Mr. Paul Lynam:

I do not think anybody here would disagree with anything the Cathaoirleach said. On Deputy Howlin's point, the starting point is that we were talking about the EU position being dynamic alignment for a veterinary agreement. Should the UK concede that, and that is a big if, the advocacy would be in terms of fast-tracking such a veterinary agreement. Those are big ifs and buts. We do, however, have some level of precedent contained within the trade and co-operation agreement, when the negotiating position was dynamic alignment versus mutual recognition, based on key principled positions as to how we got the trade and co-operation agreement as regards goods. It will have to be much stronger than that in terms of agrifood SPS because of the sensitivity of the product. I totally accept that. I am just making the point that a veterinary agreement is in everyone's interests, but I completely accept that the UK would have to cede something as regards dynamic alignment or something very close to it. However, that is standard enough in terms of veterinary agreements. Different models exist, and the closer you get and the more integrated you get, the closer the UK will have to go to as regards dynamic alignment.

The point about EU-UK relations is completely fair. We could have reset and everything; it will never the same as being within the European Union. There is, however, precedence between countries outside the European Union and countries that have trade agreements that include veterinary agreements with them. We have that with New Zealand and Switzerland, for example.