I don't think it's responsible for the media to print the comments of anyone calling for the abolition of the Northern Ireland Protocol without at least roughly sketching out what should replace it.
The NIP is a compromise in damage mitigation.
It's not meant to be make anyone happy. It was an attempt to to find a balance between everyone's unhappiness that preserves the peace, the Union and the Single Market.
An effort the PM and his boosters celebrated at the time.
It's not meant to be make anyone happy. It was an attempt to to find a balance between everyone's unhappiness that preserves the peace, the Union and the Single Market.
An effort the PM and his boosters celebrated at the time.
The reason it was adopted instead of any of the other options is that everything else was even more politically unacceptable.
Remaining in the SM/CU - No for UK
No Border at all - No for EU
Border between Ireland/EU - No for EU/Ireland
Border on the Island - No for everyone
Remaining in the SM/CU - No for UK
No Border at all - No for EU
Border between Ireland/EU - No for EU/Ireland
Border on the Island - No for everyone
If someone advocates for an abolition of the protocol, they need to explain which of the above should replace it... and why the politics that precluded that no longer apply.
If their analysis is that people they don't like should just change position... that's telling.
If their analysis is that people they don't like should just change position... that's telling.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
