let me be very clear on this: Ireland is not following the lead of Britain here. We will not be leaving the European Union. We do not think it’s a good idea to go it alone.

“We believe that in the modern world, the way to get things done is in a multi-lateral setting…. For me that is why the British decision is such a tragedy because Britain is one of the great countries of the world and it is deciding to go it alone when actually most of the great problems that we face globally right now can only be solved together through alliances rather than countries in a nationalist way looking to go it alone,” Coveney added.

Coveney was in Hong Kong on his way to China. He talked about Ireland’s long-standing relationship with Hong Kong, noting that nine of its 28 governors had Irish connections. Coveney also praised the introduction of the first direct flight between Dublin and Hong Kong – a first for Asia – which Cathay Pacific launches in June this year. Coveney said he hoped it would mean an additional 60,000 visitors per year to Ireland which would have a strong impact on the economy.

On China, Coveney said that, 40 years since the opening of diplomatic relations, the two countries’ economic ties had never been better. In 2016 total trade between China and Ireland was €13 billion, and is expected to be well above €14 billion in 2017.

“I believe that our people share many characteristics,” Coveney said of the Irish and Chinese, “not least strong attachment to family, unique cultural heritage, and some difficult historical experiences. Our economies have undergone rapid transition.”

Coveney also pledge support for China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), saying he admired its ambition and openness.

Will Brexit be a triumph or train wreck for Britain? Two panelists went head to head to lay their cases over the divisive issue.

Left to right: Experts Anatole Kaletsky and Timothy Beardson debate the pros and cons of Brexit at the FCC. Photo: Sarah Graham/FCC

The question over the United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union was the subject of a debate at the November 8 club lunch, which kicked off after a show of hands in the room revealed there were more Remainers than Leavers.

Anatole Katelsky, co-chairman and chief economist of Gavekal Dragonomics, the consulting and asset management company based in Hong Kong and Beijing, argued that Brexit would be an economic disaster for Britain; while Timothy Beardson, chairman of Bixmoor, suggested that the country could thrive once it left the EU.

Beardson, first to take the stage during the debate, argued that the EU was shrinking, and with it economic opportunities: “In 1950, 16% of the world lived in countries that now comprise the European Union. Now it’s 6% of the world. By the end of this century it’s going to be 3% in the world. That’s a narrow sample for Britain to make as its economic home.”

He added that Britain had three choices when it comes to trade post-Brexit: that the country trades on World Trade Organisation rules which means accepting tariffs – “that doesn’t seem to stop trade going on”; or we can be part of a series of trade blocks; “or we could say we’re going to have no tariffs. That would be aligning our trade policy with the consumers, not the producers – an interesting idea that might go down well with the voters”.

Beardson added: “The European Union is very committed to protectionist measures. It abhors the primacy of U.S. and British financiers in global finance. It would like to tilt the playing field to prevent that.”

And Brexit was “ultimately not an economic question, it’s a political question, it’s a cultural question. Does Britain want to be part of an ever closer political union with Europe? And the answer is most people don’t want that. European advocates like to say it’s all about economics but it’s not. Economists can have all sorts of different opinions about Britain’s move from Europe to a wider world, however, ultimately it’s a political decision. Economic issues don’t matter very much.”

Katelsky began his pitch by agreeing with the point made by Beardson: that Brexit was not just an economic issue, it was a cultural and political issue too. “Politically, I think Brexit is a very dangerous phenomenon because it was a protest vote – perhaps a justifiable protest vote – but about all kinds of issues, many of which had no direct connection with world trade, protectionism, the relationship to Europe or to the rest of the world,” Katelsky said. “They had to do with the health service, education, with housing, with regional policy – none of which have any connection with European policy.”

He added “the great danger and near certainty of Brexit” was that it would not deliver any solutions to the disquiets felt by the British population, and that subsequently “at the end of the process even if it does go well it will leave more anger and more dissatisfaction than less”.

And the country would ultimately not “take back control” – one of the slogans used by the Leave campaign – because reduced tariffs would lead to more competition and less regulation, he said.

Socially and culturally, Katelsky said Britain, “which has been throughout my lifetime, the most successful multicultural society in the world” was now somewhere many who, like himself had not been born there, now felt unwelcome. Katelsky said that as a result he had applied for a Polish passport. He said this sentiment was felt across the country and was partly fuelled by Theresa May’s citizens of nowhere speech where the British Prime Minister said: “…if you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere”.

Economically, he said that since 1992 Britain has had the best performing economy – of the G7 economies – in the world in terms of GDP. He said this was due to two factors: the completion of the single market program; and Black Wednesday, when Britain decided to detach its monetary policy from that of Europe – meaning it got the full benefit of trading in the single market in Europe, causing “enormous growth in the service industries”.

So for the last 25 years, Britain has been able to have its cake and eat it, Katelsky added.

The only two realistic options now would be for Britain to reverse the decision of the 2016 referendum result, which was unlikely; or that it would remain in a “permanent limbo” during the so-called transition phase where it would still enjoy the benefits of single market access but would also still be subject to free movement of people, he said.