Credit:PA
Proposed laws to override parts of the Northern Ireland Protocol are not designed to prop up the Prime Minister or appease hardline Brexiteers, a Government minister has insisted.
It comes as the Prime Minister has denied the Government has failed to consult one of its senior legal advisers over plans to unilaterally scrap elements of Brexit’s Northern Ireland Protocol.
Northern Ireland Office minister Conor Burns denied there is a “sub agenda” behind the legislation and said it is about “fixing” issues with the post-Brexit trading arrangements.
Mr Burns told members of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee he wants to take the politics out of the impasse over the protocol and instead refocus on the process issues with its implementation.
Committee chairman Simon Hoare praised Mr Burns’ approach but suggested he is in the minority within Government.
Mr Hoare said there is concern the protocol row would be used to create a “punch up with the EU” and as “red meat, dead cats, play-things, distractions either to salve the appetites of the European Research Group, shore up the robustness of the Prime Minister or get editorial red tops on side”.
Mr Hoare suggested other ministers would use the issue to show “a bit of leg and a bit of muscle” to further their own leadership ambitions.
Mr Burns insisted Boris Johnson is in “the space of wanting to fix this”.
He said the Government’s preferred resolution is an agreed settlement with the EU, but said that will not be achievable unless European leaders widened the negotiating mandate of European Commission vice president Maros Sefcovic.
“We cannot just sit back and wait in the hope that the mandate will broaden,” he told MPs.
“So that is why we will get into the legislative space but it will be to fix it and it will not be about propping up or getting headlines or appeasing any particular element within Parliament, be that inside the Government or inside Northern Ireland political parties.”
On the suggestion the Government is trying to assuage DUP concerns, Mr Burns said:
“I’m an openly gay Catholic born in north Belfast who supports the Union, I don’t do things for the DUP.
“I do things because they are the right things to do for the United Kingdom. And fixing this will have the consequence hopefully of restoring devolved government in Northern Ireland.”
The NIO minister said he appreciates businesses in Northern Ireland need certainty on their trading environment.
“We want a negotiated solution to this with the Commission; we think that is by far the best means, the optimum means to do that,” he said.
“But, in the absence of that, in order to provide the level of certainty that we want to deliver to businesses in Northern Ireland and across the rest of the United Kingdom, we will bring forward legislation.
“We want a spirit of co-operation and partnership with our friends in the EU.
“One of my ambitions is to drag this protocol stuff maybe out of the politics and back into process, because that’s essentially what we’re talking about.
“We’re talking about how to create a system of checks and regulations that reflect different destinations of different goods and types within these islands.
“We have long maintained that with a degree of pragmatism and goodwill there should be a negotiated solution that can be found.
“Regrettably, it cannot be found within the strict mandate that vice president (of the European Commission for Interinstitutional Relations Maros) Sefcovic is currently operating under.”
While creating new checks and processes on the movement of goods between Great Britain and the Northern Ireland, the protocol also offers traders in the region unfettered access to sell both within the UK internal market and into the EU single market.
Alliance MP Stephen Farry asked Mr Burns if the Government acknowledges the economic opportunity presented by the dual market access.
The minister replied: “We’re absolutely of the view that this is an amazing opportunity for Northern Ireland.”
During his evidence session before the committee, Mr Burns was also asked about Government investment programmes in Northern Ireland.
There was a particular focus on programmes designed to replace lost EU financial support, such as the Levelling Up fund.
Stormont ministers have criticised the Government’s policy of directly funding projects in Northern Ireland, expressing concerns the approach could lead to duplication or conflict with the devolved executive’s funding plans.
Mr Burns rejected the criticism of the centralised funding approach.
“We see it as value added,” he said.
“We see it as adding to, not detracting from, the core responsibilities of the Executive.”
The Prime Minister has denied the Government has failed to consult one of its senior legal advisers over plans to unilaterally scrap elements of Brexit’s Northern Ireland Protocol.
Boris Johnson rejected the claim that First Treasury Counsel Sir James Eadie, the Government’s independent barrister on major legal issues, had not been asked to give a view on the contentious Bill due to be tabled at Westminster.
His remarks came as Irish Premier Micheal Martin warned that unilateral UK action over the protocol would be “deeply damaging” and mark a “historic low point”.
The Government intends to use domestic law to override aspects of the post-Brexit arrangements governing Irish Sea trade, which were jointly agreed by the UK and EU as part of the Withdrawal Agreement.
Foreign Secretary Liz Truss announced plans to legislate last month and the Bill is expected to be published in the coming days.
Sky News reported that Sir James has not been consulted on whether the legislation would breach international law.
SDLP leader and Foyle MP Colum Eastwood challenged Mr Johnson on the report during Prime Minister’s Questions in the Commons.
“I can tell him that the reports that he has seen this morning are not correct,” replied Mr Johnson.
“And what I can also tell him is that the most important commitment that I think everybody in this House has made is to the balance and symmetry of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.
“That is our highest legal international priority and that is what we must deliver.”
Downing Street said a “number of legal experts” had been involved in the legislation, which has yet to be finalised.
“Obviously the Foreign Secretary has made clear that this is legal in international law and that we will be setting out our legal position in due course,” the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said.
“No final decisions have been made on that. It is an important piece of legislation and we will take the requisite time to get it right.”
The UK is moving without the consent of the EU to change the terms of the protocol to reduce the checks it requires on the movement of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
The dispute over the protocol has led to a political impasse at Stormont, with the DUP blocking the re-establishment of a devolved executive until major changes are secured to arrangements the party claims have weakened Northern Ireland’s place within the United Kingdom.
Northern Ireland’s 1998 Good Friday/Belfast peace agreement contains provisions to protect and develop relations both on a north/south basis on the island of Ireland and on an east/west basis between the island and Great Britain.
The DUP claims, and the Government agrees, that the protocol has upset this “delicate balance” of unionist and nationalist aspirations by undermining the east/west dynamic.
It is unclear whether the Government’s plans will be affected by the current leadership travails of Mr Johnson, amid suggestions that some backbench rebels could vote against the Bill.
Addressing a Westminster committee on Wednesday, Northern Ireland Office minister Conor Burns denied the Bill was motivated by a desire to prop up the Prime Minister or appease hardline Brexiteers within the Conservative Party.
Speaking in the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Wednesday morning, Taoiseach Mr Martin said the UK Government’s proposed legislation would be “to the benefit of absolutely no-one”.
The Irish leader accused London of failing to engage with the EU to reach a negotiated settlement on changing aspects of the protocol’s operation.
“I have said many times that there are solutions to practical problems under the protocol if there is a political will to find them,” he said.
“But that requires partnership. It requires the UK Government to engage with good faith, seriousness, and commitment.
“Unilateral action to set aside a solemn agreement would be deeply damaging.
“It would mark a historic low point, signalling a disregard for essential principles of laws which are the foundation of international relations.
“And it would, quite literally, be to the benefit of absolutely no-one.”
He added: “I disagree with the approach that the United Kingdom Government has taken in respect of dealing with the protocol and its failure really to engage and to engage in a substantive way with the European Union, and particularly the commission and (vice president and post-Brexit negotiator) Maros Sefcovic.”
Related: PMQs: For Boris the Black Knight, 148 attacks leave just a flesh wound
