Mr. Conor O'Neill:

I thank the Deputy for the question. I mentioned this briefly in the opening statement. I think probably the single most important critical point we would like to impress on the members is that we believe, having regard to the balance of the evidence, there is a very strong case that we can do this fully – both goods and services – under EU law. It is important that the committee has sought further input on this next week. That is critical. The threshold members need to reach is to ask whether they think those eminent experts have a case at all. If there is an arguable case we can do this, we would be failing in our responsibility if we did not do this right and set the precedent and test it. This is not something we should be afraid of. We do it all the time.

As a practical example - it is not to discuss the politics of it in the slightest - members will be aware of the Apple tax case. In that instance, the State put in place a tax arrangement that it felt was compliant with EU law. The European Commission took a different view and said it went over the line. That was challenged and brought in the EU courts. The Irish State was entitled to go and argue its case. It would have undeniably had, given the amount of money involved in the stakes, advice to set out that it can argue the case on grounds A, B and C, but we may also be challenged on grounds D, E and F. The courts heard the judgment. Again, without expressing any view on the substance of the matter at hand, in the initial hearings, the Irish legal team won the case. It was then appealed and challenged and the Irish team lost. It shows that this is an arguable point of law.

What I am trying to get across is that the same principle applies in this instance. If members think this is worth doing politically, if they think as a purely politically matter they would like to see both goods and services in the Bill, then there is no reason whatsoever we would not do it, make the case in good faith and test the principle. If we do that and we win which, on the basis on the evidence, we are confident we would, they will have set a precedent not just for this island but for the whole European Union. That is something that always comes to my mind when people talk about the potential impact of this. It is not just about the political leadership that Senator Black is showing and other countries following in the domino effect. It is the legal leadership and the precedent we could set if we do this right. That is not something we should do by any half measure or stop short of. It is critically important.