Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am grateful to the Deputy for the support of his party and, indeed, the support of other parties for the decisions the Government has had to make, working with the European Union to try to protect the interests of Irish people and Ireland, but also to protect the relationship we have with our closest neighbour, the United Kingdom.

It is clear from the text agreed last night that the withdrawal agreement itself is not being changed. That is understood. What we have is a new legal instrument which requires of the UK and the EU a series of processes that reassure everybody that there is good faith on both sides to work towards preventing the use of the backstop in the first place or, if it is ever triggered, that it is temporary.

There are, effectively, four ways of preventing the backstop being used. If the future relationship is comprehensive enough to mean we do not need border infrastructure between the EU and the UK, the backstop will be redundant and will never be triggered. If the alternative arrangements considered under the new mechanisms agreed last night result in an acceptance by both sides that an alternative arrangement can replace the backstop, in full or in part, that can happen. However, those alternative arrangements have to do the same job as the backstop. They do not have to look the same but they have to do the same job in terms of border infrastructure and commitments. There are also review mechanisms if the backstop is ever triggered. Those can be triggered by either side if alternative arrangements come to light that can replace, on a permanent basis, a temporary backstop. That would require to be agreed under the review mechanism in the withdrawal agreement. There is also an arbitration process which the document agreed last night considered in considerable detail. The UK can trigger this if it believes that the EU is not acting in good faith on its commitments around the temporary nature of the backstop or not triggering it in the first place. That arbitration process, which is consistent with the arbitration process in the withdrawal agreement, can be the basis of requiring the EU to either respond in good faith or, ultimately, for the backstop to be suspended should that happen.

There are, therefore, clear ways in which the backstop can be avoided or replaced by both sides working together or, if both sides are not working in good faith, one can challenge the other through the arbitration process to force that. That reinforces the case that the UK and the EU, working together, accept that the backstop is not to be a permanent arrangement but a temporary insurance mechanism that, should it be triggered, would be replaced by something more permanent over time.

See this speech in context