Oh look, UK government ministers once again inciting divisions in Northern Ireland in preference to admitting what they signed. In July, the most sensitive month for Northern Ireland politics. irishtimes.com/opinion/we-mus…
Which of the 300-plus EU regulations that the UK government committed by treaty to apply in Northern Ireland do ministers now wish in fact not to apply? And when precisely were these assumptions and expectations laid out?
Those operating in good faith do not constantly undermine and deny the agreement they signed. Or indeed regularly write articles saying someone else is to blame. Indeed this article will be viewed by those on the other side as emotional blackmail.
It all happens because the UK signed a treaty to make it happen. Without cross community consent, indeed specifically at the time of signing with the same opposition we have now.
Fine, you can protect both east west and north south borders by closer alignment. But you wanted to put hard Brexit first. So now you have to choose, not blame others. But of course blaming others is easier.
Sounds oh so simple. But not if you signed a treaty which specifically went against this.
The closing statement might have more credibility if it hadn't been clear for 21 months that a British hard Brexit was the priority and Northern Ireland at least third behind that and a US trade deal. And that the UK won't in fact walk away.
In short, another article claiming to be about seeking solutions but actually about boosting support among Brexit supporters at whatever the cost to Northern Ireland. Basically, appalling, but no longer surprising.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A useful summary from @MESandbu of the new globalisation, and in particular the move towards what I call 'conditional trade' - where imports of for example food may have to meet the same conditions as domestic production. ft.com/content/7b844d…
An article referenced, not paywalled, on the new globalisation. I think we are likely to see a more complex picture, with outright protectionism and subsidies in some areas, and free flows of trade in others. And supply chains weaving around restrictions. project-syndicate.org/commentary/fut…
In a sense the UK government's confusion over trade is actually a good representation of the globalisation debate in 2021. Talking free trade while increasing barriers, combining regulatory autonomy with the rules of trade partners, and introducing animal welfare and similar.
The Nissan story is just as important to Brexit as Northern Ireland. It has become the emblem of the red wall and Brexit. Which means it must survive. And given a need to export to the EU that means the UK government can't afford to provoke a trade conflict. (clip from Tortoise)
As with Northern Ireland, the government is going to talk tough with the EU, and make bold claims on divergence. There will be trade deals. But ultimately gravity and the pull of a large market next door will win.
For the time being the rough equilibrium is the UK government talking tough re. the EU and hoping their supporters don't notice the lack of significant divergence. But that still doesn't feel terribly sustainable in the long term.
What just happened on the Northern Ireland protocol is what keeps happening and will keep happening because it is the least bad mutual outcome. The UK did not get anywhere with a renegotiation on fundamentals and the EU had to flex on some specific issues.
The UK government believes that even without alignment there should be no checks on goods movements between UK and EU via Northern Ireland, but the EU and US disagree and will continue to do so. Two years of repeated attempts by the Johnson government have got nowhere.
There's no real pressure on the UK to move away from a failed position as the media and influential Brexit supporters are quite happy to blame the May administration and / or the EU for Johnson's failure. Handy really.
Just for a change, a good news story about a UK negotiating success in Europe. The European voluntary standards organisations CEN and CENELEC have agreed that BSI can continue to be a full member and will change their statutes accordingly. linkedin.com/posts/bsi-nati…
It was not at all a given that BSI could remain part of the European standards framework given existing rules and doubts about UK policy intentions. Indeed I was told here by a few usual Brexit suspects that there was no way the EU would agree (though these aren't EU bodies).
So how did the BSI achieve what the UK government apparently couldn't and get what they wanted in Europe? A clear objective agreed internally, extensive engagement, trust-building, and persistence. Starting in the days after the referendum.