DUP’s leader resigns after 3 weeks - Page 2

So who is likely to succeed Poots, Matthew, Jim? And what does it mean for the NI Protocol?

No need to apologise for informing the reader of the truth JimH. The first casualty of any conflict is the truth Only last night the Unionists circled their wagons and came out with:-

1. Boris Johnson is throwing them to the wolves - Not True.

2. The EU is trying to annexe NI thereby reducing their Britishness - Not True.

3. The government of RoI is interfering in NI politics - Not True.

But, let's not forget this episode is exclusively Unionists squabbling amongst themselves and playing their "Us wee country" card. They are losing respect except from their more hardline people. These hardliners are surfacing now and watch that space (my gut feeling). Their options are limited. 

The Taoiseach and government of RoI has called for the situation to be resolved within NI and has said there will be no interference from south of the border.

In the background the marching bands are rehearsing almost nightly in the streets and wearing black face coverings getting ready for their intimidation of anybody who will succumb. Some of these marching band members are as young as twelve and are being used by older  hardliners whose faces will not be seen during the marches. 

So, back to a metaphorical story:- Since 1921 to the signing of the (Good Friday) Belfast Peace Agreement Northern Ireland was a Bingo Hall with patrons from Unionist and Nationalist backgrounds. The Unionists always had the seats nearest the stage and were always supplied with loaded bingo cards where the numbers called were theirs only. No prizes (however small) were allowed to the nationalist back section of the bingo hall - none of their numbers were even called and even marking the bingo card was useless.

The Nationalist bingo players knew after 50 years of attending there was something wrong as they never had a win of any description and unless they reacted would never be allowed have a win. Then the Unionists allowed them the occasional "line" win, but never a "Full House" win. It dawned on the Nationalists that the bingo cards were loaded against them and even if they somehow got hold of a loaded bingo card they still were not allowed the win. 

Through international pressure the loading of bingo cards became progressively outlawed and suddenly prizes were being shared almost equally. But, that didn't satisfy the Unionist bingo players as they had been used to winning no less than everything. 

The Nationalists took their wins and cherished what was available. The Unionists again want to return to loaded bingo cards and their position at the front of the bingo hall. 

Indeed! Let’s get back to paella and the only Irish ☘️ theme I want to see is the great human invention of The Irish ☘️  Bar!

Not a bad analysis/prediction there ....................

I have to say that I think the Ulster problem and Brexit do have an impact on what we can experience in the EU and the way governments will treat us.  Unfortunately the issue was not mentioned with any force by the remain camp before the referendum - other than the odd slight reference, lost among all the rest of the noise.  I certainly didn’t notice it until it came to the fore during negotiations.  This is despite being half-Irish from a predominantly Orange family just south of the current border and used to seeing my rellies smuggle goods between both sides of the border depending on prices. Once the  point was raised, I thought “Oh s**t - that’s going to be a nightmare”.

And Matthew has it bang on when talking about how the cards have been stacked for 100 years since partition.  The original Ulster included 9 counties - the current six plus Monaghan, Cavan and Donegal.  The unionists wouldn’t stand for that as it would still have contained a Catholic majority so insisted on Ulster just being the 6 counties we now see as they  had Protestant majorities.  The screams of pain we now hear over Brexit are the inevitable result of realising the gerrymandering scam is no longer a guarantee of success, and the fact that many Protestants (if not Orangemen or members of the unionist parties) are now seriously considering a United Ireland is preferable to the current mess.

Unfortunately I fear the current Ulster machinations will affect the way our host countries regard our country of birth, and possibly infect their attitude towards us whether we like it or not.  I’m now donning my hard hat and ducking from the likely insults this post will receive!

Excellent post EM68 and well constructed and poignantly delivered. 

If only . . . . . .if only . . . . . if only we could vote on Brexit again.

You make some good points - but I don't believe the host countries will lay blame at the feet of the Irish - few people outside of Ireland truly understand the challenges faced in Northern Ireland and don't understand why the Northern Ireland Protocol is such a problem. (This would include the incumbent British government who's actions must dictate they had absolutely no idea of the Hornet's nest they would stir up!!) 

It is far more likely that any "blame" or ill feeling arising from this in the host countries will be laid at the feet (and passports) of those whose heritage grants them a British passport.  This is already starting to manifest, with banks here in Spain being unwilling to help "los ingleses" because ... "Brexit" (not supposition, personal experience. I was told by a bank staff member "pero no lo sé si podemos ayudarte porque el banco no le gustan los ingleses ahora porque de brexit")  This is an attitude that is also creeping in slowly to officialdom - Junta de Andalucia notably.  It is not an attitude prevalent amongst the wider population, but certainly now in pockets and it is something that will take a few years to settle and those on a UK passport living here may find their lives just that tiny bit harder; but it also means that any issues arising from the Northern Ireland Protocol and the division between Unionists and Nationalists in Northern Ireland will just be added to the fallout of "Brexit", and those with an Irish passport will not be sanctioned or penalised for it. 

An alternative view on the NI Protocol

The Northern Ireland Protocol is not, as is often made out, a set of clear and unambiguous rules, but a set of contradictory objectives. It aims to keep the North/South border open, but also, secure. To achieve that, it introduces oversight on the East/West border, while maintaining the UK’s territorial integrity (Article 1) and its single customs territory (Article 4).

Since those objectives are internally contradictory, the Protocol cannot detail precise rules and mechanisms. It doesn’t even try. The precise mechanism is left to a Joint Committee (JC). The JC’s job is to find a practical way of resolving the contradictory aims, in the least intrusive way possible. This is how it is described in the Protocol (see Article 6):

Having regard to Northern Ireland's integral place in the United Kingdom's internal market, the Union and the United Kingdom shall use their best endeavours to facilitate the trade between Northern Ireland and other parts of the United Kingdom, in accordance with applicable legislation and taking into account their respective regulatory regimes as well as the implementation thereof. The Joint Committee shall keep the application of this paragraph under constant review and shall adopt appropriate recommendations with a view to avoiding controls at the ports and airports of Northern Ireland to the extent possible.

The output of the JC is not hard law, but a series of operating rules, designed to balance conflicting objectives. Inherently, these rules develop with experience and time, and can only work within a relationship characterised by good faith.

The JC agreed that the UK would apply customs checks on East-West traffic, after a grace period. Now, as it happened, the customs facilities and processes weren’t ready in time, so the UK requested an extension. The consequences of immediately applying full customs checks were clear: there would have been food shortages in Northern Ireland. Yet the EU said “no”.

The problem is, the answer isn’t “no”. “No” is the wrong answer. Wrong as in incorrect. If the new procedures aren’t ready, “no” means restricting food supplies, which is unacceptable and contradicts the Protocol’s objective to establish the UK’s territorial integrity and single customs territory. The answer can only be “yes, provided you agree to xyz and stick to it” or “yes and screw you”. If the former, the EU can prosecute the UK (if it wants) for not adhering to xyz.

On this basis, since the EU’s “no” would (if obeyed), force a violation not only of the Protocol, but also, the Good Friday Agreement and the Act of Union and disrupt food supplies to Northern Ireland, the decision to ignore the EU’s “no”, would appear to be reasonable, proportionate, lawful and consistent with the Protocol.

Therefore, the UK hasn’t broken any law. It simply ignored the EU saying “no” to the suggestion of extending the grace period. The diktat the UK overrode, isn’t some sacrosanct article, but someone saying “no” in a committee. And if the UK had respected the EU’s “no” it would have violated a principle of law. Several laws, in fact.

What about the proposed export ban on vaccines? Well, that’s different, because unlike the UK’s actions in regard to the Protocol, that would violate some very sacrosanct principles of law.

For a start, it would override the ability for suppliers to meet their contractual commitments to their customers, thus interfering with contract law. More seriously still, it would violate the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).

Article XI forbids any prohibition on the exportation of a product destined for the territory of another WTO member. Article XI provides an exception to allow export bans to prevent or relieve critical shortages of products essential to the exporting party. In addition, Article XX, states that nothing in the agreement can be construed to prevent measures necessary for the protection of human life and health.

But the measures being considered by the EU Commission, cannot be defended in this way. They cannot be defended (under Art XI) as measures to prevent or relieve critical shortages of products essential to the EU, if they are concerned with vaccines of which there are ample surplus supplies within the EU not being used. In that case there is no critical shortage. Nor, for the same reason, can they be defended (under Art XX) as necessary for the protection of human life and health.

Note that the EU’s proposed criterion for banning exports is that the recipient country has a “higher rate of vaccination”. It is not about relieving critical shortages at home, but about targeting countries that are ahead of the EU. The rationale for the policy is therefore nothing to do with securing critical supplies, but “we’re going to punish you for embarrassing us”.

It appears what the Commission has in mind therefore, is to ban the export of supplies which, though not needed for the protection of life and health in the EU, are needed for the continued vaccine rollout in Britain. This would be the plainest possible violation of both the letter and the spirit of international law.

It is also just the kind of blurring of the borderline between trade policy and warfare that was so beloved of the pre-war fascist regimes. It is why the post-war world established international trade rules.

The Bottom Line here is if you own property in Spain and are from Northern Ireland and even if you are a staunch Unionist or whatever, get an Irish Passport from the Rep of Ireland (it will take a few months because of the demand). If you are a card carrying member of the DUP and hate everything green, your Irish Passport will open doors to you that are closing by the day. And you can still march and wear your bowler hat  and vote Unionist.

I love having more Paddys on the forum! Give me Bowler Hats over Panama Hats any day.

I certainly hope those of us with Irish passports won’t be penalised!  But I had a fairly horrendous time trying to get my residencia on the basis of my Irish passport.  Extranjería had considerable difficulty in making sure I got the right card, made a bit harder for them am my original NIE obtained in 2004 showed a U.K. one!  Right up to the very end they kept trying to issue the wrong green card.  And of course, my bank still has me down as British, although fortunately I know the people in the local branch well enough to get over this problem.