I beg to move

That this Assembly recognises that the role of road hauliers is critical to successful trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland; notes the concerns raised by the Road Haulage Association (RHA) regarding impacts on business-to-business deliveries, particularly around the sanitary and phytosanitary requirements and the turnover threshold for businesses moving goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland; and calls on the First Minister and the deputy First Minister to pressure the Northern Ireland Office and His Majesty’s Government to meaningfully engage with all stakeholders in order to resolve the negative impact these matters are having on Great Britain to Northern Ireland trade.

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes in which to propose and 10 minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who speak will have five minutes.

Before I start, I am a bit disappointed that neither the First Minister nor the deputy First Minister made themselves available for the debate. As we go through it, we will understand that the issues of trade diversion that we are already beginning to see are significant. Those of us who have the misfortune to sit on the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee, as some who are sitting here do, understand the importance and implication of that word "significant" and what it means.

The road haulage industry is a vital part of the logistics lifeblood of our economy. Without the smooth and timely operation of its services, much of our just-enough, just-in-time supermarket, manufacturing, food and e-commerce services would come to a grinding halt, with massive implications for every sector of life in Northern Ireland. The regular transportation of goods into Northern Ireland from the rest of our nation by ferry and air freight, and in the form of everything from bulk loads to small parcels, is what maintains the so-far-seamless integration and interdependence of our economy with our largest trading partner, the rest of our country, the United Kingdom.

Today, the regular flow of lorries, ferries and aircraft means that whatever we have on supermarket shelves and in our storerooms is the same as that in England, Scotland and Wales and is generally a similar price with similar availability. That so-far-seamless stream has been maintained, but, as of the end of this month, the requirements of the UK internal market scheme — the Green Lane — will come into force. Of those changes, the logistics industry states:

"insufficient clarity has been provided about the new arrangements," and that many companies — public and, more forcefully, private — have said to us that it is likely to disrupt trade. It is already disrupting trade. However, the present Government and the previous one stated, quite categorically, that there are to be no disruptions to trade; there is to be a seamless market and there needs to be a seamless transfer. The previous Conservative Government went so far as to state that there was no border in the Irish Sea, despite every piece of evidence showing otherwise, and that seamless movement across the narrow stretch of water between us will continue. The present Labour Government stated that the combination of mitigations, derogations and — to use Secretary of State, Hilary Benn's, words — the operation of the Windsor framework "in good faith" would see that there was minimal or no disruption.

At the end of this month, however, new arrangements will come into force. A quick glance at the government website will show what the new arrangements are. Some would have us believe that there will be only minimal requirements from the end of the month, when there are few or none now, but there will be four categories at the end of the month. Please bear with me on this, Members. The categories for goods sent by a business in Great Britain to a business in Northern Ireland are: business to consumer, consumer to business, consumer to consumer and business to business. I hope that you are following this.

To support those four categories, up to 27 steps need to be taken in order to send goods and parcels to Northern Ireland from the rest of our nation, along with, for good measure, 10 additional requirements to become an authorised carrier and a requirement to register with the UK internal market scheme. You will be glad to know that I will not be reading out every one of the requirements, but suffice it to say that there are a few of them, and I will bring those up.

Some are quite obvious. They include: carrier name; date of delivery; name and address of sender in Great Britain; name and address of recipient in Northern Ireland; number of items; value, where known; parcel reference tracking number; and a six-digit commodity code, which is generated by the authorised carrier based on the goods description — you will be glad to know that HMRC is working with carriers to support them to produce those commodity codes.

The requirements also include: the name of a representative that the carrier will deliver the parcel to; supporting documents, with, where relevant, a reference number for documents such as certificates and licences that are produced in support of the movement; the numbers of the items in a parcel, which has to be done using the sequential numbers of the items contained in each parcel, for example, "1, 2, 3" — I am glad that HMRC spelled that out. They also include: total value of goods in the parcel; amount invoiced; place of delivery if different from the address of the recipient; gross weight of the parcel, with weight limits of individual packages not to exceed 31·5 kg if the parcel contains more than one item, or 100 kg if it contains a single item; and a goods description of each item. Are you following me so far?

You can only use that lane if you follow the 10 requirements of being an authorised carrier. You must be established in the UK, and if you are not established in Northern Ireland, you must have an indirect customs representative established in Northern Ireland. A customs representative, but bear in mind that that is not a customs requirement — or so we thought.

You must have a high level of control of your operations, including through a system to manage commercial and transport records, and you must be able to demonstrate that you can show them. You must be able to determine whether the parcels should follow the B2C, C2B or C2C arrangements using information from the sender of the parcel. You need to collect and provide that data on things like parcel movements to HMRC, based on commercial information that you receive from the sender, collected from shipment postage as purchased, and also for various other goods and delivery systems. All those data requirements are helpfully laid out on a government website, which I could not access yesterday because it had crashed. You will also be required to work closely with HMRC to combat attempts to use the arrangements for consumer parcels for smuggling. HMRC will work with carriers in preparation for tackling this risk.

All those things that do not happen now are going to happen at the end of this month. I hope that Members have followed all those requirements. Many businesses, including large ones, are incredulous at the layers of bureaucracy and the added administrative burden and cost. Quite frankly, many are not going to bother. This information is never regularly used internally in the United Kingdom, and, for many distributors, it is a burden they are unwilling to carry, given the size of the market here. Indeed, some have indicated that the necessary amounts of information, coupled with the required membership of the new internal market scheme, are more onerous than those required to make customs declarations, which are much more —.

I thank the Member for giving way. His point about the layers and layers of bureaucracy further supports the Road Haulage Association's claim about a 30% drop in goods moved from GB to Northern Ireland. Suppliers are looking at this and saying that it is too burdensome for them to deal with. Does the Member agree that dual market access simply does not exist, because there is not as equitable an arrangement for GB-NI as there is for those entering the single market?

I thank the Member for his Intervention. The economist Esmond Birnie said recently that there is no evidence whatsoever that there has been an increase for dual market access. If we are going to make this work, we need to get rid of those burdens of bureaucracy.

This is the very real challenge of creating significant trade disruption. That is why the First Minister and deputy First Minister, the Economy Minister, if we can prise him from Chicago, and the AERA Minister should be raising these issues. We are less than a month away from the introduction of these restrictions, yet we have not heard from the First Minister and deputy First Minister any words of reassurance or that they are making their concerns known to the Secretary of State or the European Union.

While it is understandable that businesses, including those in the transport sector, do not wish to become involved in this highly charged political debate, the very real implications of these changes need to be understood and explained. The Windsor framework talks about the mitigation of the impact of significant changes. That is why we need to challenge this. Regardless of the partisan position adopted by some on the protocol, there is no doubt that the implications of the implementation of the Windsor framework, in supposedly good faith, will profoundly impact us all. We call on all MLAs to support our motion.

The motion would have been stronger and could have been more focused had the text spelt out that the haulage industry here in the North and others face this friction and disruption as a direct consequence of Brexit. Nonetheless, Sinn Féin will support the motion, because it highlights a particular problem facing that industry.

Allow me to cut to the chase. It must be a cornerstone of our power-sharing Executive's policy to represent the interests of all sectors, industries, local workers and families. The Executive must be constructively engaged in helping to find solutions to any and all of the issues that arise. Ultimate responsibility, however, rests with the British Government and the European Union, specifically the European Commission, to reach agreement on all outstanding issues. We need to take every opportunity to influence positively the position of the British Government, to reset relations with the European Union and to minimise the fallout and disruption that are direct consequences of the imposition of Brexit.

I pay tribute to the Members who tabled today's important and timely motion for debate. This is my first opportunity to do so, so I also pay tribute to Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard on his recent elevation to the House of Lords. Mr Elliott will continue to be a strong advocate for the people of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, and for the people of Northern Ireland, here and in the House of Lords.

The debate gives us all a unique opportunity to come together to send a strong and clear message that we recognise and understand our vital haulage sector's concerns and will all work together to try to find a resolution to outstanding issues. We can, if Members wish, try to rehash and re-debate the Brexit years. We can rehash and re-debate the rigorous implementation years. Indeed, we can criticise our fellow unionists and call them sell-outs, despite having no proposals or achievements of our own. I think that, instead, all the people of Northern Ireland want to see Members in this place work together to get the resolutions that matter to that vital industry and to our economy.

The facts before all Members are very clear. In 2022, Northern Ireland businesses' purchases from the rest of the United Kingdom were worth £11 billion. That was over double the value of purchases from anywhere else, and, indeed, from all other EU markets combined. The UK is by far our biggest market for external sales. Whether people choose to believe that, it is there in black and white. It is vital that we try to continue to find solutions to the issues that the sector faces. As the Member for South Antrim articulated eloquently, a number of issues continue to impact on the sector, so it is vital that we continue to make progress on them. In the short term, it is vital that the Government, the Trader Support Service (TSS) and industry work collaboratively to identify problems, provide clarity and promote the free circulation of goods within our United Kingdom. As Mr Buckley has already outlined, the Road Haulage Association has been clear that, in the past two years, there has been a 30% drop in trade between GB and Northern Ireland. Building on the point that he made, I will say that the Department for the Economy's own assessment, published earlier this year, made clear that the appeal of Northern Ireland's unique market access may be limited by the extent to which traders are able to access the UK internal market.

It is therefore a problem that all Members face. Yes, we can rehash the old political debates, but let us all work together to continue the progress that has been achieved and to get an outcome that works for everyone in Northern Ireland.

We tabled an Amendment to the motion to say that the issue is a direct result of Brexit, but it was not accepted. Alliance never called for trade barriers or asked for Brexit. We campaigned against Brexit. At the time, we highlighted what its consequences would be and said that there would never be a good version of it. Since then, we have worked constantly to help mitigate the consequences of Brexit — the hardest of Brexits — that other parties in the Chamber have helped to deliver.

Nevertheless, Members, we need to look at solutions. It is not helpful to highlight problems continually. Forcing everything to be viewed through the lens of a constitutional position may play to a certain gallery, but it is really not helpful to the businesses that need support from us all. this place works best when we all work together. Everything that we do and implement must stand up, in our law and in international law. Every agreement that we have made should be honoured. Alliance has always called for those agreements to be honoured. We are now in 2024, which is eight years after the referendum. We should be looking at achieving solutions for local businesses. We should be working to support and help local businesses, in which I totally include the road haulage companies.

Steve talked about the Green Lane. His tone of voice made me think that it was Darth Vader talking about some doomsday thing. We have to mitigate and help, rather than dramatising it and making it out to be something that it is not. We welcome the UK's efforts to try to deliver an ambitious sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement with the EU. That would go a long way to removing the barriers for all our road haulage companies. The sooner that that can be agreed, the better for all of us and our economy.

With Brexit, Northern Ireland lost three of the four freedoms from being in the EU. I regret that we lost the freedom of movement and the freedom of finance and services. We must do all in our power to take advantage of the freedom of movement of goods within the EU. It gives us dual market access. I have said several times that there is a window of opportunity, and we need to seize it. Having access does not mean that you get greater business; you have to move into that. We need to look at how we expand and grow our economy here.

I thank the Member very much indeed for giving way. One of the issues that we had recently with, for example, dental amalgam was that a derogation made by the European Union did not have a legal basis. What is the Member's party's position on supporting wider derogation? His party members on the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee have taken a more absolutist route. Do you think that we should be much more open to derogation?

The Member has an extra minute.

The Member talks about concerns and keeps putting forward problems, but they are not highlighted by any of the main official industry bodies. That matter is not being highlighted: if you searched for it, you would not find it.

Look at our local economy. It has been said in the Chamber that trade is down. That is absolutely not true. Trade between GB and Northern Ireland has risen overall. Look at the HMRC figures: the absolute black-and-white figures show that trade between GB and Northern Ireland has increased. It is up by 13% from the most recent figures to 2022 to £14·1 billion. You were selling yourself short at £12 billion; it is £14·1 billion. That is an increase of 13% on the year before. When you break those figures down, you see that motor vehicles are up 34%. If you look at minerals, fuels and oils, you see that those are up 55%. However, there are elements of a decrease: miscellaneous edible preparations are down by 32%. I think that that is the one that you were quoting. You quote one figure, but you do not quote the whole vision of what is happening.

We are seeing a change in our economy. Businesses are just getting on with what businesses do, which is supplying their customers, providing jobs and growing themselves. A realignment is happening in businesses. They are taking advantage of different rules. Our focus should be on growing our economy. We have come from a low base. Our focus should be on getting jobs and creating prosperity for people locally. A local haulage company in Lisburn has exploited the situation. The business is looking to expand. It used to come from GB to Northern Ireland. It then changed its model and went to goods from Europe coming to Northern Ireland, and it has now gone back to GB. It is expanding threefold what it is doing. It has signed a contract to supply Marks and Spencer. That is a great news story.

Will the Member give way?

I have already given way, and I am running out of time.

You cannot have it every way. You chose Brexit, and you got realignment. Businesses will work. We must bring solutions, not problems. We need to provide solutions and help. Business is way ahead of where we are at politically. We need to move forward and help to make life as easy and streamlined as possible. I totally agree with that. There will always be a bit of heartache at the start, but we need to learn from experience and help to make the situation better.

I welcome today's motion and the opportunity to discuss the crucial issue of trade between Britain and Northern Ireland. I particularly welcome the opportunity to recognise the critical role of road hauliers, who play a vital role in our trade ecosystem and have faced multiple challenges since 2016.

It will be said many times in the debate that Britain is the key trading partner for Northern Ireland and rightly so, because, of course, it is. It is in all our interests to ensure that the trading relationships between our two islands remain strong and that we work together across the Chamber to break down barriers to trade on this island, North and South, and with our neighbours across the water. Trade sits at the core of our economic prosperity and of the opportunities in our communities.

Since 2018, trade from Northern Ireland to Britain has risen from £10·6 billion to £12·8 billion, although it has not yet fully recovered to its peak of £14·2 billion in 2016. We said many times that it was always going to be impossible to ensure a completely frictionless Brexit, given the magnitude of that ill-fated decision. Its impact has played out in our communities through the loss of funding, which we discussed on the Floor of the House last week; through our diplomatic relationships, which are only beginning to recover; and through the immediate economic shock and the longer-term hit to our prosperity.

In that context, those who are at the nucleus of our trading relationships, including road hauliers, have been forced to contend with new barriers in an unpredictable and changing landscape. Those workers help to literally keep our economy on the road by bringing opportunities and growth to people around these islands. I take the opportunity to recognise their concerns, as well as the work of the Road Haulage Association in dealing with those concerns. I recognise those who have taken practical and pragmatic approaches and sorted out help for their members in navigating the new arrangements, particularly relating to the Trader Support Service.

We also want to support road hauliers by ensuring that there are no barriers to trade across the island. The all-island economy is crucial in supporting the RHA, because the right policy development can align standards between the North and South where possible to support those movements and navigate relationships on these islands, especially during the next phase of implementation of the deal at the end of September.

We always said that pragmatic politics and sensible solutions would be the way to deal with any barriers to trade, not pulling this place down or stopping Stormont operating. We said that that would not help trade, and we can see that it has not. That approach will be complemented, hopefully, by a new approach from the Government in London who have started to build back relationships with our European neighbours and colleagues. Momentum is building around that approach, and, in fact, it is the only approach to take when dealing with partners across the continent. We need good, close working relationships with all our neighbours. It is in marked contrast to the approach of the previous Government and those who sought to tear up those relationships for the sake of appeasing the most extreme on their flanks. We need the new Government to continue on the path of engagement and dialogue in Europe and to build momentum at pace. That momentum will drive us on a path to trade that is as frictionless as possible. It will also help to ramp up the opportunities that we now have as part of the new set of relationships.

It is always misguided to discuss the real challenges in trade without recognising the unique opportunity that we have now for largely unfettered trade between our islands and with Europe. The goodwill generated by any reset of European relationships must go hand in hand with an acceleration of work in the Department to put in place a dedicated strategy to maximise opportunity, particularly for places like the north-west, which has so much untapped potential.

Colleagues, dealing with those issues requires serious work by the Assembly. It is yet more evidence for why we should be in the Assembly. I hope that we can go forward in that spirit together.

The issues related to the motion far outstretch trade and are faced week in, week out by our road haulage sector and industry. It should come as no surprise to anyone that the legacy of Brexit has caused disruption to the lives of people who live on this island, and the haulage sector is no different. It is inescapable that the decision to leave has both created and worsened issues for the industry. It has been clear for some time that the number of people in the haulage workforce is miles from where it should be. The Road Haulage Association previously suggested that the workforce needed thousands of people to address those labour shortages. If the haulier workforce was stretched before, the implications of changes to immigration requirements post Brexit have only added to the issues that are being faced today. The ending of freedom of movement has meant that those who might have come here and become a key contributor to the industry no longer have that choice.

In addition to labour shortages and as a consequence of the ending of freedom of movement, haulage companies have experienced a skills gap. There are people who are willing to work in the industry, but they are not trained or equipped with the skills that are needed. Good work has been done with labour market partnerships and others to ensure that people who are keen to work in the sector are trained so that there is a supply of skilled people to meet the industry's demand. It is, therefore, imperative that initiatives such as employment academies, run through the councils, and other skill-up programmes are available to give people the licences, tests and other skills needed to begin a career in transport and alleviate the shortages faced by the sector as a result of Brexit. That is an area that has seen investment and must continue to do so.

To conclude, our constituents and every other sector across the island rely on the haulage industry, and it is important that the British Government engage with the EU to straighten out the issues that the transport sector faces.

I also thank the motion's sponsors for tabling it. First, it is important that we acknowledge the importance of road hauliers to Northern Ireland. They are the backbone of the economy, maintaining our supply chains across the United Kingdom and further afield. Our domestic business community relies on them for goods, exports and the movement of materials, and our customer bases depend on them for imports to our shops and businesses. As my colleague Phillip Brett stated, purchases from GB by Northern Ireland businesses amounted to £11 billion in 2022, which was over double the amount procured from the entirety of the EU. That figure, coupled with the pivotal role that our hauliers play in the movement of goods, requires government to listen and act on the concerns raised.

We know that the Road Haulage Association has already been involved in the hauliers' technical discussion group alongside HMRC, Treasury and the Trader Support Service in an effort to address some of the challenges. Outstanding areas of concern include the lack of HMRC guidance on new arrangements for the movement of parcels that are due to come into force at the end of the month; problems being encountered with the Trader Support Service; and a lack of clarity on some products entering Northern Ireland from GB.

The business community often fears uncertainty most. That is something that we are all familiar with, so it is incumbent on us all to work to reduce uncertainty and address legitimate concerns, such as those outlined in the motion. The lack of clarity and guidance on future arrangements for business-to-business deliveries between GB and Northern Ireland is a concern, particularly for those bringing goods in for commercial processing. Indeed, I had a constituent contact me just last night about challenges their business is having, particularly in relation to Amazon. To bring goods into Northern Ireland, they were advised to use an address in GB and post them from there to Northern Ireland. That is a particular concern for that business.

Equally, the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) requirements continue to threaten the resilience of the supply chain of food, plant and animal products. There are continuing bans on some plants, which is unacceptable. There remain barriers to the movement of second-hand farm machinery, with unresolved problems continuing for those who attend trade shows and sales.

The motion also identifies issues with the current turnover threshold for businesses moving goods from GB to Northern Ireland. Whilst the Windsor framework quadrupled the turnover threshold below which companies in processing can move goods in the UK internal market system, some larger businesses remain outside its scope and are therefore excluded. That has been exceptionally frustrating for larger businesses whose sole purpose remains within the United Kingdom, which is a grossly unfair situation in which the Government should intervene.

It is clear that, while there has been an improving picture subsequent to the Windsor framework and the Government's 'Safeguarding the Union' Command Paper, difficulties that require resolution remain across many of those economic sectors. I trust that those who for so long championed the protocol will be willing to identify the ongoing areas of concern and work collectively and constructively to support the likes of the Road Haulage Association to see those concerns satisfactorily addressed.

Whilst I note the commitments that the Secretary of State made on 2 September to take:

"all necessary steps to protect the UK internal market" and make progress on the commitments laid out in the 'Safeguarding the Union' Command Paper, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. Continuing barriers to trade within the UK are unacceptable and undermine our economic integrity. It will be for the new Labour Government to put action behind their commitments on those issues and to prove not only to the House but to the business community and our road hauliers that taking "all necessary steps" to protect our internal market will mean exactly that.

I will start by recognising the importance of road hauliers in our economy. The Alliance Party has long maintained that there is no such thing as a good or sensible Brexit for the UK as a whole and for Northern Ireland in particular. It poses huge challenges for our economy, environment, society and political stability, and it is not a rehash; it is reality. However, we now have to make the most of the hand that we have been dealt.

The particular concerns that the Road Haulage Association raised are not detailed in the motion, and the Member who moved the motion highlighted that insufficient clarity has been provided regarding green lanes and the potential disruption to trade and the bureaucracy that they entail. The truth is that it is impossible to entirely square the circle of the challenges and contradictions that Brexit poses and to completely avoid friction and new bureaucracy. That said, the gaps can be reduced significantly through trust and creativity. We must be open to maximising flexibilities within those special arrangements so long as they meet the tests of protecting the Good Friday Agreement and preserving dual market access and any changes are mutually agreed between the UK and the EU in line with our international legal obligations.

While the Alliance Party supports the special arrangements provided for under the Windsor framework, we want to improve the implementation and support people and businesses in Northern Ireland to adapt. Top of our list is a negotiated veterinary medicines agreement and a grace period for the next phase of goods labelling in the interim. An SPS agreement needs to be bold and ambitious enough to meet UK and Northern Ireland needs; it cannot just be a tick-box exercise. If it is done right, as my colleague said, it will go a long way to address problems. We also want to see improved information and assistance to businesses based in Great Britain regarding trading in Northern Ireland. We know that the trader support scheme needs improvement. It is clunky, but it needs to stay.

Early and enhanced engagement between Northern Ireland's elected representatives, Departments and other stakeholders in the development of EU law will be vital in helping all those who work in that space. We must recognise the concerns of our businesses, but we must also work together to improve the operation of the Windsor framework and ensure that Northern Ireland remains —

A Member:

Will the Member give way?

— a great place to live, work and invest. I am finished.

OK. That was interesting. Thank you, Kate.

No doubt, I will have the opportunity to take interventions during my speech. I do not intend to speak for all that long.

I have spent many minutes, perhaps even hours, on my feet in the Assembly Chamber talking about Brexit, and our post-Brexit arrangements, in many ways, is what brought me into politics in the first place.

There are a few specific points that I want to make, some of which have been covered by Members who spoke previously. I share some of Declan Kearney's insight into the motion. I agree with some of the thrust of the motion, but it is strikingly absent in a few key areas. Nevertheless, in the spirit of goodwill and a collective spirit of making representations and trying to get the best possible outcomes for all our businesses, we will not be dividing on it. I hope that some of the things that are aspired to in the motion are acted upon.

I will make the point that we are able to debate this motion. We are able to allow it to go through, presumably without a Division, because — shock horror! — we have a Northern Ireland Assembly, here and sitting, in which people who are elected to speak for the workers, people and businesses of this society can come to this Chamber and talk about issues facing businesses. Those issues include disruptions to trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. We were not able to do any of that for nearly two years after the 2022 Assembly election. It just goes to show that, if you stand for election, believe in devolution and want to use your mandate, the place to do it is in this Chamber. Collapsing the devolved Government will not help anyone. That point has to be made again and again. I know that it is probably not comfortable for Members across the Chamber to hear that, including Members who very enthusiastically advocated Brexit, but it is true.

To come to the point about GB/NI trade, it is important to say a few things. First, it is not a churlish or facetious thing to say that the process of what is called hard Brexit — ie the UK leaving the single market and customs union — is, by pretty much any standard, the single biggest erection of trade barriers that any modern state has inflicted upon itself. That is the starting point. There is no example since the Second World War — none that I am aware of — of any major economy deciding to effectively impose a form of low-level or quite high-level economic sanctions upon itself, so there will be consequences. The movement of goods will become more difficult. It is also true that the movement of not just goods but services and, indeed, in many ways, unfortunately, possibly people has become more difficult on this island. It is often said that there are new barriers to trade across the Irish Sea — there are some; I wish that that had not happened — but it is also true to say that people who trade in services across the island of Ireland have seen new barriers and new disruptions. There are new regulatory divergences in the present and, potentially, in the future. I would have liked to see those reflected in the motion.

The motion specifically talks about a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement. I would have liked to see the motion be slightly more specific in calling for the new UK Government to be ambitious in negotiating a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement with the EU. I can see the former Economy Minister. I am happy to give way if she wants to correct me, or, perhaps, she does not agree with me. It would be a huge step forward were the UK to agree an ambitious sanitary and phytosanitary agreement and a veterinary agreement with the EU. I presume that she would like to see that because it would radically minimise the barriers that exist between GB and NI as there would be much less disruption.

We need that because it would be impossible to have separate SPS arrangements on the island of Ireland. No serious person who is involved in agri-food thinks that you could operate two different SPS standards on this island. It is impossible, and I am happy to give way to a single MLA who wishes to stand up and tell me how you can operate two different standards for livestock or plant goods on this island, because there is not one. No one, since 2016, has ever produced a credible example.

We have to have alignment across this island. Whether you are the biggest unionist, the biggest nationalist or the biggest pro-European Remainer, it is impracticable otherwise. We simply cannot have it. There are cattle that graze in both Fermanagh and Monaghan. Whether you like it or not, there are, so we cannot operate separate standards. The way in which we need to address that is through greater alignment between the UK and the EU. I hope that, in addition to some of the actions that are outlined in the motion being taken, we will start to see people properly get behind closer alignment between the UK and the EU. Of course, the best possible alignment of all is rejoining the EU. I do not think that that is going to happen, but —

The Member's time is up.

— there is one way to rejoin the EU, and that debate is for another day.

While I support the motion, I am concerned by the way in which it talks around the presenting issue without actually naming it. While hauliers remain concerned about the operation of the Irish Sea border in the round, the issue that they particularly highlight is their concern about the imminent arrival of the Irish Sea parcels border and Irish Sea Green Lane customs border on 1 October.

In engaging with the arrival of those new aspects of the border, it is imperative to understand how they are new. First, we have been living in a grace period since the arrival of the protocol, but in 14 days' time, that grace period ends, and the border comes into effect for the first time for business-to-business parcel movements. Secondly, we are confronted by the imminent interaction of the complexity of the new green lane customs border with the existing red and green lane SPS border and red lane customs border arrangements.

The lives of hauliers are being made impossible by the fact that, notwithstanding the imminent arrival of the Irish Sea parcels border and green lane customs border, on many points of process detail, they remain in the dark. Many months ago, they sat down with the relevant officials and pointed out that, the previous time they sought to introduce a customs border, on 1 January 2021, the hauliers were informed in detail about the new process only the day before. Yet, here we are, just two weeks away, and while they have some information, the hauliers remain in the dark on many key questions of process detail.

In the context of the limited information that has been made available to them, hauliers are particularly disturbed on two levels. The first of those is the failure of the Government and the Trader Support Service to understand that the interaction between the red and green lanes is generating growing complexity, which is entrenching rather than qualifying or removing the sense in which the border is an obstacle. In the real world, lorryloads are mixed and potentially subject to multiple procedures, depending on whether they are red lane SPS, red lane customs, green lane SPS or green lane customs or parcels. As one haulier commented:

"We are creating the most complex set of customs arrangements anywhere in the world, with global customs processes imposed on a small-region economy relying on just-in-time services to keep business moving."

Secondly, the Government seem to think that they can rely on hauliers to extract detailed information from traders moving parcels and negotiating the customs green lane border, which is extraordinarily time-consuming and expensive. The hauliers' point is that if the Government wish to extract large amounts of information from traders, it is the responsibility of the Government to get that information. It is concerning that some traders have decided to stop trading with Northern Ireland because the data requirements are too burdensome.

At the end of January, the DUP leadership told the people of Northern Ireland that it had secured a significant advance on the Windsor framework, which the party had rejected as unacceptable. Gavin Robinson told us, "The green lane is gone", and, on 8 April, he told William Crawley that its removal would begin in the autumn. However, what we see is not the removal of the green lane border but the next stage of its arrival in 14 days' time.

As the final grace periods come to an end, when it comes to the border, nothing from the Windsor framework has changed in any shape or form. It is just the Windsor framework, which, through EU regulations 2023/1231 and 2023/1128, offers the movement of some goods within the UK, GB to NI, on the basis of simplified customs and international SPS border requirements, but does not remove them. That reserves to the EU the right to default to 100% red lane Official Controls Regulation (OCR) if it is not happy.

Implicit in that upholding of the border is the upholding of the integrity of the new legal regime in Northern Ireland and across the island of Ireland as the result of our new colonial status arising from our subjection to legislation made by a foreign Parliament at which we have no representation. That relates to not just one law or 300 Laws but 300 areas of law. October 1 is the day when reality will finally catch up with the current DUP leadership's 'Safeguarding the Union' fantasy. That is when we will discover, as the TUV warned all along, that the emperor had no clothes, and we will see more starkly than ever before that unionists now need to find a new credible, honest, competent, border-literate leadership to deal with the protocol and uphold the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Those in the Chamber who blame Brexit are Brexit deniers. To be clear —

The Member's time is up.

— the problems are associated with the Northern Ireland protocol —

The Member's time is up. Thank you.

— and not with Brexit, which has been denied to the people of Northern Ireland.

Thank you. I call Lord Elliott to make a winding-up speech on the motion. I advise that you have 10 minutes.

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. As always, it has been a useful debate. I will start with two contributions. The first was from Kate Nicholl, and Matthew O'Toole followed that contribution. Both of them talked about the arrangements being mutually agreed between the EU and the UK, and Mr O'Toole highlighted the issue that the UK should be more ambitious about the deal with the EU. I agree totally with both Members. The problem is that it takes two to tango, two to make a deal, and I have witnessed at first hand that, once the UK goes with any sort of deal — maybe the UK is not ambitious enough; I do accept that, Mr O'Toole — the EU rejects it. We did get a deal for human medicines and medical support, and that was very useful and helpful, but we need deals for the likes of animal medicines and medical supplies.

I sometimes think that practical common sense has gone out of the window when we attempt to deal with some of these issues, because there are simplified processes available to deal with them. Very few goods that travel around the world without a barcode or the capability to be tracked electronically. Why can we not make better use of those systems? Hauliers are very adaptable, and they will deal with this. It is a huge, complex matter for them, but they are very adaptable, and they will put measures in place. Fair play to them for doing that. The difficulty is that it will come at a cost to businesses and to the economy and a significant cost to the consumer, because that is who will pay for it in the end. It worries me that some companies have already told customers in GB that they will not send goods to Northern Ireland. It will not be a matter of trying to get the goods: we will not be able to get them at any price, because they will not be sent here. There are bound to be more practical and realistic arrangements that can allow those goods to come to Northern Ireland, whether they remain here or go on to the Republic of Ireland. Trade cannot just stop because of what I would term "minor issues", but people make a big thing out of what should be minor issues.

It is a nonsense. We can bring live animals from countries in the European Union, through Great Britain, into Northern Ireland and, maybe, into the Republic of Ireland, but we cannot bring live animals from GB itself. The animals can travel through GB and come to Northern Ireland, but we cannot bring them in from GB itself. It just does not make sense. The next implementation of the region's Brexit deal, or the Windsor framework deal, as I call it, is coming fast upon us, and the Government have not been realistic enough to deal with it in a practical manner.

I will deal with some other contributions. Mr Aiken talked about the new arrangements coming into operation at the end of the month. He outlined the very simple processes

[Laughter]

that we will all encounter. However, it was not simple. It sounded extremely complicated. If anyone can follow it, apart from Mr Aiken, will they please hold their hand up and explain it to me? I will give way for the rest of my six minutes to listen to a detailed explanation.

Mr Kearney highlighted the fact that it is important to have a collective approach when dealing with Windsor framework issues. We all agree with that, and it has been highlighted by other Members, including Kate Nicholl and David Honeyford. I fully agree with the collective approach. Philip Brett highlighted the importance of getting the deals right. The problem is that we did not get the deals right to start with, and that is why we have problems now. I agree that if we can get it right now, that will be of huge benefit, but we are not. There seems to be a breakdown in communication and a breakdown of deals between the European Union and the UK.

David Honeyford highlighted the need to find solutions, but I notice that he nicely dodged the issue of derogations and whether he supports further derogations. If Mr Honeyford wants to clarify his position, I am more than happy to give way in order to allow him to do so.

Sinéad McLaughlin highlighted the unpredictable landscape that road hauliers have to deal with. That is right, but, as I keep saying, they will adapt to it and manage the situation, but their doing so will come at a huge cost, practically and financially.

Cathal Boylan introduced something different from what other Members raised: labour shortages. Accessing a suitable workforce is something that almost every business in Northern Ireland is finding difficult and a strain.

Gary Middleton talked about the lack of clarity on business-to-business deliveries being a major concern. He also highlighted something that I have focused on for a while, and on which I have attended several meetings, which is the difficulty in bringing second-hand farm machinery into Northern Ireland. There are inspections to check whether there is a wee bit of soil still sitting on a piece of machinery that is to come into Northern Ireland from Ayrshire or Yorkshire.

I have already dealt with Kate Nicholl and Matthew O'Toole's contributions.

Timothy Gaston highlighted how we have been living with some of the issues for some time and said that solutions have just not been implemented. That is right, but we have had time to try to find a solution to this issue, and we have not done so. We have not found one, so there is a real need to up the ante. I genuinely hope that the EU and the UK Government, supported by our Ministers, be that the First Minister and the deputy First Minister or other Ministers, find solutions to many of the issues. Otherwise, businesses and road hauliers are not going to be the final problem that we encounter. Rather, it will be the consumer here in Northern Ireland.

I will finish by repeating something that I said near the start of my contribution: common sense needs to be shown on the issues and in our dealings.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That this Assembly recognises that the role of road hauliers is critical to successful trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland; notes the concerns raised by the Road Haulage Association (RHA) regarding impacts on business-to-business deliveries, particularly around the sanitary and phytosanitary requirements and the turnover threshold for businesses moving goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland; and calls on the First Minister and the deputy First Minister to pressure the Northern Ireland Office and His Majesty’s Government to meaningfully engage with all stakeholders in order to resolve the negative impact these matters are having on Great Britain to Northern Ireland trade.

I ask Members to take their ease until we change the top Table.

(Mr Deputy Speaker [Dr Aiken] in the Chair)