they can't Jim

the back stop is there to protect the integrity of the single market and the indivisible four freedoms, which is the be all and end all for the EU. It's what the EU is.

The back stop is necessary because the alternatives are: (a) hard border
(b) an open border through which the EU cannot control inward flow of inferior and/or cheaper goods to the detriment of their single market participants.

The EU is not going to let (b) happen. We shouldn't want it to happen either? ...

You can avoid (b) through a trade agreement that guarantees protection for the single market (as an aside, I don't see how that can be achieved without being in a full customs union). That's what the withdrawal agreement and then the backstop would largely achieve, if imperfectly and with little benefit for the UK.

But you cannot be in a position where one party simply decides that it has had enough and wants to walk away and either leave the border open or create a hard border.

If everyone is of one mind that we cannot have a hard border, you must have a backstop. If you don't want a backstop, you need to accept that it means a hard border and risking the GFA and peace in NI.

You could easily time limit a backstop if you're happy to put in a hard border. No-one is.

Posted By: CWC, Jan 22, 17:54:30