Oral evidence - Brexit: UK-Irish relations follow-up

Karen Bradley MP and Robin Walker MP.

Q16 The Chairman: Good afternoon, Secretary of State and Minister. Welcome to our Lords EU Select Committee. I congratulate the new Secretary of State on her appointment. We respect that, and I am sure you will find it a very interesting and important portfolio. I also congratulate the Minister, who has navigated the first phase of the Brexit negotiations in the same department.

As you know, we thought it part of our work to look at some of the areas that are very important to the constituent parts of these islands and further afield in the British Overseas Territories—they are not normally part of the Westminster debate; or perhaps not enough, but we can debate that on another occasion—and the implications of Brexit. We can probably say that we perform some service in drawing people’s attention to the importance of some of these issues. We will continue to do that. It is phase 1 of our work.

Phase 2 is making sure that there is an understanding of that in government and that the right machinery is in place to carry forward those discussions. Generally speaking, we have had some indication that that is the case. I am not trying to signal other than that. We will, of course, follow that up in the next phase of negotiations with the EU and make sure that nobody feels left out or that their interests have been overlooked.

As I said earlier, and without being invidious to the two Ministers, we are particularly grateful that the new Secretary of State, Karen Bradley, has come to see us. Most of the questions are about the sensitive situation in the island of Ireland, and Northern Ireland, of which you are Secretary of State, and its relationship with the Irish Republic and more widely. We also have in mind, and will ask your colleague later, some of the other implications on which he has been in touch with us.

This is very much a follow-up and fact-finding session to try to see where we have got to, in what direction we should be pointed and whether people understand that in what we appreciate are very demanding negotiations for Ministers.

Unless either Minister wants to make a statement at this stage, I will ask Baroness Wilcox to ask the first question.

Karen Bradley MP: It might be helpful to make a few opening remarks, if you do not mind. The first is to thank you for inviting me here today. It is two weeks and nearly 24 hours since I was appointed, so this is the first Committee I am appearing before in my role as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. Of course, in my previous role in the Home Office a few years ago, I had a great deal of interaction with this Committee.

I am looking forward to getting on with the job of dealing with all the issues in Northern Ireland. You will have seen my announcement of talks, which are commencing tomorrow. Since being appointed, I have been in Northern Ireland twice. I have met all the leaders of the main parties in Northern Ireland at least twice, and I have met Simon Coveney, the Tánaiste, twice, and spoken to him on the telephone on several occasions. My focus has been on the talks, I will be completely honest with you, but obviously the context in which they are held and the implications of Brexit are very important. I hope you will forgive me if, on specific Brexit issues, I defer to my colleague from the Department for Exiting the European Union, who has been more involved in that. I hope you will understand.

We have reached a balanced set of commitments, reflecting the unique situation and circumstances of Northern Ireland and our clear position of preserving the constitutional and economic integrity of the United Kingdom. We have to work on this always with the Belfast agreement in mind, and we are coming up to 20 years since it was signed in 1998. That includes the principle of consent, citizenship rights and human rights provisions. That has been at the heart of our approach, as has avoiding a hard border, preserving north-south co-operation and funding, and preserving the common travel area and reciprocal rights for UK and Irish nationals.

Finally, the constitutional status of Northern Ireland and the principle of consent have been at the top of our agenda in all our thinking on Northern Ireland and how Brexit will impact on the unique circumstances that Northern Ireland finds itself in. Perhaps I can turn now to my ministerial colleague for his additional comments.

Robin Walker MP: I will try to be brief. Thank you for having me back before the Committee. I found the previous sessions that we had very useful. Your report on these issues certainly deserves some of the credit for the prominence that both sides in the negotiations have placed on addressing the issues for Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland early in the talks, and for the progress that has been made at this stage.

As you know, I support the Secretary of State, David Davis, on devolution matters and in leading on the overseas territories and Crown dependencies, which I know you want to touch on later. Northern Ireland and Ireland-related issues have been a key priority for us from the start. We have been working very closely with the Northern Ireland Office, including Karen’s predecessor. I pay tribute to the work that James and Chloe did during their time at the NIO; they were very good colleagues to work with.

As we made clear, avoiding a hard border and preserving north-south co-operation are key priorities. We have been very clear from the start of this process that we are steadfast in our commitment to the Belfast agreement. While we are in the process of negotiating a withdrawal agreement, we cannot pre-empt the detail of the withdrawal agreement, but we have made a commitment during the debate in the Commons on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill that we will enshrine the principles in the withdrawal agreement and that the Bill will legislate for that. It is important to reflect that to your Committee as we move forward on this.

The Chairman: Thank you. As you know, we will be considering the Bill from here on for some time, I suspect. I am grateful to you. We are seekers after truth, rather than our own advantage, and there is a lot to get through.

I should just remind the audience, witnesses and colleagues that we are being broadcast, in view of the importance of the occasion.

Q17 Baroness Wilcox: Secretary of State and Minister, thank you very much for coming today. It was very helpful for me to hear your opening remarks. Here comes the first official question.

Can you set out for us the implications of the December joint report on progress during phase 1 of the Article 50 negotiations on Ireland and Northern Ireland? It has been suggested that the UK’s fall-back position of full alignment with the rules of the internal market and the customs union, which now or in the future support north-south co-operation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 agreement, makes a soft Brexit inevitable? How would you respond to that?

Robin Walker MP: Perhaps I will start on this one, as it relates to the joint report. There are principles in the joint report, and the fact that sufficient progress was agreed on it is welcome, particularly in the context of Ireland and Northern Ireland. As the Secretary of State said, we have reached a balanced set of commitments that reiterate our commitment to avoiding a hard border and our clear position on preserving the constitutional and economic integrity of the United Kingdom.

The agreement covers four objectives for the people of Northern Ireland: protecting the Belfast agreement in all its parts, including the principle of consent, citizenship rights and human rights provisions; avoiding a hard border and preserving north-south co-operation and funding, and the paragraph you reflected on relates to that; preserving the common travel area and reciprocal rights for UK and Irish nationals; and respecting the provisions of the Good Friday agreement regarding the constitutional status of Northern Ireland and the principle of consent.

It is important to reflect that the overall commitment in that is, first, to try to resolve the issue of the border with regard to the future relationship between the UK and the EU. It is our first priority to ensure that that relationship supports that. We published our future partnership paper on Ireland and Northern Ireland relatively early on in that process, and it suggested some steps towards that. We also published our customs paper, with some suggestions.

Recognising the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland, we need to look at specific solutions. We have agreed to work with the EU on the creative and imaginative solutions that have been suggested. Clearly there is also the fall-back of the UK putting forward specific solutions.

Finally, on your point about overall regulatory alignment, there are areas that are covered by the Belfast agreement that require full north-south co-operation. Obviously we have been talking about a number of those areas in the mapping process we have had during the negotiations. I do not think that means that a particular model for Brexit is required in order to underpin that. It means paying detailed attention to the areas on which we are required to work together.

Lord Selkirk of Douglas: Could you provide us with an account of the actual process by which the agreement was reached and the process by which the DUP was consulted on the final deal? Incidentally, why were its members not involved at an earlier stage?

Karen Bradley MP: As I was not Secretary of State at that point, it would be inappropriate for me to speculate.

Robin Walker MP: The first thing to be clear on is that these are talks between the UK and the EU. The UK Government have been representing all parts of the UK in these talks. The machinery of the Joint Ministerial Council involves the devolved Administrations, but in the absence of a Northern Ireland Executive there has not been political representation during the period of suspension. We would like there to have been through that period.

It is important constitutionally to recognise that the DUP is in a supply and maintenance agreement with the Government. They are not in a coalition and are therefore not part of the Government in the current circumstances. Rightly, we have had to be careful in the way in which we handle our conversations with all parties in Northern Ireland; we must be even-handed and take the right approach in that respect. It was absolutely right, though, that we reached an agreement that reflected the concerns of both communities and the cross-community concerns in Northern Ireland, which meant an agreement that balanced the concerns about north-south co-operation and the maintenance of crucial agreements in the peace process with concerns about the territorial integrity of the UK and the principle of consent. That is where we have ended up. It has been good to get to that point, and it is important to maintain that balance as we go forward.

Karen Bradley MP: I will add to that, if I may. It reiterates the need for a devolved Government to be up and running in Stormont as soon as possible, which will be my focus over the next few weeks. On many of the devolution issues that we are dealing with in the withdrawal Bill, and on other matters regarding Brexit, Northern Ireland’s voice is not heard through official channels, because there are no official channels through which it can be heard. We need a devolved Government, a devolved Administration, with all parts of the community represented, so that that voice can be heard. We can then have meetings of the JMC (EN) and JMC (P), which the First Minister and deputy First Minister can attend, representing the views of the people of Northern Ireland. That reiterates just how important it is that we re-establish devolved government.

The Chairman: It is very helpful to have that formulation, particularly given what Minister Walker was saying. When listening to you, I got some sense that there might be differences of approach to alignment in different sectors. Could either of you help us with clarification of the areas in which full alignment might be required, or whether there might be something that is more approximate?

In particular, and this is key to this, is the analysis by Her Majesty’s Government of those areas in line with that of the European Union and the Irish Government? Is everybody singing from the same hymn sheet and talking in the same terms, or are we merely pushing our unresolved differences into the next stage of the negotiations?

Robin Walker MP: I think there is a very good understanding of each other’s positions on this and of the overall objectives. Those overall objectives are shared. As I said before, it has struck me during this process that the objectives of Dublin, London and Belfast are all quite well aligned when it comes to avoiding a hard border, preserving the peace process and meeting our commitments under the Belfast agreement. I think those objectives have been embraced by Brussels, which is welcome.

When it gets down to the detail of the agreement, I reiterate that our first priority is to try to secure the arrangements that we want to see, for the preservation of all those things, through the future relationship between the UK and the EU. That needs to reflect the specific solutions that are required for Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Against the model of regulatory alignment in the areas that are required for north-south co-operation and to preserve the Belfast agreement, and balancing that with the fact we have been clear that there will be no new barriers between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, is the fall-back position in the event that that deal does not provide for those issues. We therefore need to work through that in detail.

You talked about specific areas, and I will give you some examples. We were clear in our Ireland-Northern Ireland paper about some of the areas in which co-operation would be sensible and necessary in any case, such as the single electricity market. Given the importance of agriculture and the agrifood business and the phytosanitary—that is not quite the right word; there is another word for it—animal health area between Northern Ireland and Ireland is another important area, and we want to look at what can be done to maintain it.

It is also important to recognise that we made that commitment to make sure that Northern Ireland remains absolutely part of the UK internal market, and that the only areas where there will be any difference will be in areas where that difference has already been approved by a power-sharing Executive.

Karen Bradley MP: One of the factors that I have learned in the past two weeks is that there are more border crossings between Northern Ireland and Ireland than there are on the whole eastern side of the European Union. There are fields that the border goes through. It simply is not tenable to have different rules for agricultural production on one side of the field from the other. We are all pragmatic about that. The single electricity market is another example of the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland; that market is simply not replicated anywhere else in the EU. That is why we are talking about specific solutions and are clear about the unique circumstances. However, as the Minister has said, this is if we cannot reach a deal with the EU as a whole, which is what we would all like to achieve. These are just small examples of why that is so important.

The Chairman: Thank you. It might help the Committee if I say that I still farm and happen to farm across a county boundary. I reflect from time to time on the implications if it happened to be between two counties on the island of Ireland. One can imagine that sort of tension. If your cattle get out from one and end up in the other, who is responsible? I am sensitive to that.

If I may, I will probe a substantive issue for a moment. Do Ministers see that as being resolved as part and parcel of the EU negotiations—either the withdrawal agreement or a subsequent longer-term agreement—or might certain matters revert to bilateral agreement because it may be more flexible or more suitable?

Robin Walker MP: I return to the structure of the joint report. The first and primary aim is to resolve as much as possible through the UK-EU arrangement. We have set out to do that with some of the papers that we have published and to reflect on the areas that could help in this respect.

Of course, there are areas where we work together and areas where, when there is an Executive in place, Northern Ireland works with the Republic of Ireland through the North-South Ministerial Council. The common travel area is a good example of where we have agreed in the joint report for the work to continue between the UK, the Republic of Ireland and the other members of the common travel area.

As we move forward, we have agreed with the Commission that there will be a specific strand in the negotiations that focuses on these issues. That is useful, because it allows us to maintain the priority that has been given to this. It is clear that the joint report acknowledges sufficient progress, rather than a complete resolution of all these issues, so we need to continue to move forward.

We also want to maintain the uniquely close co-operation between the UK and the Republic of Ireland. We would want to do that in any case. We have meetings between our Permanent Secretaries and some good organisational ability to work together. We would want to do that in any case as neighbours, notwithstanding the issues relating to our EU negotiation, but we also need to use the opportunities to use that to resolve this process.

Lord Liddle: On the alignment point, looking at it as Brussels does, Brussels takes us at our word that we want to leave the single market and the customs union and to be free to conduct our own independent trade policy. From its perspective, that means that we might conclude trade agreements that allow goods from other parts of the world to enter the UK that do not meet EU standards and EU rules of origin. That is a simple, logical fact of having an independent trade policy: that you will do things that do not necessarily meet EU standards and EU rules of origin.

You can deal with that at the channel ports by lorry checks, at some cost and disruption, but if we have an open border in Ireland, the EU has no means of enforcing its rules of origin. How will we resolve this problem in phase 2 of the discussions?

Robin Walker MP: There is clearly a broader question here about trade policy and how we move forward. First, the assumption that we would necessarily want to do deals that lowered standards in the UK, let alone in the EU, is rash. There would obviously be substantial political debate on that were that to be the case. We will want to continue to work with the EU on a number of trade policy areas, not least because we want to reach a very comprehensive trade arrangement between the UK and the EU. It is within that context that we should see these areas.

We are very clear that, as we said in our customs paper and pick up in our Ireland-Northern Ireland paper, the agreements on customs, rules of origin and so on are important, but they are not the sole solution to the issue of the Irish border. That is why we have set out a process to try to come to a more holistic solution.

It is important that we do not assume that the UK will suddenly lower or undermine standards that we have maintained and that, particularly in food and farming, we see as key to our domestic industries as well as to our ability to trade with the EU.

Q18 Lord Jay of Ewelme: Secretary of State, congratulations on getting what is probably the most difficult job in the British Government

Karen Bradley MP: You are not the first person to say that.

Lord Jay of Ewelme: I can well imagine, and it will not get any easier, either.

I am going with the Committee again to Dublin, Northern Ireland and the border in a couple of weeks’ time. I am very glad that Robin Walker talked about the importance and the salience of the debate about and negotiations on Ireland in the overall Brexit context. I have always believed that it is possibly the most difficult issue to resolve in what is an extraordinarily difficult set of negotiations anyway. That is one reason why this Committee has always regarded it as so important.

We have touched on this already, but I wonder whether you could say a bit about what happens next. We know where we have got to in the negotiations. We now have negotiations between now and Easter, which will focus on the transition period, and between Easter and the summer, which will focus in some way or another on the great unknown of the final relationship between the UK and the EU. How will the Irish question fit into those negotiations? How will that be handled over the next few months? I know that is a process question, which perhaps betrays my background, but it is a crucial one.

Robin Walker MP: It is a crucial one. I will start and perhaps Karen will chip in. First, as I just said, we set out in the joint report that there will be a strand on this that will continue into the next phase. That is very important, because we want to make sure that we continue to make progress on addressing all these issues through the next phase, working together to deliver solutions. That will focus on addressing the unique geographical situation of Ireland and Northern Ireland. It is important to reflect that they are both in a unique situation. Ireland will have the UK between it and other EU member states, and Northern Ireland is clearly divided from the rest of the UK by the sea and has a land border with the Republic of Ireland. It is important that we address that.

We set out very early on that the interim period—the transition period, if you like—was particularly important in this context. Making sufficient progress in the agreement to explore that is a significant step forward. Certainly the businesses and communities that I have met in Northern Ireland will be pleased to see that, but even more pleased when, as we hope towards the end of Q1, we reach political agreement on that and move on into the detail of the future relationship.

An important part of that process is the working between our department and the NIO. As I say, that has been good throughout. We are also working with the Foreign Office on the relations with member states, and clearly there is none closer than the Republic of Ireland in that respect. As I think I said the last time I was before the Committee on this subject, it is significant that the first visit we made to any EU member state ahead of the commencement of the negotiations was to the Republic of Ireland. We need to maintain that engagement and I have met regularly with the embassy of Ireland, and with politicians from all parties both in Ireland and when they have come over here. It is also important that we maintain that contact.

Clearly there is a co-ordination role to ensure that across government we take these issues very seriously. The ultimate guarantor of that is, of course, the Prime Minister, who takes this issue extremely seriously. She has made it one of the key focal points of each of her major EU speeches, and I absolutely expect her to continue to do so.

Lord Jay of Ewelme: That is very helpful. Thank you for that. Can I just follow up on one point that I am still not completely clear about? Do you envisage in effect that everything to do with Ireland will be settled in the withdrawal agreement? When we have a withdrawal agreement agreed with the EU 27, is that the end of the Irish negotiations? If not, what will be beyond that?

Robin Walker MP: We should be clear that the joint report commits us to finding solutions. The first priority in that is to find them through the future EU-UK agreement. That is why it is important that the joint report is also clear that there will be a continuing strand in the negotiations that is focused on these areas. That will be useful in ensuring that they continue to get prominence. Of course, we want to resolve that as much as possible through the withdrawal agreement, through the implementation period and then through the future relationship agreement. It is a matter of seeing the extent to which we can resolve each issue at every stage.

Q19 Baroness Brown of Cambridge: I want to ask a question about the technology solutions at the border. I do not know whether that might be more appropriately addressed to Mr Walker at this stage.

In order to avoid a hard border, the UK Government’s position paper envisages "technology-based solutions to make it easier to comply with customs procedures", along with waivers from security and safety declarations, a cross-border trade exemption benefiting primarily smaller local traders, streamlined processes for other trusted traders and the tracking of imports to the UK. Could you expand on what these technology-based solutions are and how these proposals would work in practice?

Robin Walker MP: One important thing to note is that the August paper set out our position with regard to things that we want to achieve through the future partnership. That was ahead of the joint report, which obviously represents what we have agreed on to date and goes a bit further than the August paper in some respects. With regard to these technology-based solutions, I think there is in some circles some misunderstanding about what we are talking about, particularly on customs.

What we are really talking about here is the facilitations: the ways of allowing people to use technology to deal with the required information in a way that keeps things away from the border. Crucially, many people have often jumped on this to say, as I think you just meant, “Do technology-based solutions at the border mean some kind of a clever fence or cameras—all that kind of thing?” That is not what we mean. We mean no physical infrastructure at the border and using technology to facilitate the frictionless movement of goods. Along with the movement of people, which the common travel area largely deals with in the context of Ireland, the frictionless movement of goods is important in avoiding any kind of border.

That is the short answer on technology-based solutions, on which we want to work together with our counterparts within the EU to explore its full potential. Our customs paper relates to the maximum facilitation model in that, but we also want to explore the other model of a hybrid approach, which would mean that even those technical solutions might not be required. It is important that we look at them both as we move forward.

With regard to safety and security declarations, we think it is important to explore whether, in removing a time-sensitive administrative declaration requirement we would seek a waiver from the requirement to submit entry and exit summary declarations for goods being moved between the UK and the EU. That would require us to remain part of the European security zone and it would offer clear benefits to Ireland, as well as to the UK.

Of course, one of the other things we set out in our paper is to explore the potential of using the common transit convention in that respect. It is important to recognise a lot of the economic interest in this is with regard not only to the huge amount of business that Ireland does with the UK but to the business it does with other EU member states through the UK. Providing solutions that help both Northern Ireland and Ireland to continue to do that is an important part of this process.

Baroness Brown of Cambridge: Can I follow up on that? The Freight Transport Association gave evidence to us last week, and it was very concerned, indeed sceptical, that these away-from-the-border technology solutions could be implemented in time. It also mentioned the training of its members and the companies that would need to agree paperwork that they have not had to do before. Quite a broad range of organisations would have to be brought up to speed to do that.

The association was also particularly concerned that, if there was some checking of lorry drivers’ papers at the border, even a few minutes per lorry, particularly at peak times such as very early in the morning when food is coming in that has to go on to supermarket shelves by 9 am if we are to buy it, it really would be a difficult problem.

Robin Walker MP: As I said, our objective is for there not to be some checking of papers at the border—

Baroness Brown of Cambridge: Would there be any checking of papers at the border?

Robin Walker MP: That is very important. It fits with the point about no physical infrastructure.

With regard to the time to prepare, we hear that in many circles with regard to the Brexit process, and I recognise some of the challenges in that respect. That is why the implementation period will be hugely important for both the UK and the EU, frankly. I think there is recognition on both sides that any changes in the way in which we do business together will mean that time will be needed to prepare—time to organise and train people appropriately—and that in other areas, not on the border, Governments may need to put physical infrastructure in place and recruit people. That is one reason why we are seeing in the negotiations support from both sides for an implementation period. I also hope that we will have rapid agreement on that so that we can move forward and take it into account in all our plans.

To be very clear, we are not planning to have any kind of checks or stops at the border. We absolutely recognise what we have heard in evidence from the business community, citizens and groups of organisations on both sides: that there is no appetite or desire for that, and that it would be hugely counterproductive to the peace and progress that we have seen in Northern Ireland over recent years.

Karen Bradley MP: As well as meeting the parties, I have met businesses and other institutions, which have expressed the same concerns. We have been clear that we will not have physical infrastructure at the border, but the implementation period is critical for business. That is why we want to get that sorted out; we want there to be only one change for business, and we want there to be time to prepare for whatever that might look like. That is why getting that implementation period sorted is now the priority.

Baroness Brown of Cambridge: Is work already going on to define what these solutions will be, so that they can be rolled out?

Robin Walker MP: Yes, and part of our discussion with businesses and other groups is to understand what they would like to see in place there. But, fundamentally, we think that the first priority here is to get a deal between the UK and the EU that facilitates frictionless trade and therefore does not require any hard border of that sort. That is the first priority in the joint report and it is the first priority that we are taking on this.

Baroness Brown of Cambridge: Do you not think that a bit of parallel processing might be useful?

Robin Walker MP: We do indeed. As a department, we have the so-called PDC approach to project delivery work in looking at what we would do in the event of no deal. I cannot go into much detail on that, but of course we also have to think about that side of things, and as a Government we are working on that across the board.

Baroness Browning: In the context of these movements across the border, how would you respond to the scepticism expressed by Michel Barnier and the Irish Government about the paper and processes that you described in your previous answer? Michel Barnier, responding to the UK’s paper on Ireland and Northern Ireland, described what you just described to us as the UK wanting a kind of test case for future use. He also said: “Creativity and flexibility can’t be at the expense of the integrity of the single market and the customs union”. He sounds as though he has given you quite a lot of pushback on this. Where do you think we are now? Has he moved a bit?

Robin Walker MP: The joint report reflects the fact that we have agreed to respect the integrity of the single market and the customs union, we have agreed to work with the EU on the solutions, the EU has agreed to respect the territorial integrity of the UK, and both are absolutely committed to avoiding a hard border. Mr Barnier also said that he did not feel that precedents were necessarily useful in the context of Ireland, nor that it necessarily set a precedent for other areas.

We have to recognise that there are a unique set of circumstances here that may require specific solutions that we can agree between us and the EU, and we need to work on those together. The joint report reflects the fact that there has been progress on that and broad agreement on where we need to end up. It does not provide the solution to all the problems. That is why it is important that we continue to work on them with the EU, but also with our friends and neighbours in the Republic of Ireland.

Baroness Browning: Lord Chairman, this may be a rather odd thing for a Minister to hear from a Select Committee, but some members of the Committee will meet Michel Barnier soon. We are from the Select Committee and we are here to help you. If we were to ask him a question in the context of this subject matter, what would be the most helpful question to ask him?

Karen Bradley MP: Are we allowed time to reflect on that?

Baroness Browning: I know this is an unusual thing to hear, but if you are getting that sort of pushback, what would be the most compelling thing that we could say to him?

Robin Walker MP: I think it is a reflection of the fact that both parties to this negotiation have placed in absolutely prime position resolving these issues and ensuring that there is no hard border. Nobody wants to see one. We will take the necessary steps to ensure that we protect the frictionless border there. The EU is operating in a less flexible framework than we are, so the question is: how can it ensure that there is sufficient flexibility to deliver the creative solutions that it has talked about? That is the challenge for the EU in these negotiations.

We have set the objective of achieving that through negotiation between the UK and the EU, but the means have to be delivered. Sometimes the inflexibility of a particular framework does not allow for that. We will absolutely take our responsibilities seriously to protect all our commitments under the agreements, including no hard border. The key challenge for the EU is to ensure that it has sufficient flexibility to do so.

Karen Bradley MP: It was put to me as the challenge of how common law and Napoleonic law are rather against each other in this situation.

Baroness Browning: You will no doubt hear what the answer is in due course.

The Chairman: We will pass now to a more specific question on which, Minister, you have already touched briefly.

Baroness Verma: Yes. I will move away from the scepticism towards optimism. How can issues in relation to the use of Great Britain as a land bridge for trade between Ireland and the continent—Europe—be resolved?

Robin Walker MP: To come back to a point that I touched on earlier, the common transit convention can play a very important part in that. There is a broad conversation to have about UK-EU trade and the benefits of frictionless market access for goods between the UK and the EU in general.

That comes into sharp relief when we look at the enormous amount of trade between the UK and the Republic of Ireland and the trade that goes beyond them. We need to look at the broader future relationship here with regard to goods, market access, transport arrangements—a whole series of things. We have set out some of our suggestions on that with regard to the common transit convention in particular, and with regard to animal movements and the phytosanitary approach. Clearly, that needs to be looked at in the overall context.

It is a key priority. To share your optimism, I think there is a lot of common interest here in achieving the right result. It is fundamentally in the interests of EU member states to achieve that result, and it is in the interests of London, Dublin and Brussels to achieve the right result. It is very much, I would say, in the interests of Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland does a huge amount of trade with the Republic of Ireland and with the rest of the UK, which we need to keep flowing.

I have met a number of organisations, including those involved in the port in Belfast, the British Irish Chamber of Commerce and Ibec to talk about some of their key concerns on these issues. We are very keen to find a solution that works for all of us.

Karen Bradley MP: It is worth adding that north-south trade is incredibly important, as is east-west. The amount of trade between Northern Ireland and Britain is far higher than that between Northern Ireland and the Republic. Likewise, the amount of trade that the Republic has with Britain is higher east-west than north-south.

On north-south trade, it is incredibly important to ensure that we have that frictionless border for communities that have grown up for decades with and got used to the common travel area and the ability to move. There are families who live on different sides of the road, and one part is in Northern Ireland and the other is in the Republic. We need to make sure that that remains open and that those communities continue to enjoy the benefits that they have had for ever, but we also need to make sure that east-west trade is also open.

It was put to me that there is a potential win-win and a potential lose-lose, but there is no win-lose. There is no point at which one side wins and the other loses. We either all win or we all lose.

Q20 The Earl of Kinnoull: My question is really about the battle of the papers. In August, we had the position paper, which we have been discussing, and in December we had the joint report. The joint report—we have already discussed paragraph 9—refers to the UK’s intention to develop “specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland”. Do you feel that such solutions went beyond the August paper?

Karen Bradley MP: Perhaps I can start with the specific solutions to the unique circumstances and then pass the question on the August paper and its origins to Minister Walker.

We have touched already on the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland. I know that the Committee will be well aware of this, but it is probably worth putting on the record in this session that Northern Ireland will be the only part of Europe that has a land border with the European Union but is a part of a non-member state, a third country in its relationship with the European Union. It is physically separate from Britain but will have a land border with the European Union. That is unique within the European Union.

In addition, the Belfast agreement and the power-sharing arrangements, which are again unique in the way they operate, and the devolution settlement that Northern Ireland has, mean that we need very specific solutions. That is why we as a Government were determined that the issue of Northern Ireland should be addressed in the very opening part of the discussion with the European Union, and why we have been determined to continue to address those specific solutions.

We have to be mindful of the Belfast agreement. We achieved an awful lot 20 years ago with it. It transformed the way Northern Ireland operated, and nobody wishes us to retrench at all on that. We are absolutely determined as a Government that the commitments in the Belfast agreement will be respected and that the agreement works.

Article 50, Paragraph 50 rather, is incredibly important; Article 50 is a completely different thing. The bell has obviously distracted me.

The Chairman: On which note, Ministers, I am sorry to interrupt, but you may have noticed that there is a Division in your House. We suspend this session for as long it decently takes you to go through the Lobby. If the public gallery will permit us, we also have a bit of private business to discharge, so we will ask for the gallery to be cleared while we do that. We aim to be back at about 12 minutes past 5 o’clock, if you can. Thank you so much.

The Committee suspended for a Division in the Commons.

The Chairman: Ministers, we are as grateful for your reappearance as I suspect the Energy Secretary will have been for your votes, at which point we will proceed briskly to the remaining questions. We will try to release you, not least because the Committee is under a certain time constraint—as you know, Minister—in relation to the debate we are having on Crown dependencies. We go straight on to Lord Whitty’s question.

Q21 Lord Whitty: Can we talk about the politics for a minute? We have on the one hand a fraught political situation in Northern Ireland, with the lack of an Executive. On the other hand, we have a positive statement from the negotiations with the EU but one that is essentially a declaration of intent. It has been described as constructive ambiguity or a fudge, depending on what language you use. We will not be clear what it means until we have reached our final agreement with the EU.

In that context, and given the problem you have with the DUP in delivering the agreement, are you confident that you have reassured the unionist population of Northern Ireland that this does not threaten their arrangements with the rest of the United Kingdom and that their interests have been protected constitutionally and economically, as you put it earlier?

Karen Bradley MP: To take the first point, I refer you to the Prime Minister’s letter that came with the joint report. Six commitments were made in it, the first of which is: “we will always uphold and support Northern Ireland’s status as an integral part of the United Kingdom, consistent with the principle of consent”. We have been absolutely clear that Northern Ireland is a part of the United Kingdom, and as such it will be part of a single market—for want of better terminology—within the United Kingdom. There will be no borders between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, and we will respect the integrity of the United Kingdom throughout.

The other five commitments reinforce that. The Prime Minister said: “we will fully protect and maintain … the single market of the United Kingdom”, and that, “there will be no new borders within the United Kingdom”. That is very important. We are completely committed to there being no borders east-west, just as we are committed to there being none north-south. Fourthly, she said that, as we are leaving the EU, we will leave the single market and the customs union and that the whole United Kingdom will do that, including Northern Ireland. Fifthly, she said that “we will uphold the commitments and safeguards set out in the Belfast Agreement regarding North-South Co-operation”—the strand 2 issues, as set out in the Belfast agreement.

The final and sixth commitment she made in her letter was that “the whole of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, will no longer be subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice”. Those are clear commitments, and they are part of the letter that goes with the joint report.

I feel from my discussions that all the communities of Northern Ireland respect that position and understand what the UK Government wish to achieve in these negotiations.

Robin Walker MP: The one thing I would add is that we have reached a balanced set of commitments in the joint report. Of course we want to make sure that we continue to maintain that balance as we go forward; I do not need to reiterate all the points that the Secretary of State just made. But it is important that there is an opportunity for Northern Irish politicians, both unionists and nationalists, to play a greater role in this process as we go forward, so long as a power-sharing Executive is restored. That opportunity needs to be grasped, because it is in the interests of the success of this negotiation and the success of the United Kingdom as we go forward. We need to do everything we can to support Karen in her important role of allowing that to happen.

Lord Whitty: I suppose what charged that anxiety on the part of the unionists was the references to full alignment with the regulatory structures that relate to the Belfast agreement, et cetera. Does that mean that if normal politics were restored in Northern Ireland, you could be clear what “full alignment” meant? Is it going to wait until we know what the overall trade agreement is and the overall understanding on any degree of alignment or equivalence with the EU as a whole?

Robin Walker MP: Again, to come back to the starting point and the hierarchy of the commitments that we made in the joint report, we want to focus first on how this can be resolved through the UK-EU relationship. The commitment to maintaining full alignment, which is there as the backstop in the event of not having that arrangement at the UK-EU level, would then be focused specifically on the areas that are required to enable the existing co-operation between north and south. It is important to look at it in that context. That commitment sits alongside our commitment to protect the single market of the United Kingdom and to put up no barriers between the rest of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland.

Karen Bradley MP: To repeat the comment I made earlier, the imperative for the Executive is not just to deliver public services with ministerial direction, as the people of Northern Ireland need and deserve, but to be part of the processes that are in place, particularly through the JMC (EN) and the JMC (P), to feed into the UK Government’s position on Brexit. Not having an Executive in place means that there is no formal process for doing that. It is vital for the whole community, nationalist and unionist, that those voices are heard, and heard properly, in the way the Scottish and Welsh Governments are represented on those bodies.

I repeat that a Northern Ireland Executive needs to be put in place to ensure that Northern Ireland’s voice is heard loud and clear. Obviously I will do all I can in my capacity as Secretary of State, but I do not have the powers which the Executive have to be heard, in the same way in which the Scottish and Welsh Governments are heard.

Baroness Suttie: Obviously we welcome the fact that you are trying to get the talks up and running—tomorrow, I believe—the next deadline being 7 February.

On the specific point about the JMC having had no elected representation for the last year, we all want your talks to succeed this time, but if they do not, have you given thought to some creative, alternative solutions, perhaps to make sure that representatives from the Northern Ireland Assembly are represented in the JMC during this period? This is a critical point for Northern Ireland, but it is also a critical point for the Brexit negotiations, and all communities’ voices need to be heard.

Karen Bradley MP: I understand the point you are making, but my energies and focus have to be entirely on making a success of the talks. You are right that tomorrow we start the preparatory talks and getting the parties to understand how far we have come in talks. We have made significant progress over the last 12 months; the last seven months of talks in particular were productive. There are still differences between the two main parties; they are narrow differences, but differences all the same. My focus has to be on trying to bridge those differences and getting all five of the main parties in Northern Ireland around the table to come up with an agreement that they can deliver on. It would be wrong for me to start speculating on what might happen as a consequence of other things while my energies are focused on that.

Q22 Lord Liddle: In the phase 1 agreement, we seem to have made good progress on things like everybody accepting the Good Friday agreement, the right of people in Northern Ireland to both British and Irish citizenship, the freedom of movement within the common travel area for British and Irish citizens, and the possibility of maintaining EU funding in Northern Ireland post-Brexit. There are quite a lot of good things there, but on those issues are you confident that you have all the assurances that you need, or do we need more?

Karen Bradley MP: I will start specifically on the Belfast agreement. Our support for the Belfast agreement is at the heart of our approach to the negotiations. We absolutely respect the principle of consent; it is paramount to everything we do as the UK Government. Our respect for the Belfast agreement is clear. You will see that the joint report enshrines the ongoing support of the UK and Irish Governments, and the EU, for the Belfast agreement in all its parts.

Again, it comes back to the unique circumstances that Northern Ireland is in. As you said, through right of birth in Northern Ireland, people have the right to choose to be Irish or British. That is a principle that we fully respect, and we are determined to ensure that all our agreements on this matter reflect that.

Robin Walker MP: I will add to that; I do not feel that I need to echo what Karen said about the important of the agreement. Specifically on the common travel area, there was concern early in this process that there would be a different EU approach to that and that it would raise difficulties with it. Questions were asked about it. I pay tribute to the work of the Republic of Ireland in advocating the case for making sure that the long-standing agreements on the common travel area are respected, paid heed to and taken into account. We have made that case throughout. It is significant that that is recognised in the joint report. That is a good thing.

On funding, and perhaps this slightly answers the question that I did not get to come back on with regard to the differences between our August paper and the joint report, we have gone further than our August paper. The August paper committed us to seeking to get both parties to agree on the continuation of PEACE funding. The joint report also includes Interreg, which is very welcome.

Some of the key issues of concern for Northern Ireland that I hear from businesses and universities relate to other areas, such as structural funding. In that respect, the detailed agreements on the implementation period will be very important, because that covers us to the end of the current MFF on structural funding, as well as the new UK shared prosperity fund, which CLG will lead on but all our departments are feeding into, to ensure that our approach continues to meet the needs of all parts of the United Kingdom, and other areas that have regard to our future relationship, such as research funding and Horizon. Earlier today, I was with colleagues at BEIS at its higher-level stakeholder forum for the science and research sector. Ulster University is a very active participant in that; it wants current arrangements to continue.

Sufficient progress is good. It is important, and it reflects the fact that, as you say, we have reached sufficient progress on some of these issues, but we want to address a much wider set of issues with regard to our future partnership, and we now need to focus on that. That is where I continue to work very closely with Karen and her team and where we will focus next.

Q23 Baroness Neville-Rolfe: Perhaps I may go a bit wider. Events leading up to the December Council placed north-south and east-west relations under a good deal of strain. What steps have you taken to ensure that effective intergovernmental relations—the UK with the Republic of Ireland and north and south—are maintained during Brexit and for the long-term, because that is important? Indeed, I would add relations with stakeholders—not just intergovernmental—such as the food and farming and electricity and business interests that you touched on in your evidence. What is your plan for a schmoozing strategy going forward?

Robin Walker MP: If my Secretary of State were here, he would tell you that I am responsible for a lot of our schmoozing strategy on behalf of our department. You are right: these relationships are hugely important. Of course there are times—we saw this in the run-up to the joint report—when there are challenges for them, but the depth of those relationships means that we find ways through that. That is down to an investment of time and effort over decades to improve British-Irish relations.

Before I came into government, I was a member of the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, so I saw some of its work. At the governmental level, there are organisations such as the British-Irish Council, which provides an important forum for engagement between us.

We need to continue to invest in those, but as you say it goes way beyond that too. We also need to have those direct conversations with business fora. I have been meeting fairly regularly with Ibec and the British-Irish Chamber of Commerce.

We try to make sure that when Irish politicians come to the UK, we as a department meet them and have conversations. In our European Parliamentary engagement, we have made sure that the Irish delegation plays a key part. We continue to communicate with them on a regular basis. We need to continue to invest in all those channels.

It is important to recognise that, while my department has a role to play, we do not hold the ring entirely. The Foreign Office will continue to engage regularly with Ireland. The Cabinet Office has an important role to play in the co-ordination of the devolved Administrations, including Northern Ireland. We need to work interdepartmentally on these things too to ensure that that effort is being made, but it is a high priority for us.

The previous NIO team and our department made a number of visits jointly to businesses and domestic groups in Northern Ireland, across the voluntary and university as well as the business sector, to talk about some of their key interests. As I mentioned in relation to the higher education forum, it is important that Northern Ireland and Northern Irish institutions continue to play a very active role in the UK fora to discuss Brexit, and they are.

Karen Bradley MP: To add to that, in relation to the talks that start tomorrow, it would not be feasible for the United Kingdom Government to call for talks without the full support of the Irish Government. That is why, when I announced the talks, I did so jointly with Simon Coveney and why he will be with me tomorrow at the talks. Without the Irish Government’s support for the Belfast agreement and getting devolved government back up and running, we could not entertain making it possible. The relationships are deeper and stronger than what you may see through the prism of Brexit, and they need to continue for the sake of all people on the island of Ireland, irrespective of whether they are in Northern Ireland or the Republic.

The Chairman: Thank you, Minister, for those responses. I think you will know that this Committee will continue to take what I hope will be a constructive attitude to the issues involving the whole island of Ireland. As you know, we are undertaking a visit there and will keep in touch with you about it.

In the last five minutes, we will switch the scene, if we may, and ask the DExEU Minister, Robin Walker, for a very quick update. He may want to do it, as it were, in note form, or he may wish to reflect and drop me a line for the Committee later. We have one or two outstanding bits of correspondence, which is not the purpose of the question, in relation to the Government’s engagement with Gibraltar, the overseas territories and the Crown dependencies. One reason why we are under the cosh for time is because we are about to debate those in the Chamber, as I think you know.

Robin Walker MP: Very good.

The Chairman: It would be useful if the Minister could give us some update on the engagement with those various extremely important interests. There is the specific question in Gibraltar of agreements involving the European Union and Brexit, because the April 2017 Council guidelines indicate that after the UK leaves the Union, no agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without agreement between the kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom.

That is the prior situation, which has now been further complicated by the question of a transitional or implementation agreement for an implementation period. It has been reported that Spanish and EU officials are stating that any transitional arrangements would not apply to Gibraltar without the agreement of Spain. That is a lot for five minutes, Minister, so I leave to your discretion whether you feel able to respond to that now or in correspondence.

Robin Walker MP: Thank you. I shall do my best, particularly on the former point. I will make a few points on Gibraltar, but I have seen drafts of correspondence, which should be with you before too long, so perhaps I might fill that out in more detail if that is acceptable.

First, I can touch briefly on the Crown dependencies, the engagement with Gibraltar and the engagement with other overseas territories, because I am responsible in the department for all of those. I have been chairing quarterly meetings with each of the Crown dependencies. Over the summer, I also visited all three of the Crown dependencies and met stakeholders and businesses in them. We last met on 13 November and will meet next on 5 March 2018. A number of working groups have come out of those quarterly meetings, and we have been able to maintain a very useful dialogue through this process. I think your Committee has heard a little more about that from the Governments of the Crown dependencies. We are absolutely committed to maintaining that as we move forward, and to making sure we pull in other government departments as required to look at those issues.

Similarly, on Gibraltar, I have been chairing a specific Joint Ministerial Council on EU Negotiations, which met for the fifth time on 11 December. Again, our next meeting is planned for March. The Gibraltar meetings have been very productive and cordial. We have been able to agree common approaches on a number of key issues and therefore advance some of Gibraltar’s key concerns in our conversations with the EU, for example on the working of its border and citizens’ rights issues.

With regard to the implementation period, we have been clear, as has the Commission in its communication to us, that the implementation period is covered by the withdrawal agreement. Our position is therefore that the withdrawal agreement should cover the whole of the UK territory that is leaving the EU. It is logical that it should apply to Gibraltar, but we recognise that there are concerns about that; some have been raised about specific parts of the EU guidelines. We will continue to press the case in that area that it makes sense. Indeed, with regard to the future relationship, we have been clear from the start of the process that we are negotiating on behalf of the whole UK family. That means that the future relationship, so far as possible, ought to apply to every part of that UK family, while recognising that there are different constitutional relationships between parts of it and the EU.

Finally, on the other overseas territories, there is a JMC, which they all attend, although Gibraltar does so largely in an observing capacity, and which I co-chair with the Foreign Office Minister, Lord Ahmad. That committee met for the third time in November 2017. I have not visited all the overseas territories—to do so would probably require a few years of anybody’s time—but I went to each of the Crown dependencies and Gibraltar last year and I hope to do so again should the opportunity arise next year.

The Chairman: Thank you for that response and for your assiduity in making sure that those interests are not forgotten. Unless the Ministers have anything to add, we should wrap this session now. I very much thank you for your responses and particularly for the new Secretary of State for coming in. Not to patronise, but I hope we have not been too soft in our questioning. I think we have a common objective to get a satisfactory outcome, and the commitment to that has become clear. We will continue to ask the questions, and we hope that this process can reach a satisfactory conclusion for all the people on the island of Ireland and for the wider people who the Minister has identified within the British family. We will debate the issue of the Crown dependencies in our Chamber shortly.

On that grace note, I say to the Ministers: thank you very much for coming. We wish you all the best in your talks on the constitutional and representation arrangements in Northern Ireland, and of course in the Brexit negotiations, because we have a common interest in them all. I invite the Ministers to depart—I am sure they will be ready to do that— and to take their officials and the gallery with them. We have a little bit of remaining formal, deliberative business to conclude, but we are very grateful to you. Thank you.