This bill unilaterally sets aside significant sections of the Northern Ireland Protocol, an international agreement, as we’ve heard, for which the Prime Minister was quite happy to take credit, when he claimed he would “get Brexit done” in the 2019 election campaign.

The Foreign Secretary said the bill is needed to protect the Good Friday Agreement, but dismantling the Protocol against the will of the majority of people in Northern Ireland also risks undermining that Agreement.

She said the Protocol needs cross community consent.

Indeed, it does.

But does she have consent from both communities for this Bill?

I doubt it.

Scant consideration was given to the province by Brexiteers before the referendum.

Nor thereafter to the fact that – like Scotland – Northern Ireland, the majority voted to remain in the EU.

And it is of course the UK’s exit from the EU rather than the Protocol, which created the difficult situation for Northern Ireland.

This was recognized by the then First Minister, Arlene Foster, when she demanded a special trading arrangement for Northern Ireland shortly after the referendum.

A request for special treatment now repudiated by herself and her party.

As my colleague, the Member for Gordon, has already highlighted:

there were only three choices,

• a border on the island of Ireland,
• close alignment between UK and EU standards to reduce checks, including a veterinary agreement
• or checks carried out in Northern Ireland ports.

The return of border infrastructure in Ireland was seen as an unacceptable threat to peace.

But it was the Prime Minister’s choice of a hard Brexit with maximal divergence from the EU, which inevitably left checks on the Irish sea crossings as the only remaining option.

The issues posed by an Irish sea border were clearly highlighted in the government’s own impact assessment, which undermines the claim of “sudden necessity” and means the Prime Minister’s claim in December 2019 that there would be no question of there being checks on goods going NI to GB or GB to NI was disingenuous to say the least .

The UK government states there’s no need for checks, as current UK regulations are close to those of the EU.

Indeed they are, but they’re proposing a bonfire of EU regulations and already negotiating trade deals which would allow lowered standard foods and goods to be imported into the UK.

The Prime Minister cites economic failure, and the outcome of the recent elections, as justification for tearing up the Agreement, despite a clear majority of assembly members supporting the Protocol in print and recent economic data showing Northern Ireland outperforming Great Britain.

Business surveys by the Northern Ireland chamber of commerce show that two thirds of local businesses have now adapted to the Protocol and 70% claim that they see advantages in their dual position, something the rest of us in the UK have lost.

Angus Brendan MacNeil MP:

The Honourable Lady’s quite right to say that there is an advantage to business and to the economy of Northern Ireland.

Interestingly last week, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, couldn’t tell me that they’d done any economic analysis whatsoever.

But when we think of the, the, the Minister for Brexit Advantages, who said that, uh, if they were to have the, introduce a border for imports in the United Kingdom, be an act of self-harm.

If that happens, or if that were to happen, it would be, it would make it even more obvious that the Northern Ireland Protocol was an economic advantage to Northern Ireland.

They wouldn’t be doubly hampered -first by this. And then by the second completion of Brexit borders.

Philippa:

I thank my honourable friend for his intervention.

I mean, it’s still the case that there’s no question there are issues, particularly with the implementation of the Protocol.

29% of businesses are still experiencing some difficulties.

Although those facing serious problems have dropped from 15% to 8% since last year.

This improvement over time suggests that some of last year’s problems could have been avoided, if businesses hadn’t only been given a matter of weeks to get ready for last January.

But supply chains from GB producers and manufacturers would certainly benefit from technical improvements, particularly to reduce the burden on goods that are purely for sale in Northern Ireland.

I think all of us can recognize that.

But while the EU proposed mitigations last October, including an express lane for exactly these kind of goods, the UK government hasn’t engaged in any discussion since February.

So talking about 18 months of solid negotiation is nonsense.

And despite the remaining challenges Northern Ireland business leaders are clear.

They seek improvements, but they do not want the Protocol removed.

The loss of trust in this UK government to honour their commitments is already holding back participation in Horizon Europe.

To the detriment of research teams across the UK, especially in Scotland, where they had disproportionate success rate in landing EU funding.

Disapplying almost half the Protocol undermines a key part of the withdrawal agreement and runs the risk, as others have said, of provoking a trade war with the EU further exacerbating the cost of living crisis.

The EU would then be likely to place tariffs on UK exports.

And as Scotland produces the UK’s leading food and drink exports in whisky and salmon, Scottish businesses would face the brunt of such retaliatory action.

Mr Deputy Speaker, it is vital the UK and EU get back round the table with all the stakeholders from Northern Ireland to discuss practical improvements to implementation of the Protocol, reducing the friction and intrusion to a minimum, while keeping the economic benefits for the province.

Solutions can only be achieved with willingness, trust and goodwill.

But sadly, these are now in very short supply and unlikely to be improved by the Prime Minister’s plan to wreck an international agreement he signed less than three years ago.