Thread by @JohnOBrennan2

A brief comment on the Johnson government’s new Brexit ‘offer’ to the EU. The sections on Ireland are replete with untruths, or claims that sit very uneasily with what London knows to be the reality of EU rules on CU/SM. 1/

The document claims that ‘our proposal is centered on our commitment to find solutions which are compatible with the Belfast Agreement’. In reality, the proposal would tear the Agreement to shreds, pulverize inter-communal relations & toxify relationship between Dub and London.2/

3/The document claims to confirm ‘our (UK) commitment to long-standing areas of UK-Ireland collaboration’. In reality, the proposal would see vast divergence between Ireland/UK by introduction of a hard border & making all forms of exchange much more difficult than under GFA. 3/

Proposal deliberately misleading in suggesting the potential creation of ‘all-island regulatory zone on the island of Ireland, covering all goods including Agrifood’. In reality UK has proposed a much more truncated zone around (time limited) SPS.
That is v far from ALL goods.4/

There is a very duplicitous insertion of what Cummings/Johnson term ‘consent’, as a mechanism for adding legitimacy to the process in NI. This is deliberately framed to give the impression it can be compared to the consent mechanism embedded in GFA.
It cannot so be compared. 5/

Note also the divergence between interpretations of what constitutes democracy. In NI, consent must be secured from the people’s reps in executive and assembly. For rest of UK, Parliament is a ‘dead Parliament’ and a ‘disgrace’.
Thus only the 2016 referendum can guide action. 6/

This clause also hands an effective veto to the DUP on any divergence from ‘2 plus 4 model’. The notion of consent is reduced to acquiring the consent of the DUP rather than the consent of both communities (in a divided society governed by an international agreement.) 7/

Note than the fifth point/paragraph directly contradicts the first. NI cannot be outside of the EU customs union after the transition period. If it is, that’s the end of the backstop.
It is also fundamentally at odds with the provision for all-island bodies in the GFA. 8/

The notion that Johnson’s government is committed to the protection of the Good Friday Agreement is blown apart by the different ways in which the proposal damages or even potentially sunders the delicately woven tapestries of Strand one, two, three of GFA. All 3 are damaged.
9/

As I suggested last night, when @pmdfoster (very accurately) described the contents of the proposal, this is in no way a good faith offer. Rather, it is the fraudulent prospectus of Mr Johnson, a political eunuch masquerading as a Caesar, engineered for rejection by EU. 10/

Today’s ‘offer’ reminds us why backstop IS necessary. UK proposals either directly threaten functioning of cross-border bodies or broader operation of GFA, or are so vague that they require EU to take them on trust.
This is a very (very) long way from needed landing zone. 11/

Excellent @ManufacturingNI weighs in on what the ‘offer’ means for NI businesses: decimation for some (agri, esp) and steep barriers to trade for other sectors. SME sector facing huge problems of scale/complexity.
Not to mention psychological impact on border communities. 12/

This is the conclusion of @ManufacturingNI :
‘....worse than No Deal for Northern Ireland’.
13/

For those disappointed by Johnson government’s ‘offer’, imp. to understand that he is in NO position to do anything but act as a ‘spoiler’ right now. He has no majority, cannot call a GE, nor can he avoid having to implement the Benn Act, without falling foul of UK Courts. 14/

For those who want a different interpretation of the Johnson government’s proposal, @AndrewDuffEU provides a much more positive reading of today’s developments and where they might lead to. 15/