I think it’s a question of two sets of mutually exclusive ‘red lines’ (too many words)

One of the achievements of the GFA that did so much to reduce violence was the elimination of a hard border between the Republic and N.Ireland. This was possible because both were also members of the EU, & therefore following a common set of rules for goods & services as part of the Customs Union. It also satisfied unionist fears about N.Ireland being split off from the UK as we were also following the same set of rules & regulations.

The UK’s withdrawal from the EU raises the possibility that the UK will no longer follow the same regulatory regime, and hence the need to restore a border on the island of Ireland to ensure that goods & services crossing it meet Ireland’s regulatory requirements (the EU’s) - as well as vice versa (goods crossing the other way meet whatever new set of rules and regulations we decide to adopt). As I understand the WA that May negotiated there was also a commitment to negotiate a new trade agreement that would match the EU’s standards, with a backstop that in the event that isn’t possible N.Ireland stays with the customs union. Effectively this puts the border in the Irish sea and would create a difference between the rest of the UK & N.Ireland - unacceptable to Unionists.

Johnson’s proposals address Unionist concerns by allowing them a veto on staying within the Customs Union after an initial transition period, and then every 4 years. Ignoring the fact that Stormont has been suspended for three years, that does give a democratic say to an institution that N.Ireland people vote for, but it’s the implications of any such vote for a border that makes it unlikely to be acceptable to Ireland, and therefore the EU. The proposals try to square that particular circle with talk of technology, innovative arrangements and spot checks on premises to avoid the need for a hard border. There is a lot of discussion about how practical and possible these alternative arrangements are, and also whether one aspect (checks at N.Ireland and rest of UK ports and airports for trade between Ireland/N.Ireland and the rest of the UK) don’t in reality mean a border at the Irish Sea, originally a Unionist red line. This is where Johnson hopes to get compromise from the EU - but see below for why other aspects of his proposals may make that less likely.

Another aspect of Johnson’s proposals is that they’ve included statements indicating they do want regulatory divergence. If that is so we can adopt higher standards than the EU, I don’t think anyone has a problem with that, however the ERG and others in the Brexiter wing have always seen this is as an opportunity to score a competitive advantage by reducing regulations and allowing lower standards in a number of areas. Along with the backstop this has been a reason why the ERG have been voting against efforts to leave so I whilst this removal of the commitment to match EU standards (along with the changes to the backstop) may be how Johnson will get the DUP & the ERG onside to his proposals, they probably have the opposite effect in getting acceptance from Ireland and the rest of the EU.

Posted By: Tressells Broadbrush on October 3rd 2019 at 11:00:11

Message Thread

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.

Log in