Brexit NI Backstop Resolution Proposal
Would appreciate critique of the following proposal please, to break the NI Backstop deadlock and enable us to move forward.
The rest of the UK to be on the same terms as Northern Ireland throughout the duration of the backstop (should it be triggered).
Benefits:
1. NI and rest of the UK treated the same, thereby meeting the demand of the DUP.
2. SNP demand for equal treatment with NI met.
3. As neither EU nor UK wishes the backstop to be triggered for similar reasons (ties us closer to the EU) this means that best efforts will be employed to ensure it won’t be triggered; this means that neither side is giving up anything in a practical sense. If the backstop is triggered the UK as a whole would continue to enjoy the benefits of the EU Customs Union and the Single Market throughout its duration. No third country free trade deals possible during this period but free and frictionless trade with the EU would continue.
4. Opposition Parties, and ‘Remainers’ and moderate ‘Brexiteers’ on the Conservative benches may well see this as a positive move for them as frictionless trade would continue at the end of the Implementation Period (should the backstop be triggered). It would also give British business certainty. This could give the Government enough votes for the Withdrawal Agreement (Amended in this way) to pass Parliament.
5. Consequences would be: a) an end to Free Movement at the end of the Implementation Period as at present; b) ECJ jurisdiction during the period the backstop is in force (should it be triggered) but limited to trade (maybe); c) Probably cost-free but, even if the EU wanted some payment the amount would be nothing like the sums we pay now and would only be for the duration of the backstop.
This proposed amendment to the Withdrawal Agreement could provide an acceptable way forward to unblock the Backstop issue and allow the Withdrawal Agreement to be voted through. Granted that it would need EU agreement but that need not be a problem (notwithstanding the "no further negotiations" rhetoric coming out of Brussels), assuming both the EU and the UK can be taken at their word that the backstop is merely an insurance policy which probably won’t need to be triggered. If this proposal is not adopted the risk is that any one of the 27 Member States could keep us in the backstop indefinitely, effectively holding the UK to ransom for their own national interest (e.g. France - fishing rights; Spain - Gibraltar). However, under this proposal, even if we were kept in the backstop for a protracted period, the UK would enjoy frictionless trade as well as ending free movement and paying much less to the EU. It is most unlikely the EU would want this scenario so there is an incentive to make sure the Backstop is not needed in the first place.