Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

The Standing Order which was used to rule out a number of the proposed amendments states that the basis on which they can be ruled out of order is that they are in conflict with the principle of the Bill. How could an amendment we proposed, about ruling out under any circumstances physical infrastructure between North and South in the form of a border, not be in line with the objectives of the Bill or how could it be deemed to be in conflict with a Bill that specifies in its description that it is a Bill to deal with the potential consequences of no deal and to prevent "disturbance" to the South in economic or other terms? How could, for example, asking that British driving licences would be recognised in the South be in conflict with the Bill? It is incomprehensible and it renders the debate a sham.

See this speech in context