Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Yesterday we heard that a Brexit transition period had been agreed to and that the talks would move on to trade. The Tánaiste said the transition period would provide businesses in Ireland and communities in the North with confidence, but the Government had sought a five-year transition period to ensure that confidence. Yesterday we found out that a period of less than two years had been agreed to. We also heard from the Tánaiste that there had been good progress on the issue of the Border, but that is not correct either. What we heard yesterday was a backward step in protecting an open border. The document released yesterday shows that no progress has been made in having a backstop. Last December the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach told us that they had secured an agreement that was cast-iron, bulletproof and rock solid. The European Union proposed a clear legal text on the backstop, but, unfortunately, the British Government rejected it out of hand. The British Prime Minister said the text would, if implemented, threaten the constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom and that no British Prime Minister could ever agree to it. It is fair to say that right now the United Kingdom has agreed to very little on the Border, although the British Government has agreed to a backstop in the final agreement. Yesterday, however, Mr. David Davis said it would have to be a backstop that was acceptable to both sides. The British Government disagrees completely with what is acceptable to the Irish Government and the European Union. The British have retained the right to come up with a different backstop and have a much more restrictive interpretation of what it might mean. Last December they talked about it applying to one or two sectors. Worryingly, in parliament recently the British Prime Minister referenced the US-Canada border as a potential source of inspiration. We have heard the same reference to it from senior politicians in the United Kingdom among the Brexiteers.

What did the British need from yesterday? They needed agreement on a transition deal, they needed the talk to move on to trade, and they needed to agree to nothing concrete on protecting an open border for Northern Ireland. I put it to the Tánaiste they achieved all of these things. What I saw yesterday was a political fudge to allow the talks to move on and to kick the can down the road on the Border. The fear is that as trade talks begin, an open border will become just one of many competing priorities.

Did the Tánaiste formally seek a five-year transition period and does he, therefore, feel that achieving less than two years is a failure on Ireland's part to achieve a longer and more secure transition period? Why has no progress being made on the backstop when we can see from the document that progress has been made across the agreement? What will the Tánaiste do to ensure the backstop is not watered down in the coming months as negotiations progress? If there is no progress on the backstop, will the Tánaiste seek a pause to the trade talks to ensure we can get clear agreement from the UK and EU sides as to what the legal manifestation of the backstop would actually be?

See this speech in context