Bits of the Withdrawal Agreement Protocol on NI/Ire to a have on hand today:
Article 7.1 states: 'Nothing in this Protocol shall prevent the UK from ensuring unfettered market access for goods moving from Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK's internal market.'
Article 7.1 states: 'Nothing in this Protocol shall prevent the UK from ensuring unfettered market access for goods moving from Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK's internal market.'
Perhaps some reiteration of that article today. Then there's Article 15.5 which sets out the procedure if the EU intends to introduce a new rule which would fall within the scope of the backstop. This seems to be the crux of the matter.
Basically the EU, through the Joint Ctte, tells the UK 'hey, we plan to do this.' The Joint Ctte shall hold 'an exchange of views' on the implications of the new rule for the functioning of the backstop within 6 weeks.
The Joint Ctte either adds the new rule to the backstop or if agreement isn't reached will 'examine all further possibilities to maintain the good functioning of this Protocol and take any decision necessary to this effect.'
If there's deadlock (no agreement 'within a reasonable time') the EU is entitled to 'take appropriate remedial measures'. These measures can apply no earlier than the date on which the new rule is implemented in the EU.
Also of relevance is Article 16 which concerns the Specialised Ctte - it can discuss 'any point raised by the EU or the UK that is of relevance to the backstop and gives rise to a difficulty' & make recommendations to the Joint Committee as regards the functioning of the backstop
There's also Article 17 which concerns the Joint consultative working group -it's supposed to meet monthly & ' serve as a forum for the exchange of information and mutual consultation'
So the Specialised Ctte and consulative working group is where you would be doing all your local consultations. Article 17 is v clear on the power of the working group 'The working group shall have no power to take binding decisions' (other than its own rules of procedure.)
I’m struggling to see how, on the basis of all that, HMG can now say it’s unilaterally handing a veto to Stormont on the operation of the backstop. Happy to be enlightened.
Maybe you argue that Art 15.5 gives the U.K. a veto with consequences & the NI Exec feeds into that through the working group & specialised Ctte?
As sort of predicted a kind of indirect veto in regard to Art 15.5 
Perhaps more important - a unilateral commitment for no GB/ NI divergence in the backstop (aka Chequers by the backsdoor)
