Thread by @GeorgePeretzQC

A good summary. But it misses a point that, I think, has caused a lot of trouble: the smoke-and-mirrors drafting of the Protocol.

https://twitter.com/UKandEU/status/1384503592132898816

The problem (to use Stephen Weatherill’s terminology) is the disconnect between what the Protocol *says* (at least on a casual reading) and what it *does* (on a detailed reading that looks carefully at the whole text).

This, on customs, the Protocol *says* that NI remains part of the UK customs territory, but what it actually *does* is to apply the whole of the EU Customs Code to imports into NI (incl. imports from GB), with a carve-out for the level of tariffs (but not checks) on some goods.

(The *says* bit was rather helpful to the current government, as it was prohibited by the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Act 2018 from entering into any agreement that put NI into the EU customs territory.)

And that carve-out itself starts off as appearing to apply generally, until you realise that what is drafted as an exception to the carve-out is in fact the general rule (ie that tariffs will apply) unless goods are shown to fall in a class of “not at risk” goods.

The Protocol also *says* that it respects NI’s place in the UK internal market - a point Johnson seizes on. bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northe…

But what it *does* is to create a series of precise ways in which NI forms part of the EU regulatory area for goods, while *saying* this about NI’s place in the UK.

NB that the “Nothing ... shall prevent” language in (1) applies only to NI to GB movements; the language applying to GB to NI movements (in (2)) is all much flabbier (and has to fit around “applicable legislation”).

So we can (rightly) mock Johnson for his dishonest presentation of the Protocol (he, after all, will have been told in detail what it did, as well as what it said).

https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1384412288749379586

But at least some of the dishonesty is to be found in the text of the Protocol itself. For which the EU is also responsible (though it presumably had no idea of the extent to which Johnson would pile on additional dishonesty).