Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

A good point. I thank the professors for their replies. My next question was going to be on the joint committee and what the sub-committees and working groups should look like but my question has been answered.

An interesting point that I will certainly take with me is the lack of detail on that. I agree it is probably not intended that just one person from each state will be working on it. It should have more detail, however, and it was probably brushed over because there were bigger fish to fry, for want of a better phrase.

Moving on to the common travel agreement, one of the debates we had in the run-up to the signing of memorandum of understanding was whether it should be an MOU or something on a stronger legal footing. I would welcome the thoughts of Professor Maher on that question. The Government's response, which is not an unreasonable position, is that a memorandum of understanding is more flexible and can be changed. However, its lack of legal certainty means it can be changed by either side and either side can decide to walk away from part of it without repercussions. There are pros and cons to whatever course is pursued. I would welcome Professor Maher's thoughts on that.

One of the arguments made by the Democratic Unionist Party is that the withdrawal agreement, as it stands, infringes on the Good Friday Agreement. I do not agree with that assessment and I take it Professor Maher probably does not agree with it either. I view the withdrawal agreement and the Good Friday Agreement as stand-alone agreements. Each must respect the other and they must work together. Does Professor Maher have a view on the status of the withdrawal agreement if it becomes an internationally binding treaty and its impact on the Good Friday Agreement?