The Irish border issue must be kept in perspective

The border should be a relatively small issue as far as Brexit is concerned. That it has taken on such prominence is a triumph of Irish diplomatic manoeuvring

by Graham Gudgin / February 5, 2018 / Leave a comment

An abandoned Customs Facilitation Office at the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Photo: PA

As we enter the UK’s last full year as a member of the EU, negotiations are about to begin to determine the long-term relationship with the EU27. The Progress Report of December 8^th 2017 recorded agreement on UK ‘divorce’ payments, the rights of EU citizens and arrangements for the land border between the UK and Ireland. The Cambridge Law Professor Simon Deakin takes the view that “while this is merely a joint report on progress in phase one of the Brexit negotiations …. Its contents are likely to be incorporated into the withdrawal agreement envisaged by article 50.”

Some UK Ministers have suggested that its contents can be amended and point to the Report’s opening statement that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.” In addition, paragraph 46 of the Irish border section of the Progress Report states that “the commitments and principles outlined in this joint report will not pre-determine the outcome of wider discussions on the future relationship between the EU and the UK and are, as necessary, specific to the unique circumstances on the Island of Ireland.”

All is thus to play for—but Deakin’s interpretation is likely to dominate EU thinking, and unless the UK is prepared for ‘no deal’ on trade, it will dominate.

Any non-negotiability of the Progress Report’s contents will present a real problem that will come to haunt the stage two negotiations. Specifically, big problems are likely to arise over what should be a small issue: the Irish land border.

YOU'VE HIT THE LIMIT

You have now reached your limit of 3 free articles in the last 30 days.
But don't worry! You can get another 7 articles absolutely free, simply by entering your email address in the box below.

When you register we'll also send you a free e-book—Writing with punch—which includes some of the finest writing from our archive of 22 years. And we'll also send you a weekly newsletter with the best new ideas in politics and philosophy of culture, which you can of course unsubscribe from at any time

Prospect may process your personal information for our legitimate business purposes, to provide you with our newsletter, subscription offers and other relevant information.

Click to learn more about these interests and how we use your data. You will be able to object to this processing on the next page and in all our communications.

DEBUG messsage: regular

Comments

John S.
February 5, 2018 at 12:36
I am afraid there is nothing'shallow' about the 141 different areas of North South daily fully-integrated and interwoven engagement, underpinned by common EU standards that are under threat by a decision taken unilaterally by the British and against the will of the people in the North. Those common EU standards that the British want to break with are the basis that allows strand II of the GFA to effectively function. That is your 'perspective'.The British have signed up to Full Alignment and they will be bound by that or there will be no transition and Britain will face third country status with all that implies for its economy. Such is the price of handing your country over to ideological extremists who think nothing of the consequences of their actions.

Graham Gudgin

Graham Gudgin is Honorary Research Associate at the Centre For Business Research (CBR) in the Judge Business School at the University of Cambridge and Cheief Economic Advisor at Policy exchange in London. He was director of the Northern Ireland Economic Research Centre from 1985 to 1998 when he became Special Adviser to the First Minister in the NI Assembly until 2002.