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

I wish to acknowledge Deputy Richmond's role in a lot of the public debate on many of these issues. On his last point, we are very keen to have regular BIIGC meetings so that they are not seen as something that is triggered in an emergency situation or when there is a problem to be solved. What we were working towards with the previous British Government under Teresa May as Prime Minister, and with David Lidington in particular, was putting in place a schedule of BIIGC meetings two or three times a year. The idea was that they would be scheduled months in advance so that they would not become an issue. They would just be a procedural thing whereby the Governments meet and discuss the issues of the day.

Sometimes, these discussions concern serious, difficult issues; other times, they are planning and policy discussions. If we put these meetings in a regular cycle every year, then we are using the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement as they should be used. Instead, what has happened with the BIIGC is that there have been very few meetings. The last one was in 2019 and was really useful. It confirmed the memorandum of understanding that is now the basis for the definition of the common travel area and a whole range of other things linked to that in terms of social welfare, pensions, education and other things that we have now legislated for. The 2019 BIIGC meeting in London was a most useful one.

We would like to "de-dramatise", to use a term that has been used throughout the Brexit process, what the BIIGC is all about, as opposed to every time a meeting is triggered, it raises hackles in certain political parties because they do not like the two Governments talking about Northern Ireland with them not being present or whatever. Just like we should have North-South Ministerial Council meetings as a matter of procedure, we should also have BIIGC meetings as a matter of procedure. Even if there could be two a year, that would be very welcome, as it would be with the other formats such as the British-Irish Council, BIC, and so on.

As regards the protocol, I make no secret of the fact that in my view it is very much in the interests of the UK and the EU to put in place a veterinary and SPS agreement that can effectively ensure there is a guarantee of common standards in the two jurisdictions that prevents the need for inspections at ports. It is a no-brainer, as far as I am concerned, in terms of the pragmatic facilitation of trade. Unfortunately, many of the issues linked to Brexit are approached not from the basis of pragmatism but on the basis of interpretations of sovereignty and so on, and Britain needing to be able do its own thing and change without having to consult the EU. Therefore, so far, the concept of dynamic alignment with EU rules in any sector has been rejected as a way of reducing trade barriers.

I hope we can find another way of doing this that the British Government can support. I am even conscious of the fact if I am advocating too strongly for this approach, it may make it more difficult for some to agree it because it is the Irish Government's position and therefore there must be something that is not quite right about it. That is not the case here. For many years on this island, we have co-operated on animal and plant health and we have had pragmatic arrangements, even within the European Union together, between Britain and Ireland in relation to some checks. In my view, there is a real opportunity here to change the implementation of the protocol quite significantly, within the confines of the protocol, by putting in place a veterinary and SPS agreement for animal and plant health. The estimates are that the number of checks could be reduced by up to 80% by doing so. Not only would that benefit Northern Ireland in terms of Larne and Belfast, but it would also benefit Dublin and Rosslare and anywhere else where goods are coming in, whether it is Cork, Waterford or Foynes or anywhere else. From our perspective, we want the fewest possible barriers to trade in the Irish Sea. This is an area on which I will continue to try to advocate for change.

In terms of the trade and co-operation agreement, and the role or influence of the Irish Government in the trade and co-operation agreement versus the protocol, first, it is an EU-negotiated agreement, not a bilateral negotiation between Ireland and the UK. We never allowed it to become that, which was a wise thing to do in my view. It is an EU-UK agreement and an EU-UK implementation plan, which of course requires consultation with political, business and community leaders in Northern Ireland as well as the Irish Government, because we are all impacted by it. However, I must say, just as was the case with Michel Barnier, where there was an incredibly close relationship between his negotiators and the Irish Government to make sure we fully understood the implications of all decisions that were being made, that kind of relationship of trust has very much carried over into our relationship with Vice President Šefovi on the protocol in particular. The trade and co-operation agreement is different. It is much broader. It is as much about trade between France and the UK as it is Ireland and the UK. We clearly have a say there, but it is a much stronger one in terms of shaping the approach on the protocol than it would be on any future negotiations around the trade and co-operation agreement.

Just to give the committee a sense of how the trade and co-operation agreement and the protocol have changed the trade environment between Ireland and the UK, Central Statistics Office, CSO, figures show that the value of imports from the Great Britain for January and February 2021 was 57% lower than in the first two months of 2020, while the value of exports to Great Britain in the same period had decreased by 12%. On the other side of that coin, roll on-roll off volumes on direct routes to and from continental EU ports increased by 74% in those two months. Therefore, we are seeing quite a dramatic impact on supply chains in terms of how they function. It is too early to draw definitive conclusions from that because there was a lot of stockpiling in November and December in anticipation of a no-deal scenario and therefore looking to avoid tariffs. Literally every warehouse in the UK was full of product that was essentially being stockpiled. That explains some of the dramatic fall-off in trade in the months of January and February, but undoubtedly, the trade and co-operation agreement and the new realities of, and barriers to, trade are also part of that story.

Deputy Howlin will have more accurate figures on this, but I think that there are 36 direct ferry trips being made each week from Rosslare alone, primarily into France, but into mainland Europe, bypassing the UK. Last December, that figure was six. It is now 36, so it has increased sixfold, which is quite extraordinary. Whether that will be sustained indefinitely into the future or we can get back to a point where the UK land bridge is being used as the most efficient way to get goods to and from the rest of the EU Single Market, and whether we can get back to the kind of supply chains that would have served us before 1 January 2021, remains to be seen. Certainly, an SPS and veterinary agreement would make some of those things much easier, but for now Irish companies are adjusting to the new realities as well as they can, but it certainly has been quite difficult for some sectors.