1) First: Is this a workable solution to avoid a hard border?
The UK recognises that the proposals in its paper cannot qualify as a backstop since the issue of full regulatory alignment is not addressed. I repeat that we need regulatory alignment to avoid a hard border. How do we solve this issue?
2) Second question: Does the UK proposal respect the integrity of the Single Market and the Customs Union?
The UK wants to continue benefiting from our free trade agreements. Does that mean that we will have to reopen, renegotiate or even re-ratify our existing agreements in order to keep the UK in our customs territory after the transition?
The UK tells us that it wants to avoid any control. How does that fit with the requirements of our VAT system?
3) Third question: Is this an all-weather backstop?
The UK calls this arrangement temporary. How does that fit with the need to secure the absence of a hard border in all circumstances?
Moreover, we had agreed with the UK on the principle that public authorities and businesses would need to adapt only once to the new situation created by Brexit – only once. Does the temporary nature of the customs arrangement mean that several adaptations will now be needed?