The debate today is hugely important. It is 29 years since the Good Friday Agreement and this is my 16th year in this House. I have been waiting each year patiently, hoping this debate would happen. I particularly welcome the constructive approach. I listened to every word the Tánaiste said. While I would disagree with him on many things here at different times, I believe he approached the matter very constructively. His statements were very constructive and will contribute greatly. I hope this is the beginning of moving on the process. The big argument of those who still support partition and have a partitionist mentality is that we cannot afford a united Ireland. As a left republican, I put the case that we cannot afford not to have national reunification. Various claims have been made by economists, some highlighting the economic logic of reunification and others exaggerating the cost, with the latter done mainly by ignoring the fundamental issues and facts. As an example of that, they ignored the economic damage caused by partition, particularly in Border areas. The previous speaker referred to the IBEC meeting this morning, which I was happy to attend. Its representatives gave us the example that firms in the Border region are now reluctant to hire workers from the other jurisdiction due to the difficulties with Revenue and tax compliance, etc. That is a real issue that IBEC is highlighting. That is just one more issue that is popping up. Those who still argue for partition ignore the fact that in a reunified 32-county state, the pension liabilities of those workers in the Six Counties who accrued pension entitlements by paying into the British national insurance system and the British exchequer or employment pensions would receive that portion of their pension liability. It would not fall to a new government of Ireland but, rather, to the British exchequer into which they paid. Currently, taxpayers in the North contribute to the cost of the British royal family. The relevant figure when last I looked was €137 million. I think that was the figure for last year. There is also the cost of Britain's massive diplomatic mission and its embassies across the world, not to mention its occupation of the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar and many other places. The cost is €2.6 billion for the diplomatic mission alone. There is also MI6 and the massive military machine and capacity, including the army, the navy and the Royal Air Force. I saw a figure of €60.2 billion for 2025 and 2026. That amount is due to rise sharply to meet its increased military capabilities. Proportionate or not, all of that is paid for by residents of the Six Counties. Taxpayers in the Six Counties have to carry part of the burden of Britain's ever-increasing national debt. Of course, the fundamental points cannot be ignored. One of the key points is that Britain no longer has the benefits of empire. Its coal industry is gone. Revenue from North Sea oil has all but dried up. Britain's manufacturing base has gone south, including car-making. Those jobs have gone to the Third World and China. Those fundamentals cannot be ignored. Are supporters of partition really saying that we can continue on this small island with 14 different departments in each jurisdiction working back to back, often in competition with each other? Are they saying that having Twenty-six Counties in the EU and Six Counties out of it makes economic sense? Are they saying that having two revenue systems and two separate currencies on this small island of 7.3 million people is logical? The fact is that we need an all-Ireland economy that gives us economies of scale both to improve exports and enlarge the whole market. We need a single currency and a single revenue system that will benefit the Thirty-two Counties. Having the whole country in the European Union, which is not the case as a consequence of Brexit, would be of obvious benefit. We need the North-South interconnector. We should drop all opposition to it. That needs to be built. Government departments working with singular focus in all areas, right across government, would bring efficiencies to public services. Along with the strong economic case for reunification, there is also the political and social case, with opinion polls now showing an ever-increasing number of people in favour of reunification. There is an onus on the Government to begin planning and preparation work for reunification. There is no reason to delay this any further.

Sentiment score: 0.04