Not often I read something @Telegraph that I feel has to be taken on but Vernon Bogdanor’s opinion today is one such piece. Bogdanor is one of the leading scholars of the British Constitution & has an in-depth knowledge of Irish history so there are no excuses @KingsCollegeLon
1. His assertion that the Northern Ireland Protocol has fallen at the first whiff of grapeshot is evidence of a scholar rushing to judgement just 4 weeks into the implementation of a complex set of legal provisions @BrigidLaffan
2. He rightly identifies problems the Protocol causes for GB-Northern Ireland economic exchange but argues that any flexibility EU would agree to would not solve the problem because the problem for him is constitutional. For him the Protocol cannot work @BrigidLaffan
3. He suggests an escape route-he suggests that in tandem with the Assembly elections the Assembly could insist on bringing forward the consent mechanism from 2024 to 2022. In other words next year. @BrigidLaffan
4. He argues that the Protocol is a nationalist solution forgetting that a majority of the Northern Irish electorate voted against Brexit. The Protocol is a direct result of the kind of Brexit favoured by London-there the responsibility lies @BrigidLaffan
5. He essentially favours a land border on island of Ireland knowing what that land border represents & the number of crossings-he knows it & still thinks it is an acceptable solution. @BrigidLaffan
6. We really need to remember what a visible border represented & what it looked like before the GFA. Yes it was a militarised border with big installations. See below @BrigidLaffan
7 Bogdanor suggests that it is a disreputable argument to suggest that a return to a visible border might lead to violence-it would be very destabilising & dangerous.Peoplewho live on the border would not consent to it. Look at Brexit vote-solid blue on the border @BrigidLaffan
8. Bogdanor argues that checks on the land border would be less onerous to administer than checks on the Irish Sea. People live on land not at sea. This is truly shocking frim someone of Bogdanor’s standing. @BrigidLaffan
9. He ends by saying ‘Today’s argument is about the cohesion of the kingdom’- nothing about stability & peace on island of Ireland. Nothing about the UK’s responsibility to ensure that Brexit does not harm its neighbours. @BrigidLaffan
10. Breixt is not of Ireland’s making. GB especially England needs to have some sensitivity to the history of the island & to their historical responsibility for the way U.K. exercised power in Ireland. @BrigidLaffan
11.This is a truly disreputable piece from someone who writes from a knowledge not ignorance. Bogdanor places constitutional cohesion above stability of the most troubled part of his UK. Well Ireland will not consent to being collateral damage in England’s search for sovereignty
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Am prompted to do this 🧵 following @BEERG sharing of Gove 19 April’16 speech, @kevinhorourke observation on interests & ideas & @CER_Grant observation that historians will ponder the weakness of economic interests in Brexit negs at @InstituteGC yesterday @BrigidLaffan
1. Seems to me that @BorisJohnson has delivered on the @michaelgove 2016 speech in one important sense-not the sunny uplands of Brexit but the working out of what Brexit was to this clique who drove the Leave campaign @BrigidLaffan
2. That was a total rejection of the #EU model of internationalisation, its governance regimes, institutions, regulatory frameworks, its ideals & the political, economic & legal order it represents. @BrigidLaffan
Extensive U.K. discussion on #EU27 approach to #Brexit. Began with @anandMenon1 & @jillongovt who suggested 1 reason for hard Brexit is ‘defensive’ EU. Now @Mij_Europe has a poll offering the ‘defensive’ option. @NashSGC has thread explaining why EU defensive-SM. @BrigidLaffan
1. EU must defend the gains of integration both polity & market power. This is not ‘defensive’ as in anxious but defending achievements @BrigidLaffan
2. Membership has to matter or why would states submit to mutual vulnerability. If the #Brexit argument is to throw off constraint why would the 27 allow an imbalance between rights & obligations especially for a large state @BrigidLaffan
1. Unity stemmed from existential nature of #Brexit-first country to leave EU, a vote of no confidence in the Union & the hard Brexiteers led by Farage wanted destruction of the Union @BrigidLaffan
2. #EU27 had to protect the polity & the market against UK’s departure. Membership has to matter-if a former member could retain lots of rights while outside the club the internal equilibrium of the Union would be jeopardised. @BrigidLaffan
Thread on EU too defensive claim from @anandMenon1 & @jillongovt in #Brexit negs. EU27 had something to defend & continues to have. What. 1. The share polity, Union. 2. Collective achievements-SM & shared policies. 3. Quality of membership. @BrigidLaffan
2. U.K. a was champion of outouts/opt ins. Had bespoke membership but that was not enough to keep UK in. Post ref-U.K. never set out a clear landing zone for post membership relationship that had worked through the trade-offs. @BrigidLaffan
3. U.K. set down redlines on SM, CU & Court that narrowed the possible deal that EU could agree without undermining its core principles & balance of rights & obligations which is critical to future of EU. @BrigidLaffan
Very pessimistic @TheEconomist editorial on #EU this issue. Fully agree with the failings/challenges identified but editorial distorts the Union’s history in two ways. 1. Says that EU has had a ‘sense of direction’ in the past & this time EU has lost its way. @BrigidLaffan
1. At the end of the 1970s following the two oil crises, EU had many common problems but no agreement on direction/solutions. Found that direction in SEA & single market. In fact @TheEconomist was also very concerned by EU capacity to govern. @BrigidLaffan
2. Treaty change which the editorial suggests was continuous was in fact episodic. First major treaty change post Rome took almost 30 years-treaty change not the EU norm for much of its history. We should expect treaty change to be episodic. @BrigidLaffan
Short thread on Irish election #GE2020 for my non-Irish followers. 1. #FF the party that informed Peter Mair’s ‘cartel party’ will not be a cartel party again. It will never regain its pre-crash standing. 2. SF emerged as the largest party in vote terms. @BrigidLaffan
The performance of #SF was a surprise given their 2019 EP & local elections performance but they managed to frame a manifesto that really resonated with the electorate @BrigidLaffan
The election was not about BREXIT but domestic issues-housing & health were the top two. Irish voters not concerned about jobs or the economy for the first time in 10 years. @BrigidLaffan