Mr. John Callinan:

The way the negotiations are structured and sequenced means it is correct to say they begin with the exit issues the Deputy mentioned, but it is not quite as clear cut as saying they must be fully agreed before we move on. The language in the guidelines talks about sufficient progress being made, so I think there is room there for the talks process to make a certain amount of progress. People talk about the tone and the goodwill factor as much as the detail of the talks. The expectation is that if reasonable or sufficient progress is made early on those issues the discussion on the future framework can get going reasonably early. Realistically, people are thinking in terms of maybe before the end of the year - probably not much earlier than that. Certainly, we have argued that it is absolutely important that we can get those discussions going as early as possible, but it is a matter of law that even if those discussions move on and make good progress, legally, a free trade agreement between the UK and the EU can only be finalised and implemented as and when the UK is a third country so there will inevitably be some moment between the UK's departure and the new free trade agreement coming into effect, and that of course argues on the need for transitional arrangements. While obviously the devil is in the detail and that remains to be seen, we have worked on the basis that it is most likely, and consistent I suppose with the ECJ judgment today, that the likely shape of a future free trade agreement would be what is known as a mixed agreement and would probably require national member state ratification in any event. We have been working on that assumption.