The British Prime Minister said today that he will be tabling proposals to the European Union shortly on alternatives to the backstop and dismissed the non-papers disclosed on RTÉ news last night as more or less redundant at this stage. The Taoiseach met the British Prime Minister twice recently, on 9 and 24 September, and has also had telephone contact with him. I met the Taoiseach and other party leaders on 15 September but at no stage was there any reference to these non-papers or their contents, particularly with regard to customs posts. In the Taoiseach's discussions with Mr. Johnson, were these non-papers referenced or discussed? What is their provenance? The Taoiseach stated to the British Irish Chamber of Commerce on 5 September that in the event of a no-deal Brexit, there would be checks on goods and live animals but that these would, in as far as possible, take place at ports, airports and business premises. He said that some checks may need to take place near the Border and that the Government was working out the details with the European Commission. On 17 September, the Tánaiste said that he did not expect checks to be near the Border. The Taoiseach had said that they would be near but I do not think the Tánaiste will do to the Taoiseach what he did to the Minister, Deputy Shane Ross, in respect of the issue. Nonetheless, the checks would have to take place somewhere and that remains to be clarified.

We need to remind ourselves that the talks are on the terms of the exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union, with a full trade deal presumably to be negotiated between the two subsequently. The need for an insurance policy in the exit deal negotiations is key in order that there will be no reintroduction a hard border between the North and the South.

The key issue in the ongoing negotiations is whether Northern Ireland will remain within the EU customs union unless or until a full trade deal that removes the need for the insurance policy is negotiated. It comes down to customs, and the comments of Arlene Foster in that regard are somewhat unhelpful. It is easy to rule out things; it is much more difficult to create solutions and resolutions to complex issues. We always have to be careful about leaks, their timing and the motivation behind them. I did not believe we would see any serious British proposals until after the Conservative Party conference. We await those proposals. There has been much megaphone diplomacy and we need to be conscious of that. The Good Friday Agreement has been badly damaged by the collapse of the institutions and would be damaged further by regulatory divergence if that was to occur, and by the reintroduction of a customs infrastructure. These are serious and profound issues. Were the Taoiseach and Tánaiste aware of the existence of these non-papers prior to yesterday evening's disclosure? Did they discuss them with Boris Johnson during their meetings and communications with him? Will the Taoiseach confirm what is the Government's position on discussions with the European Commission regarding a no-deal Brexit, particularly in light of the various statements he and the Tánaiste have made in respect of checks, where they will take place and what they will involve?

In answering the Deputy's question, I am conscious that I will be talking about non-papers that I have not seen. I do not mean that as a double negative. I have not seen them. I was aware of their existence, which was public knowledge and was commented on in the newspapers in the past week or two. Essentially, the UK provided non-papers to the EU task force on the basis that they would be kept confidential and not shared with member states. They were not shared with member states. I welcome Prime Minister Johnson's words earlier today, when he disowned and distanced himself from those non-papers. Had he not done so, it would have been hard evidence of bad faith on the part of the British Government.

In December 2017, the British Government promised Ireland and the European Union that there would be no hard border as a consequence of Brexit and no physical infrastructure or associated controls or checks. We expect the British Government to honour that commitment, made in good faith in the withdrawal agreement. People in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland do not want a customs border between the North and the South. No British Government should seek to impose customs posts between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland against the will of the people in both places. I was especially interested in what businesses in Northern Ireland have to say. They speak much more eloquently than me about this. The Northern Ireland Retail Consortium stated that the British Government has not been listening to Northern Ireland businesses. The Freight Trade Association stated that what has come to light contradicts all of the advice it gave to the British Government. The Confederation of British Industry in Northern Ireland stated that these proposals were a disgrace. Manufacturing Northern Ireland rejected the proposals out of hand. I ask anyone in the British establishment who thinks that this is a good idea to listen the voices of Northern Ireland - those in business, farmers and people in general. Both they and we are saying "No" to customs posts between the North and the South. No British Government should try to impose on Ireland a solution opposed by people in the North and the South.

In my meetings with Prime Minister Johnson, he spoke on occasion about not having checks at the Border, which raises the obvious question of where they will be if not there but we never got into the details. When the Government talks about checks, it is in the context of them being necessary if there is no deal.

If we face a no-deal Brexit on 31 October and if the UK decides, and it will be its decision, to leave the European Union without a deal and operate on WTO rules, there will need to be checks at ports, airports and perhaps at business level and near the Border. That is the reality of the situation, but that is in the context of no deal. We have never been in the position of signing up to checks as part of a deal.

The Taoiseach needs to be careful in welcoming everything Boris Johnson said this morning because he made it clear, saying "we will make a very good offer" blah, blah and so on, but he said there would be a difficulty in keeping Northern Ireland in the customs union because one of the basic things about being a country is having a single customs perimeter and a single customs union. While he is dismissing the non-papers, his essential message today is that he wants to keep Northern Ireland out of the customs union. All of us in this House are agreed that Brexit makes no sense economically or for those in business or in farming in Northern Ireland and that it will damage the economy all around, but it seems very clear that the Prime Minister is sticking to his idea of not wanting, as part of the exit deal, any provision that would ensure and guarantee that Northern Ireland would remain within the European Union customs union. Does the Taoiseach accept that seems to be Mr. Johnson's position right now or does he have evidence to suggest that he may be willing to compromise on that point?

The Deputy's assessment is correct that it is his view that the United Kingdom should leave the European Union whole and entire, to use his own language. That means the UK, including Northern Ireland, leaving the customs union. However, as I explained to him when we met in New York, there is a reason we came up with the deal we did after two years of negotiations with Prime Minister May and her Government. The backstop provides for a single customs territory. It does not provide for Britain or Northern Ireland staying in the EU customs union; it provides for what is described as a single customs territory. That satisfied our demand and desire that there not be customs checks North and South, but also the concerns and desires of many unionists that there not be any customs checks east-west. A single customs territory was designed specifically to meet that need. That is why we ended up with the backstop and why it is the best solution. Having the entire UK within a single customs territory avoids the need for customs posts North-South and east-west. I explained to Mr. Johnson that we spent two years going up and down all of these rabbit holes and that we came up where we did because we needed a solution that avoided customs posts not only on the land border between North-South, but between Northern Ireland and Britain and between the Republic of Ireland and Britain. Very often those who were not part of negotiating an agreement do not know why those negotiations reached a certain point, but this is why we reached that point.