data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ea63d/ea63d0b047a19e0f6a5287869025cbf8950392c7" alt=""
It is intended to show that a 'hard border' is not just determined by its visibility. And this is before we even touch on NTBs etc.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/17c18/17c18998f67a1f9a5c9d03895c4826bc2a81d9f8" alt=""
It is primarily a means of enhancing efficiency.
It cannot make a hard border 'frictionless'.
It requires physical infrastructure. It does not obviate the need for inspections etc
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5dbae/5dbae7b8dc906bd6b29e5dbf701b958418acea42" alt=""
IMO the draft Protocol is narrow interpretation of Joint Report.
UK in a CU wd be minimum to keep E/W open as possible.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/483cb/483cb79288e1ee906ee436fa8a3d0ea2806ef5a0" alt=""
Any solution relies on a clear distinction between constitutional/political borders & economic/regulatory ones.
[Each of those slides is deliberately simple but let me know of any glaring errors!]