 Y rhaid i'w ddweud ar y tawrch iawn i'w ddweud o'r minister Genthaloni i chi'n ddweud, mae'n gwneud, y Unedig Eurpoedd Cymru, yma, yn ddweud, o'i ei wneud, yn y canfod y 27 honny, ac yn ymddangos, mae'n ddweud i gael ddim yn ddweud ar hyn o'r Unedig Eurpoedd. Y Llywodraeth wedi ddweud y cyfnod cofod o'r gweithredu, yma yw'r drwsglwydau drwng gwrsgrunio'n euw ychydig o Bryd i Brif Weinidog. Mae'r ddweud â'r ddweud yn fawr, yn fawr, mae'n ddod i gael beth sy'n bwysig a'r Ffwrdd ddiwedd ym Mhryddol i gynnig eich cynnwys mewn gwirionedd y Unedig European Union a'r refernd ym Mhrydd i Acreffor. Ddweud i'r gweithio. Ddweud i'r grifennidwch, profi, roedd yn gwneud amser yn y bryd. I'm very glad to be in Dublin and to have the honour to speak at Trinity College. The tradition, really a longstanding tradition of its Italian department, along with the significant participation of Italians to the Centre for Research and Adaptive Nano Structures and Nano Devices, reinforced my conviction that this is the right venue for sharing a few remarks from the future of Europe after Brexit. The Brexit shock has arrived while the European Union is living through one of the most difficult phases in its history. It's not the first time, but today's situation conveys the impression of a sort of perfect storm because of two issues. First, the convergence of different crises, terrorist migration flows and the enduring effects of the economic recession, especially on youth unemployment. And second, a perception that such a multiple challenge lacks a shared European approach and a common European response. We appear divided and often ineffective in a nutshell too many summits so few answers. In our societies we feel a huge public disenchantment different from country to country. And even anger vis-à-vis the European Union as it is today. Many perceive Brussels as a bureaucratic tool that in the end harms job security, boost inequalities and even embodies the evils of globalization. And some very vocal political forces, although fortunately in minority, are trying to exploit this disillusion against the EU. Confrontant with such a complex scenario we cannot be complacent. We have to take very seriously the increase in dissatisfaction of our public opinion and offer credible answers. And neither the rhetoric call on more Europe or the endless discussion on the EU institutional architecture will provide a real answer. On the contrary, we must build a Europe that works on the most pressing issues for our citizens. On security, on migration, on jobs and economic growth. Not a too little too late Europe, but a union capable to manage the new challenges. We need to demonstrate that our institutions can be reliable for citizens in times of uncertainty. And we need to show that democracy can deliver. This is the only way to counter any populist narrative. After the UK vote, Henry Kissinger wrote, the coin of the real enforcement statesman is not to anguish our recrimination. It should be to transform setback into opportunity. In our vision we should work together to transform the Brexit event into a positive opportunity for Europe. This practical and not at all rhetorical commitment will require, from my point of view, to move with determination along three dimensions. First, we have to manage properly the political, economic and institutional consequences of Brexit. It is clear that Brexit means lower growth in the UK with a possible negative spillover all over Europe, even for Italy. Therefore, it is crucial to organize the withdrawal of the UK from EU in an orderly fashion, according to the legal basis provided by Article 50 of the treaties. The British government should notify its intention to leave the EU. And Prime Minister Theresa May will decide when this decision will be taken. It is hard to her to decide. Meanwhile, there can be no negotiation before this notification has taken place. And we need clarity on the process in order to reduce political uncertainty and avoid the risk of a Brexit domino effect. I mean that EU cannot become a sort of hanging union waiting for a too long time the evolution of the domestic political debate of a single country. A debate that we respect but that cannot be lasting forever. Let me be very frank on another point. The EU cannot become Europe a la carte, where each member states decides whether to participate in broad policy areas or in specific measures on a case-by-case basis. Because this would unravel the foundations of the EU. As for the new agreement that the EU will conclude with London as third country, our position is crystal clear. It should be based on mutual rights and obligations. In particular, it could not ignore the principle that access to the single market requires acceptance of all four freedoms. As agreed by the head of states or government of the 27 member states in their informal meeting right after Brexit in Brussels. In any case, the UK will remain an EU partner, a key NATO ally, a major G7 and G20 player and a close friend for Italy. In the process that will lead to the British withdrawal from the union, Ireland has many good reasons to safeguard its strong relationship with London. We fully understand this point. Your special arrangements must continue to guarantee the free movement of persons. The common travel area between Ireland and the United Kingdom has contributed to peace and stability. Moreover, the North-South Council activities which foster cooperation between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland depend on EU measures and funding. It would be an historic contradiction to rebuild border posts on this island, as well as on the continent. The second direction to follow in order to give a new impulse to the European Union, regards the following priorities. Security, immigration and economic growth. This is time to show the strength of our civilization, and strength requires answers, particularly on these three issues. The security of our citizens is at stake, as confirmed by several terrorist attacks from Paris to Brussels, from Istanbul to Baghdad and Dhaka in Bangladesh, where nine Italians were killed one week ago. We are facing a hybrid, asymmetric and global challenge. A threat from both outside and inside our societies. With the ferocious actions against theatres, restaurants, airports, metro, schools, churches, mosques, geodist wants us to live in fear. They seek to destroy our values and our way of life. Our aim should remain to push back and destroy Daesh on the field and to eradicate its attractiveness within the European Muslim communities. We made some progress, but defeating Daesh will require time and prolonged efforts. This is why Europe has to rely on a comprehensive strategy which should envisage a military, political and cultural approach. Beyond terrorism, the other existential challenge for the European project is migration. The flow of migrants and refugees is a global and long-term challenge. For the first time in 2015, we have seen worldwide forced displacement exceeding 60 million persons. One million arrived to Europe. In the last two years, Italy has been very often alone in the effort to save lives in the Mediterranean and in trying to focus the European attention on the migration issue. But I would like to express the deepest appreciation for the commitment and dedication shown by the Irish government and the Irish friends employed in Operation in the Mediterranean Sea. We are geographically distant, but Ireland gave a clear demonstration of genuine European solidarity, deploying naval assets to carry out operation of search and rescue in the Mediterranean, in combination with the Italian authorities. In order to manage migration flows effectively, we made some progress, as in the case of the Balkan route and the EU-Turkey agreement. Progress that we should be looked carefully at in the next weeks and months. And we made some progress also in the setting up of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. But there is still a long way to go, especially with regard to the Central Mediterranean. The refugee and migration crisis will be on the European agenda for a very long time. And not only because of wars, just consider the impact of demographic imbalances, fragile states and climate reference. The migration compact that we recently proposed to EU has the ambition to become a new pact for Africa. On the basis of a clear partnership, a model whereby the measure proposed by the EU in terms of capacity building and financial support are matched by African countries with specific commitments on return and readmission fight against human trafficking and effective border control. Italy's goal is also to anticipate a much needed European involvement for Africa's future, because Africa will have an enormous impact on this century. And this impact will be key also for our own well-being. While addressing security and migration, Europe should respond also to today's challenges, putting in order its economic house. We need to engage the European Union to promote investments, growth, innovation and employment. These past few years have proven that austerity alone is not the answer, particularly while we strengthened our efforts on much needed structure before. And we need to send also a clear message on the irreversibility of the euro to enhance the democratic accountability of the monetary union and to proceed towards the completion of the banking year. The third and final direction to take if we aim to create a stronger and more cohesive European Union is about to start discussing a new governance model for EU. Make no mistake, the strengthening of the EU capacity to meet the citizen's expectation on security, migration and socio-economic issues is our first priority after Brexit. Nevertheless, we should also think about a new way to stay together, recognizing different levels of ambitions amongst member states on European integration. Without stepping back from what we have achieved, we need an EU where different paths of integration can coexist successfully. We have to manage a differentiation that already exists, from Schengen to the euro, which is likely to increase in the future, taking the shape of a consenting circles Europe. We have already opened this kind of discussion and we will keep it up in view of the 60th anniversary of the treaties of Rome in March 2017. Ladies and gentlemen, notwithstanding Brexit, I also believe that the EU global role can represent the new underpinning for our long-term European project. In the 50s Europe was the answer to the horrors of the Second World War. Then it has represented the perspective to overcome the Cold War and make the community of our democracies larger and more stable. Today, our narrative should focus on a very simple message. A stronger, more cohesive and competitive union is our only chance to help the century-old decline of our continent, to face the risks for our liberal democracies and to defend and strengthen the social fabric of our societies. In concluding my remarks here at Trinity College, Pope Francis Words on young people come to mind. In his Charlemagne Pride speech he said, they are not the future of our peoples, they are the present. Even now, with their dreams and their lives, they are forging the spirit of Europe. For them, for you, we need to work on this new Europe, able to provide concrete answers and solutions to our challenges. A new and more confident Europe with a shared vision of its future. Now, we have some short presentations from our panellists and the Minister has kindly offered if we have some time to take questions after the presentations. We'll call on Ruri Quinn to start off the proceedings. I should mention that the Minister's address was on the record, as is the panellist's intervention, and any questions will be off the record. As I forgot at the beginning to remind, no mobile phones, please, if they could be turned off. Ruri, the floor is yours. Thank you very much. In view of the time constraints, I'm just going to make one point, and it is addressed not just to the speakers here, but also to the audience that are here before us as well. There are going to be very many meetings, like the first informal meeting that met immediately after David Cameron left Brussels, when 27 Member States will discuss what the preparations for Article 50 will be and what the shadow estimations of what's going to happen. I would make an assertion and an appeal. First of all, the assertion is that we are, no disrespect to either Cyprus or Malta, the largest Euro-anglophone Member State in the Union. We will remain so, because some form of Brexit is going to happen. That has already been asserted. The Irish, by virtue of our close neighbourhood relationship, by virtue of the border in Northern Ireland between Northern Ireland and the Republic, have an insight at every level that will be able to assist and inform the other 26 Member States of the European Union. Large countries in the past have had the tendency to negotiate with other large countries, because they felt that that was where the deposit of knowledge was located. In my view, I would say to this audience here, and there are many diplomats within and without the European Union, that the insights that Ireland has to offer will be invaluable if they are heard and listened to. We have a lot to say and to help to ensure, just as you said so eloquently in your last paragraph or so, that we have to find new ways of staying together, Minister. One of the new ways of staying together in the 27 will be understanding the insights that Ireland can offer to the wider community. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll introduce Parig Murphy. Parig. Yes. Certainly the European Union has suffered a body blow with the decision of the United Kingdom on the 23rd of June. I think our reaction should be basically along the lines that the Minister mentioned that we need to devote special care and attention to the Union because of this. I think that it is quite clear that the two parties in the world that most rejoiced at the decision by the United Kingdom were the Russia of Vladimir Putin on the one hand and China of Xi Jinping on the other hand. Russia under Vladimir Putin has always resented the gravitational pull that the Union exercised on what it considered its sphere of influence. China, on the other hand, has always preferred to deal with the members of the European Union singly and individually. I think that this underlines the fact that the European Union is one of the main pillars of the world system, one of the main Western pillars of the world system, and we have to take care that it is not further disintegrated. A second point I'd like to make is the one that the outcome of the British referendum I think makes even more clear that trade, liberalisation and globalisation, while it produces many winners and many important winners, also produces losers. And if you analyse the results of the British referendum I think that you will find that significant parts of the British electorates in northern, central England and in Wales were people who have been left behind by globalisation and trade liberalisation. I think that the lesson that we could learn is that we need to make sure that people like that are not left behind because this of course is not a problem peculiar just to the United Kingdom. I think that if you look at the situation in France you can conclude that a large part of the attraction of the foreign national comes from old industrial cities like Lille for instance, not to speak of the pool of waters that Donald Trump appeals to in the United States. So I think we need to look at that more carefully. A third point I want to make is that the minister has said that more Europe is not the answer and it certainly is the case at the moment that we should not be embarking on ambitious new objectives which we'll call for referendum in our member states. We here have our own experience with referenda. At the same time I think that the answer is not no more Europe. There is a certain logic in the European project. There is a certain dynamic in it. We have as a group of European countries committed to economic integration and the progressive integration of our societies consequence on that. So we should certainly not be putting out a slogan of no more Europe. Then there is another aspect of our approach to the European Union which I think has become more and more prevalent over the recent years and it is this that too many of our politicians I'm afraid to say are taking the view that the negative aspects of developments that they see are assigned to Europe. I think it is too tempting for many of our politicians to ascribe to Europe the decisions that might appear negative to the electorate whereas it's quite clear despite what is said that the decisions taken by the European Union are democratically legitimized at all levels in the council in the European Parliament. A final point that I'd like to make is that we should be very attentive to the situation of Germany in all this. The orientation taken by Germany after the Second World War was to see its future in the context of European integration. The departure of the UK will mean an accrual of even more significance to Berlin but if you read carefully what the German government is saying it is determined to continue to exercise its influence in the world and through the European Union. To envisagional challenges to this is very hard but it is very easy to see historically what the consequences of such an alternative can be. Thank you. Thank you for a straight way to the hyio callig. I'd be very brief. Firstly I'm very encouraged by what the minister had to say about trying to use this Brexit setback into a positive outcome for Europe and for its peoples. I think there's just a few principles I think we need to remember. Firstly Mrs May has stated quite clearly that the British people have spoken that they have decided there will be a Brexit and that it will be a hard job to implement that decision of the people. So I think we need to operate on the basis that Brexit is going to happen and not have notions in our head that somehow or other it might not happen. I think we really need to concentrate on that. Secondly the Irish government has clearly made a decision that our future lies with Europe and not with the United Kingdom. And that view of the government has the overall betting of the vast majority of people in this country as opinion poll after opinion poll shows. The negotiation is going to be between Europe and London. It's not going to be between Dublin and London. And so it's very important for us I think that our interests and our particular interests with Northern Ireland that these interests are known in Brussels in the commission and that they are well known in the capitals of the member states because these are the people who will be making decisions about our future. The minister mentioned some of these areas, the common travel area, the border with Northern Ireland. But I don't think we should forget that the peace which exists in Northern Ireland at present was brought about by the two governments. It was driven by the two governments over a period of almost 30 years. And it was because those two governments became close within the European Union. There is a danger that as one of the two leaves the European Union that those close relationships will lessen. I won't say wither entirely but will lessen and that the capacity of the two governments to continue to drive forward this peace process will be reduced. I think as a country we're going to be faced with very difficult choices. In a way we've had it easy over the last 40 years. This country has been transformed by our membership in the European Union and by the changing relationship with London within that membership. We're going to be faced with choices. The choices won't all be easy for us. One thing's for example of cooperation tax. Will there be changes there? Will there be changes in the Schengen arrangements? So there are choices facing us down the road which will be difficult and which I hope our European partners will help us find solutions to it. Thank you.