Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

"The EU took advantage" is this really all they have left to fall back on. The big hard bulldog and spitfire British Empire reduced to crying about bullying.

Also fantastic Freudian slip at the end where he says Britain are trying hard to make the deal "worse"

The below (which I got from a consent fact check) summarises it very well.:

Article 18 of the Protocol states that it provides a mechanism to:

“provide the opportunity for democratic consent in Northern Ireland to the continued application of Articles 5 to 10”, namely the Articles on: customs and movement of goods; protection of the UK internal market; technical regulations etc.; VAT and excise; the Single Electricity Market; and State aid.”

The “consent mechanism” can currently be actioned by the Northern Ireland Assembly in one of two ways:

1. Consent can be given by a simple majority vote in the Assembly, and the Protocol will continue to apply. Consent will need to be sought again within four years.
2. If the vote passes with cross community consent, then consent will only need to be sought again after eight years. A vote is classified as having cross community consent if either:
   • a majority of total MLAs and a majority of both nationalist and unionists in attendance, vote in favour (known as “parallel consent”); or
   • 60% of MLAs, including 40% of unionists and 40% of nationalists in attendance, vote in favour (known as a “weighted majority”).

If the consent is not given — it does not receive majority support — the Protocol will cease to apply after two years. In this case, the UK-EU Joint Committee established under the Withdrawal Agreement to oversee the Protocol will make recommendations to the UK and the EU on alternatives to Articles 5–10 of the Protocol for avoiding a hard border and protecting the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. It is then up to the UK and EU to negotiate new arrangements that replace Articles 5–10 but which still meet the objectives of the Protocol, including avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland.

Can 45 MLAs vote to revoke the Protocol, and in doing so “it goes”?

No. The consent mechanism only applies to articles 5–10 of the Protocol. Even if a simple majority votes against giving consent in the December 2024 vote, the remainder of the Protocol still stands (including the non-diminution of rights and maintaining the conditions for North-South cooperation).

So no matter what happens, they can’t go against the Protocol and the GFA.

I wonder what the more knowledgeable contributors to this thread make of the UK's timing here. They seem to me to be playing a dangerous game - with Polish eyes likely to be watching, can the EU afford to be seen as a pushover?

The problem with the Protocol is that it appears to be working too well for NI and the Brexit Govt feel the need to sabotage it. But there is the other theory that they always intended to sabotage it and get rid of it, right from the moment it was signed.

Some EU watchers warn that the UK is playing with fire though and that the EU could even end up suspending the TCA and having the legal right to do so.

There will not be a customs border between Ireland and the EU and they have made that clear

The commission, during the negotiations over Brexit, remained solution focused in the face of UK intransigence. It is quite possible, even with the change of personnel, that they will remain in the same mould. Sefcovic will , presumably, present his document tomorrow. And then the Commission will take on board the objections or comment relating to the on-the-ground difficulties while perhaps ignoring the whole ECJ issue.

But if the UK government are unwilling to engage at that level, and insist on repudiating any role for the ECJ then it is hard to see how the EU can continue in any sort of talks with the UK. I always get the impression that Irish government would be willing to go quite far to reach an agreement with the UK but any suggestion of bypassing the ECJ would not be acceptable to the EU generally.

i am not sure that the court issue in Poland will have any bearing on these talks with the UK. But in so far as they might have, Sefcovics past political positions might suggest that his sympathy lies with the Polish right wing government rather than with the EU.

Much more importantly, those kind of financial opportunities have habitually been exploited by paramilitaries to fund their deeds. Either a free for all that allows an open border getting around customs that would be due, or a hard border that can be smuggled through/around will all help fund extremists whose aims may not be aligned with the general population.

Providing easy funding for extremists won't help anyone.

I think it’s important to state that the consent clauses don’t allow for the UK to disregard the protocol but must agree alternative ways to comply. If they do go ahead and completely renege they will be breaching at least two international agreements. Their thesis that national law trumps conflicting international law while prima facie is plausible, it would be very difficult to negotiate any treaties/agreements with other countries. The EU is a much bigger character and the likes of the US/Australia will be loathe to go behind their backs.

From the beginning of all of this, the UK were convinced that they could brow beat the EU into giving them what they want. Every UK negotiator openly admitted they had not read the GFA.

a country whose agriculture, fushing and manufacturing and financial industry is being decimated doesn’t really have much to bargain with.

If the UK forces the choice of a land border or loss Single market access, Ireland will choose the land border.

Whether things get to that point is entirely in the UKs hands.

Nate