To explain the problem with Johnson’s Brexit ‘Deal’?

[Eyewhisker]

Under Johnson’s proposal, NI would stay in the single market if the N.I. assembly voted in favour. In the absence of such a positive vote, NI would leave the single market.

NI Assembly rules mean that on key areas (known as Petitions of Concern) a simple majority of members voting in favour is not enough: there needs to be a majority of Unionists and a majority of Nationalists.

As the default is that NI leaves the single market unless there is a vote in favour, this means that in order for NI to stay in the Single Market, the DUP would need to vote in favour. Chances of this happening = zero.

This DUP veto is against the wishes of the majority. A majority of NI assembly members have written to Donald Tusk to say they support the backstop. Similarly, a majority of Members have voted for gay marriage but the DUP used its veto to block it.

Johnson’s proposal in effect is saying that NI can stay in the Single Market if the DUP agree.

There are alternative ways of gaining consent - e.g, a simple majority of NI Assembly members to approve staying in the single market or a N.I. referendum on the single market. Both of these are highly likely to be approved as the DUP is not representative of the majority of N.I. opinion.

Johnson’s ‘consent mechanism’ is a figleaf designed to sound reasonable to his supporters while conceding nothing in practice.

Thank you! Clear and concise, unlike most media coverage of the debacle we are living through. (Yes, I know I spelled cluster**ck wrongly.)

Thanks. I’m just frustrated as I saw it again misrepresented in the Times this morning.

It is a bit complex, but Johnson’s proposal essentially means that NI would leave both the single market and the Customs Union and so is hardly a compromise by the UK.

You’ve used more than three words, so therefore you are incomprehensible. #gammon #getbrexitdone

Excellent post.

The only thing I'd ask is whether it would actually happen. We are assuming (so is the EU) that we will continue with May's plan for no Single Market, CU etc.

If we got a Labour government, they may well decide that they want to go with the Norway-style option, in which case the backstop isn't needed anyway. The whole point was that it was meant to be a backstop in case no agreement could be reached between the UK and the EU on trade, not a guaranteed certainty.

Thank you OP.

Okay, but this set up exists for a reason. To maintain a fragile peace. If it's changed in order to push through a specific policy then does that not have knock on effects for other issues. Presumably there are things the DUP would like to push through the assembly but their opposition has a veto?

Looks like we’ll crash out.

The Benn Act obliging Boris to ask for an extension reminds me of that insipid legislation granting parents the “right” to ask for flexible working patterns.

The EU will say no. Or they’ll say yes and nothing will change during the extension period.

No deal here we come 🤷🏽‍♀️