Lisa Chambers (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Lord Kinnoull and the rest of the members of the committee. We really appreciate the engagement this morning. My colleagues have touched on some of the key issues. The select committee's report is excellent and succinct and covers all aspects. The committee has touched on all the questions we have been asking. We would agree with the committee that the tensions, as the speakers from the committee have outlined, in the withdrawal agreement were known fully to both sides when it was signed up to so nobody went into that agreement with his or her eyes closed. Perhaps that is why it is such a surprise that this particular difficulty has arisen given that the agreement was only agreed less than a year ago.

Given there is no evidence of the EU acting in bad faith, and I agree there is no evidence of that and I do not believe the EU has acted in bad faith in these negotiations, and the fact that the dispute resolution mechanism within the withdrawal agreement was not utilised, one would have to ask what the real purpose or intent behind the Internal Market Bill was. Perhaps it was a negotiating strategy or, as one of members of the select committee said, it was to reinvigorate and kick start the negotiating process. Perhaps it was trying to be a bit too clever. I really do not know but, unfortunately, the outcome has left a bad taste in the mouths of those involved in the negotiations. The fact that this could happen has definitely bred much mistrust across the board. From an Irish perspective, it is important that a significant amount of blame is not being heaped on all Members of Parliament or the country. There is an appreciation that these are difficult negotiations, that it probably is a negotiating strategy and that the intention was not to harm Ireland, the North or the peace process. I do not think that was the intention behind it even though that has been suggested.

I have two more specific questions. The first is around state aid and the level playing field provisions. I am curious about the thoughts of Lord Kinnoull and the other members of the committee. Is there an appreciation of why this is so important? Is there an appreciation at Government level and in the UK Parliament as to why this is so important from an EU perspective? If there is going to be access to the market, similar rules must apply to all those in the market. Is that appreciated? Is it genuinely the view of the UK Government, and I know not everybody can comment on this, that it is an unreasonable request from the EU, that is, that if one wants free access to the market, one must apply the same rules and that level playing field provisions are there to safeguard matters and ensure that UK companies cannot get an unfair advantage over EU companies? Does Lord Kinnoull think this is understood?

We will get to a point where the Brexit process concludes. I hope sincerely that we have a free trade agreement - certainly by the end of the year - and can move past this. I would be interested in hearing the thoughts of the committee on what kind of mechanism it believes we should put in place for future engagement between Ireland and the UK because that is really important. From my perspective, and I am sure the view is shared across the board, the UK is a very close friend of Ireland. We want that relationship to be maintained. We want a very close and special working relationship with the UK beyond Brexit. The mechanisms that have been there between the two countries for the past 45 years have been at EU level. We have engaged weekly and monthly through the institutions and the European Parliament and we will no longer have that, so what does the committee think both countries should do to ensure that really close co-operation and working relationship post-Brexit when we put all this behind us and start working together?