Protocol-busting plan represents a breach of international agreement

Today the UK Government will unveil new legislation that will give Ministers the power to override parts of the Northern Ireland Protocol.

The Northern Ireland Protocol is part of the Brexit deal negotiated and signed by the Prime Minister and exists to prevent the need for customs checks along the 500km border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after the British Government insisted that Britain left the EU Single Market and Customs Union. 

Despite promising that there would be no checks on goods travelling between Britain and Northern Ireland, the Prime Minister agreed to a Brexit deal which kept Northern Ireland within the EU Single Market and Customs Union and which included checks on some goods at ports in Northern Ireland.

Reports indicate that the new legislation being introduced today would enable Ministers to unilaterally ignore the UK’s treaty obligations in the interests of ‘ensuring the effective flow of trade’ as well as ‘safeguarding economic stability’ and the ‘territorial or constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom’ criteria which many have described as too broad and ambiguous. 

The Prime Minister claims that the move, which many say represents a breach international law, is needed to protect the Northern Ireland Peace Process. However, in the recent Assembly Election the majority of people in Northern Ireland voted for parties who campaigned to keep the Protocol in place.

Of the five main parties in Stormont, only the DUP support removing the NI Protocol without any alternative in place. They were also the only party who campaigned for Leave during the EU referendum and who voted against any type of Brexit that would have removed the need for customs checks anywhere.

Hilary Benn MP, Co-convener of the cross-party UK trade and Business Commission said,

“The Protocol is a product of the Brexit deal negotiated and agreed by the Prime Minister. The problems it has created can only be resolved by negotiation with the EU which needs to show more pragmatic flexibility on products coming from Britain which pose no threat to the EU Single Market.

“The blunt instrument being proposed today would not only break an international agreement the UK signed, but would also damage confidence in Britain’s commitment to abide by future trade deals and potentially lead to further costs to British businesses and consumers."