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

I have not received a briefing from today's discussion. Generally what happens is the two teams meet on Wednesday and Thursday, and it is every second week in Brussels and London. Then the two principals meet on Friday to assess progress, or not, as the case may be. Two weeks ago, there was a noticeable change in tone coming from the British side, which certainly suggested to the EU that the negotiation was worth investing in. Before that, the negotiations were going nowhere. Last week was difficult, but at the same time, substantive in terms of the discussions. The Lord Frost and Vice-President Šefovi meeting was professional and constructive. Let us wait and see what happens this week.

There is no secret in this because in Lord Frost's briefing of party leaders in Northern Ireland and other stakeholders, including business leaders in Northern Ireland, he has shown much scepticism as to whether or not the Šefovi or the Commission proposals can deliver what they say they are going to deliver; that is, the 80% reductions in SPS checks on food and agrifood products coming in to Northern Ireland and staying in Northern Ireland and the 50% figure on customs checks. I have put that directly to Vice-President Šefovi and his team and they are very clear and strong on that, in that they believe they can deliver those numbers. Not only that, but they are looking to work with the British Government to show how it can be done. Of course, that will involve input from the British side too, in terms of the sharing of data and labelling so the EU can fully understand that there is a trusted trader system that both sides can see in a transparent way. A company like Marks & Spencer, for example, has systems that can show where a product is distributed from in Great Britain. The product comes into Northern Ireland and it will be able to show the shelf from which it has been sold.

If information like that is shared, then the EU can get much reassurance around trusting that a product is staying in, sold in and consumed in Northern Ireland, and therefore the checks burden on us should be reduced dramatically. That involves partnership between both sides in terms of sharing information and data and potentially labelling as well. That is what Vice-President Šefovi means when he says we can deliver this, but we need partnerships with the British Government and the British regulatory system to make it work.

I am more hopeful than I have been. I spoke to Lord Frost last week and it was a good conversation. He reminded me that they still regard Article 16 as a perfectly legitimate tool to use. I do not believe Article 16 was ever designed to set aside large parts of the protocol. It was essentially a safeguard clause in an emergency situation to make a temporary amendment, but then to return, in time, to the normal functioning of the protocol. I do not believe that is what the British Government is suggesting it would use Article 16 for. It is effectively suggesting that if it cannot get the compromise that it is looking for from the EU, it may act unilaterally and use Article 16 to set aside elements of the protocol that it does not believe are necessary. If it does that, I do not believe the EU will respond well; in fact, I know it will not. The EU will respond very robustly and it will regard it as a fairly serious breach of good faith in terms of the protocol and the Article 16 mechanism. I am sure Vice-President Šefovi told the committee that the EU regards the withdrawal agreement and the trade and co-operation agreement ,TCA, as inextricably linked to each other. Therefore, the EU would not even agree to start negotiating a TCA until there was a withdrawal agreement in place, backed by a treaty, that is, international law. If the British Government decides to set aside elements of the withdrawal agreement, that is, elements of the protocol, then that has a carry-over into whether or not the EU can implement the TCA as agreed. That is the last place any of us want to be, particularly in Ireland, or in the UK, for that matter.

There is much at stake over the next few weeks, and the focus probably needs to be on what percentage of, and what elements of, checks can we effectively do without, and at the same time protect the integrity of the EU Single Market. How do we put systems in place that can dramatically reduce the checks burden on goods coming from Great Britain into Northern Ireland that we know are staying in Northern Ireland and can show and prove that? How can both sides work together to remove that burden and make it easier for businesses to source from Great Britain in terms of their supply chains? If we can make a lot of progress in that area, that will deal with many of the unionist concerns and many of the business concerns in Northern Ireland linked to the protocol. The EU is in that space, but it cannot remove 100% of the checks. That is not credible and it is not consistent with what was agreed. However, it can certainly show a lot of flexibility, and it is willing to do that.

I will get a briefing on where we are again on Friday. There is still quite a big gap between the two sides, if we are honest. At least the negotiations now are focused on and are serious about trying to find landing grounds, which is a welcome change. We should give those negotiating teams time and space and also the confidentiality of what goes on in the negotiating rooms that, hopefully, can facilitate the building of some trust. Trust is possibly the biggest problem.

If I am frank, the EU is concerned that if it makes a concession it will be banked and Lord Frost's team will then take that and look for more. The UK side has got to give something here, too. It is not all about the EU giving. If you look at what has happened since the start of the year, all of the concessions and flexibility have been moving in one direction only, and that has been a very successful negotiating strategy for Lord Frost and his team. However, there are limits to that as to how far the EU can go if it does not believe it is moving towards an end point through negotiation. We are pretty close to that end point now.