Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Martin's analysis of the situation is largely accurate. In terms of our conversations with the UK Government, to the extent we have spoken about special arrangements they are in the context of the paper agreed by the EU 27. That paper attempts to make real the promises made to us. We have all heard the language of the past 18 months, that there should be no hard border, no return to the borders of the past and no physical infrastructure along the Border, and we, not as Ireland but as the European Union, and as a negotiating party of 27 with the strength of all of Europe behind us, have set down in writing how we think that can be best achieved. We are not demanding that the UK or any part of the UK should have to remain in the customs union or the Single Market. We are, however, saying that if we are to honour this promise and commitment we have been given of avoiding a hard border or a return to the borders of the past there must be regulatory equivalence, if not between the United Kingdom as a whole and the EU then between Northern Ireland and the EU. It is set out in the paper, which has been extensively leaked at this stage, that the same rulebooks must apply.

The Minister, Deputy Coveney, describes this very well. We cannot have a situation where a factory north of the Border making hair dryers could be given state aid by the UK Government while a factory south of the Border making hair dryers would be forbidden from receiving aid under state aid rules. We could not have a situation where the CAP in the Republic of Ireland as part of the European Union would require eight inspections a year whereas British or UK deregulation might only require four. This is what we mean by regulatory equivalence. It means the rules of the customs union and the Single Market continue to apply, even if the UK and Northern Ireland are not in the customs union.

There are many examples of bespoke arrangements throughout Europe. The Isle of Man is one small one. It has never been in the EU or part of the UK. It does not pay into the EU budget or get anything out of it, but under a protocol to the Treaty of Rome, it, by its own legislation in its own parliament, adopts the rules and regulations of the Single Market and the customs union. It is a sovereign decision for it to do so because it is its own parliament that does it. Deputy Martin has touched very accurately on how the role of the Northern Ireland Assembly could be to do something exactly like this.

Our preference, however, is that arrangements which would allow free trade to continue should not just be a special arrangement for Northern Ireland. We would like these arrangements to apply to the entire United Kingdom because that is what is most important for Irish jobs, the Irish economy, Irish businesses and Irish farmers. Let us not forget that most of the exports from business and farming in Ireland do not go to Northern Ireland but to England. A beef farmer's produce is probably going to go to England. The solution we want is one that protects free trade and free movement for the UK and Ireland and not a special arrangement just for Northern Ireland. That is a secondary outcome. It is not the preferred outcome. It may be better than the worst outcome, but our preferred outcome is an arrangement that allows us to continue to trade and travel freely with all of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland but not just Northern Ireland.

By definition, a special arrangement for Northern Ireland means we are accepting new barriers between Britain and Ireland. Of course, that is damaging for our farmers, agrifood industry and exporters and also for trade and jobs. Those who are advocating a special arrangement as a great outcome need to understand they are proposing something very damaging for agrifood, farmers and Irish jobs and businesses.

See this speech in context