Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour) | Oireachtas source

We are asking the witnesses to prognosticate in a vacuum, which is very unfair. I smile to myself when I hear everybody talk about how we should have this or that done. How can one do anything in anticipation of what might transpire when Article 50 has not been triggered yet? If one takes the Greenland scenario, one would think it will take far more than two years to unravel the multitude of trade agreements and stuff that is transposed from EU law and embedded in UK law. Would the witnesses agree that two years is a very optimistic scenario and that it is more likely for it to go on for five years? That is my strong view. In that context, the UK will not have gone away from the EU. There will still be some trade until it definitively pulls out. The impact of that will be uncertainty. Will the witnesses give some view of the level of uncertainty? We will lose free trade with 65 million people. Is it the position that we are dealing with guesstimates in respect of potential negative impacts on volume and value? That is the important thing - volume and value. One of them will be impacted by the level of sterling and how weak it becomes.

I would like the witnesses to address a simple issue. I will be fair to them as economists, because I did some economic training and I know the "on the one hand, on the other hand" scenario drives everyone mad. There is never a middle scenario. Britain contributed £12 billion to the EU budget. Will that not be the most dramatic impact? Is it not the most tangible and the one which economists can immediately evaluate? What will be the impact of that on Ireland, particularly in the context of Ireland being heavily dependent on the more than €1 billion it gets?

Could the witnesses address this as something tangible to which we can get a reasonable reply?