Brussels raises Brexit tempo with Irish protocol
The EU’s Brexit negotiators set out their answer to the Irish border question on Wednesday: take legal control of a large part of Northern Ireland’s economy.
Cast as a last-resort measure to avoid a hard border in Ireland after Brexit, the European Commission’s “protocol” maps in excruciating detail the legal arrangements required to allow seamless movement of goods across the island.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, brushed off claims that imposing EU customs checks on the Irish Sea, under the direct jurisdiction of EU judges, amounted to breaking up the UK.
“It would not call into question the constitutional order,” he insisted, adding: “I’m not trying to provoke or create any shockwaves.”
But even within EU institutions, the boldness of the provisions left some startled. One senior official called it a “maximalist” approach to put “maximum pressure” on London. Another compared it to asking Britain to “cede territory”. Theresa May said that no British prime minister could “ever agree” to implement it.
The views speak to the long and lively debate in Brussels and Dublin about the purpose of the Irish protocol. Was it a hyper-legalistic fallback plan or a negotiating tool designed to force decisions in London? And what implications does that have for Brexit talks in months to come?
In December, the UK and EU agreed to develop a border plan for Ireland that would hold up “in all circumstances”.
Based on these agreed political principles, the commission drafted a legal text aimed at reconciling the no-border pledge (Ireland’s goal) with the need to protect the single market (a particular concern for France).
The solution as drafted straddles these demands by restricting UK sovereignty. Joint customs checks are set up along the Irish Sea. Enforcement provisions give the European Court of Justice not only direct jurisdiction in Belfast, but the entire UK should cases relate to the “common regulatory area” in Ireland.
British regulators, meanwhile, are stripped of powers to authorise products in Northern Ireland, and told they “may” be invited to EU meetings deciding on regulation of UK economic activity on UK territory.
Nigel Dodds, the Democratic Unionist party MP, described it as “offensive”. British officials privately saw it as squeezing “until the pips squeak”. Even some senior EU diplomats involved in talks recognise it would be “politically impossible”.
Why is the EU doing this?
For some in Brussels, Paris and Berlin, the protocol helps force what they see as an overdue British reckoning. Frans Timmermans, the first vice-president of the commission, reflected the growing exasperation among those handling Brexit.
“It’s not our fault [the Brexiters say], it’s because these Europeans are being so nasty to us,” he told the European Parliament on Wednesday.
“Stop it. Take responsibility . . . Explain to voters what you want from Brexit and then face the consequences.”
Indeed, to some EU negotiators, the legal protocol simply hones choices, both practical and legal, that must eventually be confronted. The tactical call was to do that earlier rather than later.
Ireland backed a “full throttle” approach, perhaps sensing that its leverage would decline as Brexit day approached. Other EU countries were more wary. One senior eurozone government official asked why there was such a rush for “clarity” on an Irish problem that was “insoluble”.
The tactical differences, however, belie an emerging consensus on the desired outcome for talks.
Largely for economic reasons, the vast majority of EU27 countries would want to remain in a customs union with Britain. Mr Barnier’s team was said by colleagues to be “buoyed” by Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, backing the idea this week.
Such attitudes have left Brexiters suspecting that a conspiracy is afoot. “The issue of the Northern Irish border is being used quite a lot politically to try to keep the UK in the customs union, effectively the single market, so we cannot really leave the EU, that is what is going on,” said Boris Johnson, Britain’s foreign secretary.
Will British plans for smart border circumvent the problem?
Brussels has invited the UK to propose how a UK-EU trade deal, or a “unique” arrangement for Northern Ireland, could avoid the need for a border. But expectations are low: EU negotiators have been caustic about Britain’s “magical thinking”, particularly regarding technology.
Even if negotiations prove more fruitful, it may not help the UK avoid a looming problem. Britain’s preferred solution, a trade deal, requires a separate treaty, agreed years after Brexit. Given this gap and the associated risk of failure, the EU is adamant that a workable fallback plan has to be included in a Brexit withdrawal agreement.
That poses a significant risk for Mrs May’s government. Some Brexit negotiators see a possible fix: seeking a new UK-EU customs union that would avoid the need for barriers along the Irish Sea.
That seems unlikely given that Mrs May described staying in a customs union as a “betrayal” of Brexit voters.
But senior Tories remain hopeful that her keynote speech on Friday may edge in the direction of a customs union, potentially through the concept of a “European traded goods area”.
Source:- https://www.ft.com/content/70062b90-1cd1-11e8-956a-43db76e69936
