Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

There are two obvious issues in respect of which to seek a veto. One is a veto on the withdrawal only as it pertains to Northern Ireland. The second would be to seek a veto, which is what the Spanish have achieved, on the future relationship only in so far as it pertains to Anglo-Irish relations. I will give Mr. Callinan an example of where European law and existing Anglo-Irish agreements may bump against each other. The common travel area is widely supported. However, diplomats I have met from EU member states have explained that the common travel area is not about Irish people and UK citizens being able to visit each other's countries.

It is a full bilateral reciprocity of rights, including the right to vote. Therefore, when we talk about full ongoing implementation and recognition of the common travel area, CTA, what we mean is that every Irish citizen will enjoy the right to work, as UK citizens, in the UK regardless of whether that same right is afforded to any other EU member state. When one explains it like that, one gets a very different response. Now the response from foreign diplomats is, "Hang on a second. Are you suggesting that you should have the right to work in London, but my colleagues in Spain shouldn't?"

That is an obvious place to seek a veto because it is a unique agreement between Ireland and the UK. Was any veto and any additional leverage, other than being one of 27, sought on the future relationships specifically around issues like the common travel area and the right of Irish citizens to work in the UK?