Rumour has it that Boris Johnson has done a deal with the EU.
The whole of the UK will, supposedly, be leaving the EU. Except, and this is the most almighty except, there will be a border down the Irish* Sea. Northern Ireland will stay in the Customs Union and Single Market and some form of words will be used to suggest otherwise.
Of course, this interpretation of what is being discussed in Brussels may be hopelessly wrong: all that is being leaked may be deliberately misleading. But suppose it isn't. Suppose Johnson is trying to replicate, in his own mind only, the achievement of the Good Friday Agreement that let those who wanted to think they lived in a united Ireland think they did, whilst allowing those who continued to think the six counties were part of the UK persist in that belief as well.
Here Johnson will claim we've all left the EU.
Except Northern Ireland will have some different rules that happen to align exactly with those of the EU which the UK will happen, perchance, to operate on its behalf.
Let's ignore £1 billion spent to avoid this by 'buying' the DUP.
And three wasted years as they objected to any Irish sea border.
And the claim by the ERG that this could never be agreed to.
Those are all political history. What matters is that the Good Friday Agreement told a truth: there was no border any more, as I well know having crossed its absence many times. And what this Bad Tuesday Deal does is tell a lie. It will say there is no border when there will, quite emphatically, be one.
What does that mean?
Will Northern Ireland keep representation in the EU Parliament? It should.
Will the Uk still contribute to the EU? It should.
And why shouldn't Scotland also have this deal? After all, it too wanted to stay. And a border could be easily arranged.
And how will Northern Ireland law be legislated? There is no Stormont parliament in session, but it will require very different law from the rest of the UK.
And how will the UK do trade deals that do not apply to the whole of the UK?
This suggestion answers no questions.
But it does leave a gaping hole in any known Tory EU strategy.
And, whatever Johnson might hope, it leaves the Brexit Party still in play. As will be Unionists unhappy with their lot in Northern Ireland.
This is a very bad deal, if it is as I am guessing.
But who knows?
Not Boris Johnson, I suspect.
* Apologies: I published saying North Sea: now corrected
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I have long believed the ‘backstab’ issue ti be red herring.
Because NI is your actual Legally recognised Unicorn.
The Northern Irish were guaranteed to be able to be British, Irish or BOTH in the gfa.
Irish means EU – so even as the UK could have left – the few million in a part of the country in perpetuity retain the right to be EU citizens.
Unfortunately for Scotland- they don’t have a gfa – they may have older treaties?
Only hours away now to see if the ‘No Deal’ can be snatched!
“The Northern Irish were guaranteed to be able to be British, Irish or BOTH in the gfa.” It’s nice to believe that but apparently this is a fiction which never got beyond the intention stage. Recently tested, the law appears to say that people born in NI are British and that’s it https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/14/uk-court-rules-against-derry-woman-in-irish-identity-case I expect we’ll be hearing more on this particularly now as it must have bearing on any Brexit decisions.
I did not notice that
But I think the issue was she had never registered as Irish: she could have done but had not
Some more questions worth asking:
Wasn’t the idea of a border in the North Channel & Irish Sea one of the DUP’s Red Lines?
If that gets ignored, will the DUP continue to supply votes to keep the Tories in power?
How much will it cost the UK Taxpayer to keep the DUP happy this time?
Does anybody know what the DUP did with the first bung of a billion quid?
Why should Scotland accept this?
How long before we get widespread civil disobedience in Scotland?
Dungroanin says “Unfortunately for Scotland- they don’t have a gfa….”
Unfortunately Scotland does have a gfa; it stands for “get f***ed about”.
For “North Sea” read “Irish Sea”? bjg
Yes
I wrote in haste
Sorry!
Predominantly male libertarian Unicornists trying to do the splits is not a pretty sight!
Especially when we know in this “sceptred isle” of a Union there is only one country (England) trying to ram Leave down the other Union countries’ throats!
A detail: that would be a border down the Irish sea, not the North Sea (unless you’re suggesting Ireland would join the UK in leaving the EU!!)
Too much haste
Sorry!
It has long been plain that, if the UK is to leave the EU and gain a border between Dover and Calais, there would have to be a border of some sort (i) between France and the Republic of Ireland, or (ii) between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, or (iii) between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. The last of these is the only one that makes sense from a geopolitical point of view, so here we are again.
Another alternative would be for there to be no border between Dover and Calais (i.e. the UK rules remaining the same as the EU – perhaps through membership of the EEA plus bilateral customs union).
The UK should have gone through a consultative and then deliberative process to reach a consensus on the preferred exit route some three years ago. The six months since March could have been long enough, but we have wasted that time on fruitless internal politics in ever decreasing circles. At the very least, we should stop the clock and attempt to reach some sort of consensus now.
An extension now appears essential – to make sure that now reality has dawned we get this right
I strongly suspect based on what I hear from SW1 this evening that there is no deal – but there is real movement
Will the ERG and DUP buy it? Who knows. And will Labour rebels vote for it?
The feeling again is that there will be nothing to table by Saturday: thi si too comple to finish by then
So instead what will happen is that Johnson will have to do the Benn letter – and he has been told by enough Tories that he has no choice but do so – and then make the best of it byu tabling an enabling motion for an extension on Saturday with a deal outline attached
This may be hopelessly wrong
But it does not feel that it is
Correct me if i’m wrong. But it seems that the 3 years and where we are now completely depends on Labour.
I don’t mean Corbyn – who has not had much choice – but their Champion. Starmer.
I say whatever he decides, it will have to go, or he will.
High stakes poker.
You are wrong about the waste of three years, I think. That can be attributed to Theresa May, and to a lesser extent David Cameron. He could have stuck around to build a consensus way forward, but instead he ran away (unstandably from a personal point of view, but the easy way out) – we ended up with ever more fractious internal party politics, accompanied by increasingly bizarre posturing. Brexit means Brexit. Red lines. Deal or no deal. They need us more than we need them. We hold all the cards. The easiest trade deal in history. The will of the people. Take back control. 16 million remoaners, saboteurs, remoaners, Etc etc.
Shall we blame a Party?
Andrew says:
“You are wrong about the waste of three years, I think. That can be attributed to Theresa May, and to a lesser extent David Cameron.”
Hmmm… Certainly a waste of three years. Cameron get’s the lions’ share of blame for my money for starting the referendum process at half cock and failing to campaign effectively. (I put that down to complacency and poor instinct for the mood of the country outside his narrow circle) Theresa May had not much chance of healing wounds, but managed to keep her party together – sort of. She left office with her party still holding, an albeit slender, majority.
Mr Johnson having elected to throw his weight behind the ‘Leave’ campaign and probably winning enough votes on the back of his (to me inexplicable) popularity to swing the result, now has to deal with an outcome he supported but didn’t expect would come to pass. If he ‘dies in a ditch’ he will have no one to blame but himself for his cynical opportunism.
The Labour party position has been vague to the point of dilatory throughout, but they didn’t start this nonsense and they weren’t responsible for dealing with it. If they have the misfortune to inherit the mess the chances are the Tories will wipe the board at the next but one GE, because too many Brexit problems will remain intractable, and the Tories will successfully divert all the blame in their direction. They have decades-long form in doing this to great electoral effect.
Whatever the outcome on Oct 31st the next five years parliamentary business will be dominated by Brexit. 🙁
““We’re going to have to see how the next few days develop. If we can get to an agreement, on Thursday or Friday, and if the House of Commons is able to vote in favour of an indicative vote in favour of that agreement on Saturday, it may not be necessary to even consider an extension.”
Leo Varadkar
With France and Germany saying they want at least a short extension for detailed technical discussions this statement from Varadkar makes me think he actively wants this deal.
Could it be preferable to him by comparison to the status quo?
Is he calculating that this deal will eventually lead to the unification of Ireland?
In a word, yes
It looks like he and Johnson both blinked
My concern is that Johnson and his ERG cronies will simply not abide by any deal set with the EU once we are out. To me – looking at the personalities involved in the Tory party – that remains a real threat and a credible possibility.
On which (that the under the Johnson government the UK would not abide by a deal), I came across a blog by Craig Murray, at https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/10/bad-faith-negotiation/ , of which the key sentence is “There is currently considerable alarm in the FCO that Legal Advisers have been asked about the circumstances constituting force majeure which would justify the UK in breaking a EU Withdrawal Agreement in the future. “