A Cheann Comhairle, I welcome the strength and earnestness of your comments on voting in this House. We know we now need to act to address the genuine concerns of the general public.

There is near unanimity in this House that from an Irish perspective, there is no such thing as a good Brexit. However, there are bad Brexits and worse Brexits. In recent weeks, there was a genuine fear that Boris Johnson would pull the UK out of the EU without a deal. The threat of no deal has receded thanks to the Benn Act and the Letwin amendment, which are designed to prevent a no-deal exit, although I am not convinced that a no-deal exit is still impossible.

Last week's agreement between British and European negotiators is certainly better than no deal. The new agreement seems to guarantee an open Border, which has been our collective primary responsibility and objective in this House. Other than that, it is a worse deal than the one negotiated with Theresa May. The new political declaration sets out a vision of the UK diverging to a greater extent from the EU and its standards. The new text gives greater emphasis to respecting each other's autonomous decision making. The future role of the European Court of Justice is reduced and the UK's future relationship with the EU is no longer to be as close as possible but on the basis of a free trade agreement. This indicates that Boris Johnson wants to distance the UK from the Single Market and our customs union or even from a single customs territory, as was envisaged by Theresa May in her deal. If Boris Johnson wins the next general election, the UK is likely to move away from alignment with European rules. There is no commitment to maintaining a level playing field into the future other than not rowing back from existing shared standards. In short, it is no longer safe to assume that the UK will remain close enough to the EU rules for British-Irish trade to continue even as a semblance of what it is currently. It looks like the UK is now determined to go down a radically different path, including deregulating of industries regulated by EU rules. What analysis has the Government done or initiated to estimate the effect on our economy if the UK pursues a very different approach to the harmonisation envisaged by Theresa May and instead embarks on a much more hardline separation, as envisaged by Boris Johnson?

The deal between the UK and the EU is one we can live with. It is a deal that protects Ireland's core interests in terms of the lack of any Border infrastructure, be that live animal, sanitary and phytosanitary, customs or regulatory checks or any form of tariff. What we have managed to achieve with our partners in the EU is a negotiated deal with two different British Governments, both of which took quite a different approach under former Prime Minister Theresa May and Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Those deals had to be designed primarily around British red lines while at the same time protecting core Irish interests.

It is important to say that the revised political declaration on the level playing field issues is stronger than Deputy Howlin suggests in terms of an insistence by the EU side on a level playing field in the future should there be free trade that is tariff and quota free, which is the stated objective.

The briefing from the EU after the deal was done referred to the political declaration, stating it:

...provides for an ambitious FTA with zero tariffs and quotas between the EU and the UK. It states that robust commitments on a level playing field should ensure open and fair competition. The precise nature of commitments will be commensurate with the ambition of the future relationship and take into account the economic connectedness and geographic proximity of the UK.

If the UK wants tariff-free and quota-free trade that is as seamless as it would like it to be with the EU under an FTA, it will have to provide guarantees, sector by sector, regarding issues on a level playing field and equivalents. That is an absolute must or else the UK will not have the type of FTA that it wants. We cannot have a situation whereby the UK decides to change fundamentally its regulatory model, diverges from EU standards and, at the same time, trades into the EU uninhibited. I am afraid that is not realistic. We have to protect our market, our consumers and our businesses. I hope there will be free trade because that is in the interests of Ireland and the UK. If that is to happen, however, the issue of the level playing field will be a big part of any discussion of the future relationship. I hope we can get to that if we can get the withdrawal agreement ratified and settled and allow the UK to leave the EU in an orderly manner so that we can move onto a transition period to resolve all of these issues.

We agreed in this House that the core issue - and Deputies from all of the benches gave incredible solidarity to the Government - was maintaining a borderless island. As the Tánaiste indicated, all trade, including animal trade, between North and South is protected. That does not, however, include east-west trade, which is the bulk of our trade. That is, or should be, a core issue for us as well. It is an area, however, that we will have less control over if the UK leaves the EU. My central point, however, is that there has been a fundamental shift in British policy from that pursued by the May Government, which we had envisaged would have close alignment into the future, to that now being pursued by the Johnson Government, which has set out on the hard Brexiteer path of separating the UK from the standards of the EU to give themselves a trading advantage.

The Tánaiste has outlined what we have all known for three years. It has, however, taken that long to dawn on the hard Brexiteers. From the very first negotiations, they thought that they could have their cake and eat it, that they could have free access and be able to carry on other trade as well. My fear is that the Johnson Government is now determined to have a no deal immediately or else in 14 months, or whenever the trade talks end, when there is a failure to agree the free trade terms outlined by the Tánaiste. What preparations are we making for that eventuality if Johnson remains Prime Minister?

I believe the British Prime Minister does want a deal. The deal he has struck with the EU is fair from an Irish perspective regarding our priorities in these negotiations. Northern Ireland has a unique set of circumstances. As part of the UK, it is leaving the EU. It is also, however, subject to a peace agreement that is 21 years old. We all know the complexities and vulnerabilities brought about by the challenges of Brexit in that regard. That is why Northern Ireland has been given a unique solution, which essentially allows it to stay, legally, within the UK customs union and single market while, at the same time, ensuring that businesses in Northern Ireland can have uninhibited access into the EU market.

We all agree on that. I was referring to the future of east-west relations.

The east-west future will be determined on the basis of the future trading agreement. There is a stated objective in the political declaration of a tariff-free, quota-free trading arrangement, which I will work towards achieving. For that to be achieved, however, the EU will, of course, insist on level playing field issues, which are mentioned specifically, whether those are environmental standards, workers' rights or climate issues. We must ensure that businesses in the UK operate to an equivalent standard to businesses in this country. Otherwise, it will simply not be a level playing field and it will not be possible, therefore, to facilitate the type of trade we would like to envisage in the future.