The efforts to provide a legal basis for the December agreement reached between the UK and the EU are clearly running into the sand. That fudge has been subject to back-pedalling by many elements within the British Government since it was announced. At the time, the Taoiseach described the commitment as politically bulletproof, rock solid and cast iron. However, efforts by the EU to put a legally binding framework in place are, as an Irish official has put it, irreconcilable with the stated British position. In the past week, the UK has clearly said that it will be leaving the customs union but that it wants a new customs arrangement. Yesterday, the full details of economic impact assessment by the UK Government became public. Northern Ireland will be hit by at least 2.5% of GDP or up to 12% if there is a no-deal Brexit. Most accept this to be an underestimate. Britain's Brexit cabinet committee also met yesterday and we are told that Northern Ireland and the Border led to sharp division. It is reported that the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Home Secretary want the closest possible alignment between the UK and the EU after Brexit to avoid a hard Border. However, according to the Financial Times, a pro-Brexit Minister described this approach as absolute rubbish. No agreement was capable of being reached.

If in coming weeks, the UK does not set out details of its preferred deep and special partnership that it has spoken of, I understand that the EU will proceed to a Canada-style trade deal. In such a scenario, we are looking at a hard Border on the island of Ireland. It has been difficult to find out exactly what Ireland is looking to achieve in phase 2. This week I tabled parliamentary questions to the Taoiseach for oral answer asking what economic impact assessments each Department has commissioned on Brexit. I have tabled written questions to every Department on the same basis. The Department of An Taoiseach, whose second most senior official is our representative on the Barnier team, refused to answer the question and transferred it to the Department of Finance. When I asked the Taoiseach to tell us what contributions, positions or changes his Department had sought to be made in the EU proposals, he transferred that question to the Tánaiste's Department. It is unacceptable that the Department which is the principal lead in this area is so reticent in the context of putting forward Ireland's position on phase 2 and the preparations that are under way in the very challenging event of a hard Brexit.

Has every Department of State commissioned an economic impact assessment on the sectors under its remit under the various scenarios and will the Government make these public? Can the Tánaiste say what Ireland is seeking in phase 2 of the Brexit negotiations? Specifically, is the Tánaiste still confident that the December agreement which was announced is committed to by both the EU and the UK and will be fully implemented?

I thank the Deputy for asking this question as it gives me the opportunity to clarify a number of matters. First, I certainly do not speak for the British Government so I cannot give the Deputy an answer in terms of the British Government's position, that is something it must decide for itself. I and many others have called for clarity from the British Government as soon as possible as that would make it far easier for the EU negotiating team to plan for the structured negotiations that need to take place in the future.

The Taoiseach reminded us yesterday of the commitments given before Christmas. They were clear. People talk about fudges, but we are not talking about a fudge, we are very clear about the commitment that was given before Christmas in the context of no political agreement, on a broader trade and new relationship deal that can solve the Border issue on the island of Ireland and in the context of not being able to agree mechanisms to deal with the Border on a bilateral basis. The UK has committed to maintaining full alignment with the customs union and single market to ensure that now and in the future the all-island economy and North-South co-operation can continue. We intend to ensure that commitment is maintained and have very strong solidarity within the EU and within the EU task force on what that means. To use the European term, we will not be back-sliding on that commitment.

It is very important. Yesterday, I spoke at a conference in Louth on cross-Border business and Brexit, which was jointly hosted by the Newry and Dundalk chambers of commerce. There were over 300 people there. They need certainty on a fall-back position or a floor below which we will not fall in terms of Border questions and the future in the context of Brexit. We have that floor and that fall-back position; it was negotiated before Christmas. I hope we will not have to use it because I hope that we can resolve these issues with a broad trade agreement but it is difficult to see how we can avoid using it if the British Government is determined to pursue a strategy that results in the UK leaving the Single Market and the customs union in an absolute way. That is why there will be ongoing discussions with the British Government. I will have a meeting with a member of the British Government, as I had last week in London. We need to understand their thinking. We will continue to contribute, as we do almost daily, to the Barnier task force in terms of mapping out Irish issues in these negotiations which are complex and challenging.

To be very clear, the negotiations which were concluded before Christmas are very clear on the issue of the Border and many other areas. We want to ensure that there is no pull-back from those commitments in the broader negotiations as they move ahead.

I am sure that the Tánaiste will agree that now is the time for specifics and clarity. What does the Tánaiste mean when he says the Government hopes it does not have to use the fallback position? If the stated position of the United Kingdom is to withdraw from the customs union, and that includes Northern Ireland doing so, and the Republic of Ireland is in a different customs union, what British Brexiteer Ministers are saying is that if the Irish Government imposes a border, so be it, or if the EU imposes a border, so be it. The Tánaiste knows that it cannot be acceptable to the EU to have no checks if there is not what he describes as full alignment. Does the Tánaiste expect that, in the case of Northern Ireland, there will be full alignment on everything from animal welfare to duties to standards? Will everything that applies in the EU also apply to Northern Ireland? Is that the Tánaiste's understanding of full alignment? Does he believe at all that this will be implemented by the British, particularly as it would mean - unless the entire United Kingdom applied it - that there would be a border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK?

It is important to understand the process. We are moving from a political commitment that was made before Christmas to a legal document that will be a draft withdrawal agreement. The EU is looking to draft this before the end of the month. It has been made clear, and the discussions are focusing on ensuring that the political commitments made by Britain in the context of citizens' rights, financial contributions and the Irish issues, will be part of a draft legal document on which both sides can agree. That process is ongoing. I do not think we can draw any conclusions about how this will look until we have clarity on what the British Government is seeking.

There is no hope of that.

The Deputy is making judgments based on what he is reading and on what individual Ministers are saying. That is not the British Government position which has been finalised yet.

The Taoiseach has said that he does not know.

The European Union has made it clear that it will be finalising its negotiating guidelines by the end of March but that these can be altered, amended and changed up to that point.

That, essentially, is the window that is available to the British Government to decide and clarify exactly what it is looking for beyond the kind of language that we have heard to date which is general in nature.