Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

In some ways we need to tone down the language on the Internal Market Bill because it is a huge distraction from the actual negotiations, which is unwelcome. We have wasted so much time talking about the Internal Market Bill and on what is the motivation for the British Government to do it, whether that is a negotiating strategy or a way to sink these negotiations if it wanted a tool to do that. Five former British Prime Ministers from both parties have come out against the legislation and its approach. The Bill has, undoubtedly, damaged Britain's international reputation, not just in the European Union but on the other side of the Atlantic as well. People are trying to understand what the British Government is at. In the context of these negotiations, they should be between two negotiating teams that are trying to put a future relationship in place that benefits both. I hope that our future relationship with the UK will be very close for mutual benefit. In some ways, the Bill is a very provocative approach that has undermined trust and sucked in a huge amount of oxygen that could have been used to focus on resolving issues through negotiation. It is what it is and we cannot ignore it, which is why I mentioned it today. We could have a second item of legislation that doubles down on the issue, through the Finance Bill next week, in the context of another element of the protocol. One would have the state aid element and the list of goods not at risk issue in two different Bills. I believe the EU will draw only one conclusion from that course of action if it happens, which would be hugely regrettable but again, that is a matter for the British Government.

If that were to happen and there was a no deal on the back of it, then what happens next? We are as ready as we possibly can be. There are companies, mainly small ones, that have not thought about Brexit as much as they should or could have. They have been greatly distracted by Covid. They have been closed down, opened, closed down again and are opening again this week and they simply have not had the bandwidth to focus on Brexit as well as Covid, and perhaps other challenges too. They have got to find the bandwidth, however, because they will be impacted whether they like it or not.

There is not going to be a grace period on 1 January. The UK is applying what is, in effect, a grace period on some of the checks that they will require at their ports on goods coming into the UK. I understand that the UK will facilitate us by providing a period of flexibility that will last about six months. The EU does not have that luxury because it i s not a single country; it is a Union of 27 countries. If the EU sets a precedent by offering flexibility on timelines when everybody has known about this for quite a long time, then a precedent will have been set that could cause problems with other third countries with which it may be developing relations, such as Turkey or whatever. There may well be some flexibility in some specific areas that simply do not have political solutions right now where there is more time needed. There are some examples, potentially, in the implementation of the protocol of the need for more time, and medicines is a good example. There will be goodwill to try to give some time.

A general extension of the transition period beyond 1 January is not going to happen. It is very important that we are honest about that in order that people sit up and take notice.