UK NI 'backstop' proposal problematic on many levels - a short thread.
1.
ft.com/content/8834c2… via @financialtimes
1.
ft.com/content/8834c2… via @financialtimes
According to the FT: “Under the proposal, if technology for a new customs arrangement is not ready by the end of the post-Brexit transition period in January 2021, the entire UK will continue to apply the EU’s common external tariff.” 2.
But NI wd need to stay aligned w EU regulations too - & either UK as a whole too (but EU unlikely to agree) or else accept a border in the Irish Sea. 3.
UK ‘backstop’ ideas imply ‘max fac’ or other wheezes can solve Irish border, they can’t. Assumes EU wd accept UK as temporary customs union member – but why wd they? And, as Barnier says, backstop cd commit EU to a trade agreement (here on temp CU) in advance of trade talks 4.
It assumes EU wd buy into unicorn or magic technology one day solving the problem (which it won’t). And, crucially, EU wd then surely have a veto on whether the technology was ever adequate but how cd that work politically w UK? 5.
And if EU has to agree technology in future is viable, then either UK stays in customs union or leaves customs union & abrogates backstop deal claiming it has the technology while EU disagrees. 6.
& while UK is temporarily in the customs union, it can’t finalise trade deals (except in services – good luck). & it won’t have a clear end date for when it will leave customs union. Good luck too doing trade talks on that basis. In conclusion - June summit row still beckons 7.
