We will now take Leaders' Questions and I ask Members to have regard to the time allocated.

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?

It is somewhat regrettable that Fianna Fáil seems to be changing its position in terms of how it approaches Brexit from one of consultation with the Government to one of trying to find ways of undermining and criticising what the Government is trying to do. This is regrettable, but it seems to be the case.

Yesterday was a big step forward on the Irish issues. Do not forget that Ireland was the first country in the European Union to ask for a transition arrangement for a number of years. When I was asked in the past what I thought would be necessary in terms of transition I said four years would be closer to what is needed than two years. The EU task force has looked at an appropriate transition period for the EU. It has looked at two years and there is an option to extend it should it be necessary. There is an obvious backstop in terms of the end of 2020, because that is when the multi-annual financial framework and budget of the EU comes to an end. This is an obvious period by which we would look at ending a transition period after Britain leaves the European Union in 12 months. The fact Ireland was the first to ask for this, and the fact what was agreed yesterday was exactly in line with what the EU task force, which includes Ireland, looked for in terms of transition, whereby Britain would be required to ensure the full EU acquis applies for that period, including in areas such as fishing, which are controversial, is a success in negotiation, in terms of what a transition period will look like, to provide certainty for businesses. The only issue where there may be some uncertainty is whether further extension will be necessary at the end of that close to two years.

This is a negotiation. The Deputy seems to expect that all the answers will be provided in the space of a number of days. What we got yesterday on the Irish Border was also a success because since December, until now, the interpretation that most of the British commentary put on the agreement in December was they would first of all look at an option A, which is a comprehensive trade agreement between the EU and UK that would solve the Irish Border issues. If this is not possible they would look at an option B, which is a bespoke solution for Ireland to try to solve the Border issue. If option B is not agreed then they will look at fulfilling their commitment under option C, which is a backstop to maintain full alignment with the customs union and Single Market. Now what we have is an agreement from the British negotiating team to put that backstop in the withdrawal agreement first, so we know there is a floor below which we cannot fall. They have made it very clear now in what they have agreed in the text of the draft withdrawal agreement that Britain has signed up to that the backstop solution for the Border between Northern Ireland and Ireland is in line with paragraph 49 of the joint report we agreed before Christmas. They have also agreed that as a matter of urgency they will engage in negotiation to put a legally operational backstop in place in the withdrawal agreement and that negotiation will start as soon as next week.

The Deputy should inform himself of what constitutes progress.

On domestic preparations for Brexit, Fianna Fáil believes the Tánaiste and the Government have been asleep at the wheel from day one, but, as the Tánaiste well knows, we have supported him on the international aspects. That does not mean, however, that we will not ask him tough questions here when we see that no progress has been made. Yesterday we saw a document that showed progress had been made in the Brexit negotiations but not on the issue of the Border. We know that the British Government has stated it will sign up to a backstop arrangement. We also know that it has rejected emphatically the European Union's interpretation of a backstop.

Does the Deputy have a question?

We also know that the British Prime Minister is talking about the US-Canada border. My question is that if we see no further progress and if we cannot get to agree to a legal text, probably in the next 12 weeks, between the United Kingdom and the European Union on a backstop because of a gulf in the understanding of what it might be, will the Government seek to pause the trade talks in order that we can force through that priority and get agreement and then move back into trade talks?

First, as the Deputy will be aware, I invite constructive criticism on Brexit in order that we can get this right on behalf of the country. This issue is not party political for me and never has been. However, I will not accept people trying to misrepresent what was agreed to yesterday as a lack of progress when all of the informed commentary was welcoming of the step forward. If anything, the political pressure is certainly not on the Government in what was agreed to yesterday. The point I am making is that it is clear from the Barnier task force on the withdrawal treaty that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. What we are saying is that we will have to get agreement on the backstop to ensure it will be legally operable and agreed to between the British and the EU negotiating teams. Without the backstop agreement in place, there will be no withdrawal treaty and no transition arrangements which will be part of the withdrawal treaty. The language is clear. It states the backstop "should be agreed as part of the legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement, to apply unless and until another solution is found". In other words, what we have said and what the Taoiseach has reinforced repeatedly is that we have a cast iron guarantee linked with the negotiations in ensuring there will be no physical infrastructure in Ireland linked with the Border and no associated checks or controls, in line what was agreed to in December. We are figuring out and negotiating on the basis of the European Union's draft legal text, on the back of which the United Kingdom, of course, wants to negotiate. If it brings forward proposed changes, we will, of course, look at them, but the backstop will be place. That is the important issue.