It's hard to keep up with the swirling disarray in British government circles. No sooner has Brexit Johnson returned to No 10 with his 'over-ready' deal signed and sealed we learn that he is planning to 'get round' the NI protocol part of it. This is the deal that he first of all persuaded the House of Commons to endorse, with a customs and regulatory border down the Irish sea, before telling the DUP that there won't be any checks on goods going either way.
The PM is in the strange, perhaps unique, position of being transparently untrustworthy. He may as well get the word 'devious' tattooed across his forehead. Everybody knew he was dishonest in his personal and political life, but he is now cementing his reputation for it on the international stage.
Yesterday we learned via Tim Shipman on The Sunday Times that the PM is secretly trying to figure out ways to circumvent the checks he said would not be needed. Get it?
Don't worry if you don't follow the twists and turns, it will no doubt be different next week anyway. Perhaps we will be able to experiment with those 'maximum facilitations' that Greg Hands and Nicky Morgan dreamed up last year. Or not, as the case may be. Some people think they might work, others are not convinced including Katy Hayward, a Reader at Queen's University, Belfast.
There are reports that the government was planning to use the 'good faith' provision in the agreement to force Brussels to allow minimal and light touch checks. This will now be greeted with incredulity in Brussels if anyone ever dares to suggest it.
The PM can't manage more than four pages of A4 in a stint so most of the near 600 page WA is a mystery to the famously idle Johnson. He now needs a lot of smart-arsed lawyers to avoid the consequences of his own failure to read and comprehend the fine print. The 'great deal' is apparently not that great after all.
Don't worry if you don't follow the twists and turns, it will no doubt be different next week anyway. Perhaps we will be able to experiment with those 'maximum facilitations' that Greg Hands and Nicky Morgan dreamed up last year. Or not, as the case may be. Some people think they might work, others are not convinced including Katy Hayward, a Reader at Queen's University, Belfast.
There are reports that the government was planning to use the 'good faith' provision in the agreement to force Brussels to allow minimal and light touch checks. This will now be greeted with incredulity in Brussels if anyone ever dares to suggest it.
The PM can't manage more than four pages of A4 in a stint so most of the near 600 page WA is a mystery to the famously idle Johnson. He now needs a lot of smart-arsed lawyers to avoid the consequences of his own failure to read and comprehend the fine print. The 'great deal' is apparently not that great after all.
This is the problem with Johnson. Something promised to NI businessmen on camera while looking intoxicated, swaying slightly and holding a glass is more important to him than a legally binding obligation in an international treaty. He doesn't understand things but can't admit to it.
Seriously though, it's not funny. The EU will see this as acting in very bad faith. International agreements between nation states and lodged with the UN are not like a promissory note to your bookmaker or a pledge to a probation officer to keep off the weed. Normally both sides try to scrupulously honour the commitments made. The ink is still wet on the WA and we are repudiating parts of it.
It is asking for trouble. The EU are going to demand ever more detailed provisions and robust guarantees in the trade talks, especially on the LPF issue.
Seriously though, it's not funny. The EU will see this as acting in very bad faith. International agreements between nation states and lodged with the UN are not like a promissory note to your bookmaker or a pledge to a probation officer to keep off the weed. Normally both sides try to scrupulously honour the commitments made. The ink is still wet on the WA and we are repudiating parts of it.
It is asking for trouble. The EU are going to demand ever more detailed provisions and robust guarantees in the trade talks, especially on the LPF issue.
The reason for Braverman's appointment as Attorney General is now clear, she is more compliant and likely to be not so scrupulous or accommodating as Brexiteer Geoffrey Cox - another child of the revolution to be consumed. She will interpret our legal obligations flexibly and if Johnson doesn't like them she will bend them a bit more. Simple.
Or is it? You might be interested in this legal blog by Professor Steve Peers: How do you solve a problem like Suella? The legal aspects of breach and termination of the withdrawal agreement. We might be getting ahead of ourselves but it's worth looking at the legal redress the EU has if we fail to live up to our obligations (Hint; there's a lot).
The Irish border was dismissed as inconsequential during the referendum campaign but is now creeping towards the top of the list of the most intractable problems if it's not there already.
We are already a laughing stock internationally, with an issue of Der Spiegel showing Boris Johnson on the front cover morphed into Alfred E Newman of Mad magazine. It's humiliating. But now we're in danger of becoming a pariah, untrustworthy, unreliable and capricious.
Not a nation that you would want to do business with.
The government would do well to heed this warning from a former Irish ambassador to the EU Bobby McDonagh:
There is a lot of pro-Irish backing for the GFA in Congress. A US-UK free trade deal will never get ratified unless the provisions of the WA are met to the satisfaction of the Ireland, who have surely never been in a stronger position vis-à-vis the UK.If UK Gov were to renege on its legal obligations under Brexit Withdrawal Agreement to protect Good Friday Agreement it would have many consequences. One would be the end of any prospect of a 🇬🇧-🇺🇸 trade deal— Bobby McDonagh (@BobbyMcDonagh1) February 23, 2020
Peter Foster looks at what the UK can do to minimise checks in a tweet. He makes some good points but the most telling is in comments from Michel Barnier when he was trying to sell the original backstop idea to a sceptical Theresa May way back in October 2018. Barnier is mentioned in the Irish Times:
"In an attempt to bridge the gap between it and the UK, the EU Brexit taskforce has moved on two fronts – on the one hand chief negotiator Michel Barnier has sought over recent weeks to minimise the intrusiveness of regulatory checks between the UK and Northern Ireland."
So while EU sources are now suggesting 90-95% of goods going from GB-NI will face checks, Britain believes it will be much less - and in the end it will probably be less, as decided by the joint committee when it is finally set up. But it won't be zero - even 50% is still a lot of checks but they will be as unobtrusive as possible. The fact that the government is trying to circumvent any checks show how seriously they are taking the problem for the NI economy.
Onto other matters, I note Brexit Johnson's former cabinet colleague David Davis, with whom he performed a choreographed resignation in July 2018, launches an attack on the PM in the pages of The Daily Mail over the Huawei decision. He is saying out loud no more than a lot of other MPs on the right of the party are saying in private. Davis calls it "the most devastating security blunder since MI6 hired Philby, Blunt and Burgess". No word mincing there then.
And Davis also thinks that slashing tax relief for pension contributions of higher rate taxpayers would be a "moral disgrace".
Apart from these back bench rumblings, The Daily Mail appears to be changing its political stance. I wonder if the constant attacks on the press might not be having an impact in Fleet Street? Even The Sun does not seem so keen on Johnson any more. Only The Telegraph and The Express are still unabashed supporters of the government.
The honeymoon looks to be coming to an end.
