It was the DUP, ERG et al who drove Brexit as a consent-free mystery tour.

That ended up with the Protocol because they refused to listen to anyone else's concerns about Brexit or easing its impact.

Bit rich for Jeffrey to now complain about Unionists not being listened to. 1/ Sir Jeffrey, DUP, ERG, L Trimble et al insisted Brexit did not need democratic consent of people in NI or any degree of cross-community support.

They cheered when UK Supreme Court said Brexit against NI democratic wish did not breach "consent" principle of GFA. 2/

Some politicians & commentators now back to specious refrain from their Backstop opposition that Protocol breaks GFA.
Points made = Lord Trimble says so; consent; constitutional status.
Arguments contradict own previous lines & ignore Protocol as result of own Brexit stances. 1/ Same L Trimble:
•denied Brexit implications for GFA saying GFA was "purely political & constitutional" not about economics or trade which Brexit is about.
•said NI consent not needed for Brexit &
•devolved consent not needed for terms or outcome of UK-EU negotiations 2/

22 years ago today people of all traditions voted for #GFA.
It stands because it was uniquely validated North & South (h/t John Hume).
DUP opposed it.

Still, like rest of us, they & followers were guaranteed rights under GFA.

But the DUP do not have rights over it. 1/ Agitated against #GFA even after its validation but DUP now self-ordain as arbiters of GFA precepts.
Using twisted lines to conflate/confuse discrete "consent" provisions in GFA re Brexit, backstop & protocol.
Now arrogating over "birthright" tenet on citizenship choice. 2/

DUP current lines re Brexit, consent, democracy & GFA need more than pinch of truthful salt added.

•DUP opposed GFA (even after referendum consent).
•DUP pushed "Leave" rubbishing all concerns re GFA impacts.
•DUP insist Brexit to be imposed on NI against public choice. 1/. •DUP opposed all calls for parliamentary oversight of Brexit negotiations
•DUP rejected case for devolved consent on Brexit terms even if devolved powers (Scotland/Wales) affected
•DUP blasted Miller decision by SupCourt but cheered rulings on Brexit not engaging consent 2/

1) Frustating when issues of "consent" and especially "parallel consent" under GFA are being misrepresented by some & misinterpreted by others including "experts" & some journalists.
It is *not* true that the principle of parallel consent applies to all decisions under the GFA. 2) "Parallel consent" is one of two measures of cross-community support in the Assembly.
The Agreement specified certain decisions which require cross-community support. Namely:
elections of speaker & FM&dFM (jointly), standing orders, programme of government & budgets.

•GFA was not just "agreement between two traditions in NI" but a democratic covenant between two traditions in Ireland, unquestionably endorsed by referendum and directly reflected in the Irish constitution.
•Backstop to uphold its precepts & purposes is not anti-democratic. 1/

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1163531548999802881

The specious line that GFA neither depends on or requires a particular customs or regulatory regime ignores fact that removal of customs border etc not only predated Agreement but ceasefires. Single market & CU prospect was plank in JH's case in Hume-Adams even in '87-8. 2/

Anti-backstoppers putting big weight on par 50 Dec'17 EU-UK Report. NB It applies to any *new* regulatory divergence in future. Terms actually covered in Juncker-Tusk letter of 14 Jan ie EU won't *impose* new regs & (unlike detractors) truly respect terms of Strands 1 & 2. /1 Anti-backstoppers claiming par 50 needs consent for backstop itself.
Not so!
Brazen given Brexiters' previous lines cheering UKSC ruling neither Brexit nor its treaty terms are subject to NI consent.
Existing ambit of Strands 1 & 2 protected by backstop, jeopardised without. /2

As one involved in negotiation of #GFA (dealing with all parties not just one) I have to refute this misconstrued "Fundamental" @TomMcTague & L Bew. Anxious about "top-down imposition" & GFA's delicacy? Why blindly uphold imposing convulsive Brexit on NI that voted Remain? /1

https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1088766281824813056

I would not pretend the backstop fully protects #GFA. (It is mitigation/insurance & wouldn't make up existing GFA deficits eg Rights). But given the impulses & ignorance shown in London's chaotic approaches to date noone should pretend that GFA would be upheld without it. /2

It might have been more welcome that UK govt finally look to GFA strands for Brexit answers if their paper was not so selective & distortive about "safeguarding". A pander paper slanted to curb Strand 2 potential, contort Strand 1 workings & ignore Strand 3 (&2) possibilities. If a main point of paper is to show potential inputs for NI Exec & if serious about not altering the remit of NSMC, why not highlight par 17 of Strand 2? This would enable NI Exec views agreed in NSMC to be represented appropriately at relevant EU meetings. A unique advantage.

Powerful, moving #GreatBritishInjustice @StephenNolan exposes crushing cruelty to #MaguireSeven. Asked by Gerry & Sarah Conlon, I got TBlair to agree to fully apologise & assert total innocence of #GuildfordFour & Maguires in 2005. But events even cheated them on its form. 1/ Downing St spinners had BBC/Sky News lead at midnight on apology due during PMQs (w Maguires & GerryConlon in gallery). Speaker then told Eddie McGrady he couldn't call him for a Q as LibDems protesting protocol! PM apology then given to camera in Commons office not Despatch Box.

Some reflections on #SIF. When I was dFM DTrimble proposed fund for FMdFM "patronage" re projects especially "hotspots". I refused "riot-driven slush fund" & pointed to proper example of ExecutiveProgrammeFunds. Strongly believe NICS then would have resisted on due grounds too.

https://twitter.com/PPR_Org/status/1060496148463566849

ExecProgFund allocations decided by Executive w NIAssembly scrutiny, encouraged innovation & cross-cutting, supported partnership, reached social need & channeled via relevant depts for accountability etc. Plan was to grow EPFs inc Social Inclusion/Community Regeneration Fund.