Britain's Brexit Withdrawal Agreement: Part Three (Draft).

A direct continuation of Part Two; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2018/12/britains-brexit-withdrawal-agreement_14.html

In that post I explained the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland. Sometimes referred to as; "The Northern Irish Backstop."

I also explained why it is considered so important. By briefly looking at the The Troubles in Northern Ireland and the 1998 Belfast Agreement which helped to end them.

I then looked at some of the concessions British Prime Minister May extracted from the EU in negotiating the protocol.

In my rush to get all of that, just out of my brain and onto the page my mind managed to completely blank on another significant concession Prime Minister May won during the negotiation.

The terms of the protocol will put the British mainland in a unique customs union with the EU.

That requires the British mainland to impose tariffs/taxes on imports and exports. The level of those tariff/taxes is set by the Most Favoured Nations (MFN) provisions of the 1994 General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT).

These are the World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms the Hard Brexiteers are so hot for.

Beyond the tariffs themselves administration fees are also imposed. In order to pay the staff needed to process all the paperwork and conduct the physical customs checks.

For example, although slightly off-topic, a B-2 Tourism visa to the US costs US$160. Typically it lasts for one month.

Yesterday (14/12/18) the EU announced that post-Brexit, British citizens will require a European Travel Information & Authorisation System (ETIAS) visa to travel to the EU as tourists. This costs around US$8 and lasts for up to three years.

During trade wars nations normally massively inflate these administration fees. It allows them to impose a de facto higher tariff above the ones which are allowed by law.

What Britain will be able to do under the protocol is count the administration fee as part of the tariff. Allowing it to in fact charge a lower tariff than the one allowed by law. The tariff will be the same and in accordance with the law. However the total cost will be lower.

So imagine you're an importer/exporter looking to send goods into the EU via a/the customs union. Do you opt for Turkey which charges tariffs and fees. Or do you chose the British mainland which only charges tariffs?

I suspect the vehicle production sector of its economy which Turkey is trying to expand may well find itself running into some problems.

As I've said the Plan A laid out in the Withdrawal Agreement is that all issues are resolved during the Transition Period. If that fails the Withdrawal Agreement sets out the Plan B contingency; extending the Transition Period.

It is only if both Plan A and Plan B fail that the Plan C of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland will be invoked. As the contingency for the contingency.

I hope I have also managed to make clear that the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland will not put the British mainland in the EU Customs Union.

However despite this and all the other concessions Prime Minister May has been able to extract being in any sort of customs union is not ideal. You still have to impose tariffs, perform some physical border checks and fill out a lot of paperwork.

Turkey is currently the only nation which is in the EU Customs Union but not also in the EU Single Market. They complain about this on pretty much a daily basis.

To the point that if I want to infuriate Turkish President/Prime Minister/Emperor Recep Tayyip Erdogan I merely have to utter the polite farewell;

"See You."

I don't even need to follow it up with the more traditional confirmation;

"See You Next Tuesday."

Therefore before Britain enters into even this unique customs union with the EU it is only prudent and sensible to ask if it will ever be able to get out of it again. And if so, by what mechanism.

As has been very widely publicised in Britain the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland does not contain a specified end date. Nor does Britain, or the EU, have the power to unilaterally withdraw from the protocol.

However much of this wide publicity regarding the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland has relied upon a pernicious myth. Put simply the lie that it contains no legal guarantees.

The Protocol Contains Legally Binding Guarantees.

Paragraph 5 (p.5) of the Preamble of the Withdrawal Agreement states clearly;

"STRESSING that the objective of this Agreement is to ensure an orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union"

While Article 1(4) of the Protocol itself states even more clearly that;

"The objective of the Withdrawal Agreement is not to establish a permanent relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom. The provisions of this Protocol are therefore intended to apply only temporarily, taking into account the commitments of the Parties set out in Article 2(1)."

I suppose the layout of the document made available to British MP's could be altered, on a Mutatis mutandis (change only that which is necessary) basis. So these statements appear in every article on every page.

However legally you only need to state it once. Stating it twice is overkill.

During both the Transition Period and under the protocol, if it is invoked contact between Britain and the EU will be through the Joint Committee mechanism. This is laid out under Title Two of Part Six of the Withdrawal Agreement.

The Joint Committee mechanism simply allows for a series of summits or meetings between representatives of the EU and representatives of the British government. It is essentially how negotiations have been conducted up until now.

However with Britain leaving the EU and becoming a so-called Third Country before either the Transition Period or the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland come into effect it requires a separate mechanism. Outside of the EU mechanism.

Due to the legal guarantee in Paragraph five of the Preamble all of the work of the Joint Committee is legally obligated to focus on bringing the Transition Period to an end as quickly as is reasonably possible.

If the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland is invoked then both the legal guarantee in p.5 of the Preamble and Article 1(4) of the protocol mean that all of the work of the Joint Committee is legally obligated to focus on bringing the protocol to an end as quickly as is reasonably possible.

If Britain feels that the EU is not living up to this legal obligation within the Joint Committee mechanism it can take the matter up under the Withdrawal Agreement's Dispute Settlement procedure. This is laid out under Title Three of Part Six of the Withdrawal Agreement.

The Dispute Settlement procedure sees the matter taken to the International Bureau of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA-CPA).

Although located in the Hague, the Netherlands the PCA-CPA is not a body of the EU. It is not even a body of the UN. Founded in 1899 it is recognised as the international, intergovernmental body for dispute resolution.

Upon referral the PCA-CPA will ask the EU to nominate 10 people to sit on an Arbitration Panel. The PCA-CPA will also ask Britain to nominate 10 people to sit on an Arbitration Panel. Between them the EU and Britain will also be asked to nominate a total of 5 people to act as chair of the Arbitration Panel.

From that list of 25 names the PCA-CPA will pick four people to make up the Arbitration Panel. Two from the EU and two from Britain. Those four will then pick a fifth person from the sub-list to act as chair of the panel.

At the risk of being strangled by at least one of my mothers I'm tempted to call this Arbitration Panel the; "Supreme Court of Brexit."

Technically it is not a Court. However it is a panel of five people considering a case and making a legally binding ruling.

Those five people must be wholly independent of either the British government or any EU Member State government. They must also be qualified to the extent that they can hold the post of Supreme Court Judge in their respective country.

This system guarantees Britain, as a single nation at least two seats on this Supreme Court of Brexit. The EU, as 27 nations is only guaranteed two seats. This automatically gives Britain a clear majority on this Supreme Court of Brexit.

Aside from Britain's clear majority the guarantees of p.5 and A.1(4) mean that when faced with any reasonable request this Supreme Court of Brexit is legally bound to rule in favour of ending the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland.

The burden-of-proof, if you like is on the party which wants to keep the protocol in place.

To put it in a way even arch-Remainer Gary Lineker would understand;

"In a 50/50 challenge the ref's got to send it off."


At around 17:45 on 15/12/18 (UK date) there is still so much more to come. Even if I don't know when.

Edited at around 18:25 on 16/12/18 (UK date) to copy & paste from another tab;

//PLACE HOLDER FOR AVIGDOR LIEBERMAN'S CONSPIRACY TO KEEP BRITAIN IN THE EU\\

Opposition to the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland has mainly been driven by the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).

Other Hard Brexiteers have then latched themselves onto the issue. Either for their own reasons. Or because they're too stupid to understand the issue.

Sadly I know that the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson are not stupid.

It is tempting for me to simply dismiss the DUP as religious fanatics. As always in life though the truth is more subtle and complicated than that.

In Part Two I discussed The Troubles in Northern Ireland in terms of Catholics against Protestants. Despite little of what either side got up to having much to do with any branch of Christianity.

The conflict is often also discussed in terms of Republicans against Unionists. Those who wish to see Northern Ireland become part of the Republic of Ireland against those who remain loyal to the Union between the Four Home Nations which make up the United Kingdom (UK).

That is probably the more accurate way to describe it. However within the Withdrawal Agreement the EU is officially referred to as; "The Union." So I can see that getting really confusing, really quickly.

The Protestant, Unionist side of the conflict is actually itself quite a broad church. Dr, Rev Ian Paisley who founded the DUP was never a Church of England (CoE) Protestant. He was a Baptist Protestant.

To confuse matters even further Paisley's Northern Baptists actually owe more to the Southern Baptists in the US. Only with a lot more drizzle.

What unites these different Protestants is a deep sense of British identity. They see themselves not just as Protestants but as BRITISH Protestants.

In the wake of the Brexit referendum the British mainland started to experience this sort of identity politics. As did the US in the run-up to and election of President Donald Trump.

Apparently whether you chose Leave or Remain in the referendum is not simply a question of what you think Britain's future legal and economic relationship with the EU should be.

Instead it is a much deeper question of who you are as a person. Essentially whether you are a Good person or a Bad person.

So Britain's approach to these Brexit negotiations hasn't been so much Nebulous as full blown Existentialist.

In trying to explain this to people at the 2018 Winter Olympics I pointed out that it's not really something I experience.

Politics is basically my job. So Britain's relationship with the EU doesn't affect the way I think about human rights or efforts to combat climate change. Nor does it effect how I deal with people on a day-to-day basis.

However, particularly talking to members of the gay community of the generation before mine I do, sort of understand it.

Up until really the start of the 21st Century Britain remained a still very homophobic society. Some, who do not remember that time, would say that it still is.

If you can distill a nation's culture down to one, single thing Britain's homophobia is defined by Section 28 of the Local Government Act of 1988.

This was introduced by the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher. It declared that, at no level may British government institutions, such as schools;

"Intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality. [...] Nor promote the teaching [...] of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship."

This piece of legislation essentially turned round to every gay person in the country and declared;

"Britain does not want you. You may not call yourself British."

Feeling they were no longer allowed to identify as British this forced many gay people, along with their friends and relatives to instead identify as Europeans. To those people Britain leaving the EU must feel like a personal attack.

There is a rather cruel joke amongst those who voted to Remain (Remoaners) that the only people who voted to Leave (Brexiteers) are the extremely elderly.

The truth is that the bulk of the Remoaners are left-wing liberals from the generation older than mine.

People who came of age politically during the battles against Apartheid and Margaret Thatcher. There are some even older, who came of age during the 1968 Paris Spring. Which, unlike the so-called "2011 Arab Spring" actually happened in spring.

At the risk of a messy tangent the famous 1968 Paris Spring was actually preceded by a similar outbreak of revolutionary politics in West Germany in 1967. However being Germany it was a much more precise and orderly upheaval.

This upheaval, which has really defined the German political left ever since was triggered by the police shooting and killing a student protester. Benno Ohnesorg.

In 2009 is was finally confirmed that the police officer who fired the fatal shot, Karl-Heinz Kurras was actually an agent of the East German KGB/Stasi.

So Germany's recent discovery of Vladimir Putin's old Stasi ID is not quite Tier One Trolling. But it's getting up there. Even if as the chant goes; "*shakes head* Oh, Jeremy Corbyn."

As I attempt to wander back to my point it shouldn't really surprise you to learn that politically I came of age during the anti-globalisation protests. Against things such as GATT, the WTO, the World Bank and the IMF.

//

Although I grew up in a mixed, English-Catholic, Irish-Protestant family. So my childhood in the 1980's wasn't exactly politics. Particularly if the gathering was due to a religious rite. Such as Baptisms, Weddings, Communions.

A tradition my family has continued.

Such as my mothers', technically Civil Partnership. Which marked the start of the August, 2011 riots. Or my cousin's wedding amongst trauma doctors at the Royal London Hospital. Just before the Lee Rigby terror attack.

Incidentally that reception began with a traditional Gaelic toast. Prominently featuring the phrase; "Sinn Fein." It ended with the playing of Sloop John B.

//

The generation younger then mine are what are sometimes called; "Digital Natives." People who have lived their entire lives with ready access to high-speed Internet connections.

I think this has really changed people's sense of identity. Particularly in terms of national identity.

Throughout 2013 I spent a lot of time online with Rihanna fans. These are people who didn't identify themselves as British, American, Polish, Brazilian etc. Instead they identified themselves simply as Rihanna fans.

You also see it a lot in football. Manchester Utd have fans not only across Britain but also across the World. Something which continues to offend Mancunians of my generation, older and younger.

In this digitalised world where everything is tailored to your trends you have to try so much harder to stand out. It's no longer enough to identify as gay or straight. Instead you have to invent nonsense terms such as; "Gender Fluid" and "Pansexual."

During the 2018 Eurovision Song Contest I pointed out that generation of gay people probably don't even know that they've been born. 70 years after the founding of the State of Israel you could probably say the same thing about Beitar Jerusalem fans.

With so much of their sense of identity tied up in the notion of their Britishness the DUP and their supporters are deeply offended by the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland.

It creates what is known in the jargon as; "Regulatory Divergence." The rules in Northern Ireland will be slightly different to the rules on the British mainland.

Rather like Section 28 this says to the DUP that they are somehow less than British.

However, as with so much else that has been written or said during the Brexit debate, I think the DUP are being a bit silly about this.

Even before the start of The Troubles, let alone the Belfast Agreement there has always been significant Regulatory Divergence between Northern Ireland and the British mainland.

I'm tempted to say that if you printed out, on paper every Northern Irish regulation that diverged from a regulation on the British mainland you would need a warehouse to store it all in. Or even an aircraft hanger.

In Northern Irish politics everything can be sectarian. Everything can start a riot.

For example;

"It's a beautiful sunset. The (protestant) orange is really blessing the land."

Or;

"I can't wait for the spring. When the (republican) green rises."

So I'm going to try and stick to the least inflammatory examples of regulatory divergence;

The Accent: Okay, not strictly speaking a regulation.

However Britain is really famous for its multitude of regional accents.

To the point there is even a distinct North London accent and a Sarf (South) London accent. Of which mine tends to come out when I'm drunk. There's even a North-West London accent and a North-East London. Which tends to come out when Chelsea play West 'am Utd.

Norn Iron has its own regional accent. To absolutely anyone on the British mainland anything said in a Northern Irish accent automatically sounds like a threat.

Bank Notes: Although there is a slight divergence with Scotland on the British mainland banknotes can only be issued by the Bank on England. They are printed horizontally, from left-to-right.

All for of Northern Ireland's banks have the power to issue banknotes. Ulster Bank have just announced plans to print notes vertically. From top-to-bottom. Northern Bank actually issued a small number of these vertical notes to celebrate the 2000 millennium.

Vehicle Registration Plates: The designs of car number plates on the British mainland and in Northern Ireland are completely different.

Mainland plates have, from left to right; A National Identity code. A Regional Identity code. An Age Identifier code. Three random letters.

The national identity code is optional. And contains an image, making it hard to show here. So a typical mainland plate looks something like;

BD|51|SMR 

Northern Ireland plates have, from left-to-right; A National Identity code. A longer National Identity code. Four random numbers. They do not include an Age Identifier code.

So a typical Northern Irish plate looks something like;

BDZ|7459

I am very sensibly going to avoid the discussions about which national identity code and/or flag should be used on Northern Irish registration plates.  

At around 18:30 on 16/12/18 (UK date) I'll be leaving the rest of that list until, at least tomorrow.

Edited at around 18:15 on 17/12/18 (UK date) to copy & paste from another tab;

Policing: Always the aspect of Northern Irish society you want to tackle when you're a bit drunk.

On the British mainland the police are not routinely armed. Following the terror attacks in 2018 a lot of work went in to reassuring the public not to be alarmed because they were suddenly seeing police officers carrying guns for the first time.

In Northern Ireland the police are armed as a matter of routine. Every officer carries a handgun as a sidearm. Most patrol vehicles are also equipped with long-guns such as assault rifles.

Although they're being phased out the patrol vehicles themselves are often heavily armoured, bomb-proof Land Rovers. These are know to the people who drive them, with absolutely no level of affection as; "Pigs."

Shortly after invading Iraq in 2003 the British Military replaced its own fleet of Pigs with the similar, but much more advanced Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected (MRAP) Bearcat.

In August 2011 the British mainland experienced what residents of Northern Ireland would describe as; "Some light summer rioting."

In response then London Mayor Boris Johnson brought three water cannon vehicles for riot control. It was only after he'd paid out the GB£320,000 the then Interior Minister (Home Secretary) Theresa May pointed out that on the mainland the police aren't allowed to use water cannon.

In Northern Ireland the police are most certainly allowed to, and do use water cannon.

On the British mainland the standard police uniform is dark blue, or increasingly black. The standard uniform of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) is green.

This is something the DUP are still a bit sensitive about. The change is the result of the dismantling of the RUC, who wore blue uniforms, under the Belfast Agreement.

The DUP were only prepared to accept the Irish green because it was the colour worn by the Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC). Back when the entire island of Ireland was a British colony.

All parties were happy to agree that the replacement for the RUC should not be named the Northern Irish Police Service. After all, no-one likes getting caught by the NIPS.

The Provision of Public Services: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) forbids discrimination AGAINST people in the provision of public services based on race, religion etc.

Although they collect extensive data authorities on the British mainland are not allowed to base their decisions on race, religion etc.

This has actually caused its own set of segregation problems between Muslims and non-Muslims in many northern English towns and cities. I suspect France will be getting another lecture on just this multiculturalism doctrine at the 2019 Eurovision Song Contest. To be held in Israel.

In Northern Ireland authorities are most certainly allowed to discriminate FOR people based on, primarily religion. This is particularly true in the area of social housing.

Simply if you house a Protestant family in the middle of deeply Catholic housing estate within a week the house will have been burnt to the ground. Likewise if you house a Catholic family in the middle of a deeply Protestant housing estate. There's no such thing as a mixed housing estate.

It's testament to what a success the Belfast Agreement has been that apparently people are now starting to use this to game the system. Sending themselves death threats in order to get moved to one of the nice new build houses in the suburbs.

Gay Rights: In the Republic of Ireland gay, or equal marriage is now legal. As it is on the British mainland.

However in Northern Ireland it remains illegal. Almost entirely at the insistence of the DUP.

So I think they're likely to be doubly offended by all those jokes about the SAS spending the night in Bobby Sands. I know his mother certainly was.

Abortion: In the Republic of Ireland abortion is now legal. As it has been on the British mainland since before the start of The Troubles.

However in Northern Ireland abortion remains illegal. Again almost entirely at the insistence of the DUP.

The Northern Irish Assembly: The biggest, and probably most controversial example.

Under the Belfast Agreement Northern Ireland has, effectively its own Parliament. The entire purpose of which is passing laws and regulations which are different from those on the British mainland.

The DUP are really not happy about the Northern Irish Assembly. To the point they are keeping it suspended and out of session. In the hope of forcing the return of direct rule from London.

Making the DUP the only political party in Britain, and possibly the entire World which is actively trying to have powers taken away from it.

In part two I said that no-one wants to see a return to the security measures of The Troubles. The truth is that there is a hardline faction of DUP supporters, if not the party itself who absolutely do want to see a return to those security measures.

They think that the enhanced Anti-Terrorism laws brought in after 9/11 mean they can win the war this time around.

On the mainland the Labour Party's approach to the Withdrawal Agreement is the same as the party's approach has been to every issue since the June 2017 General Election. Use it to try and bring down the government.

Labour Finance Minister John McDonnell has made quite clear that his party does not think the collapse of the government should lead to a General Election. Instead he thinks it should lead to the Labour Party simply being appointed as the government.

Bear that in mind when Labour introduce a no confidence motion in the government claiming that Prime Minister May is denying the public its voice in a second referendum.

The Provisional Irish Republican Army's (PIRA) mainland bombing campaign of the 1980's and 1990's was not intended to kill. In fact, bizarrely every PIRA terror cell had its own, sort of health & safety officer. In the Birmingham & Warrington cells the health & safety officers failed.

Instead the PIRA bombing campaign was intended to do massive economic damage. Effectively to bankrupt Britain. This is why post-9/11 Anti-Terrorism laws have specific provisions for this type of economic terrorism.

So I'm fast running out of reasons why John McDonnell and others in his party haven't been arrested on a formal charge of insurrection.

As I'm sure former Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams will remind them. They have the right to be offered food. There's no guarantee they'll actually get fed.

In their efforts, both legal and otherwise, to overthrow the government the Labour Party frequently point to the GB£1bn Prime Minister May promised the DUP as part of the confidence & supply deal. The so-called; "Magic Money Tree."

What they've failed to realise is that with the Northern Irish Assembly suspended the DUP can't actually spend any of that money. It's effectively sitting in escrow.

So this terrible negotiator Theresa May appears to have pulled a little bit of a fast one on the DUP. Which is no mean feat.

As for making the Scottish National Party (SNP) look foolish. Well, that's akin to bullying the mentally disabled.

Maximum Facilitation.

Despite the DUP leading the opposition to the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland it has been drawn up almost exclusively for their benefit.

The far easier solution would be to simply declare Northern Ireland a Frontier Territory under GATT.

This would mean that technically Northern Ireland would leave the EU Single Market along with the rest of the UK. However no customs controls would be imposed on the Ireland/Northern Ireland border. All goods in both markets would be considered to be in Free Circulation.

However in order to prevent so-called leakage (smuggling) both into and out of the EU Single Market a loose border would have to be placed around the entire island of Ireland. This is actually much more of a problem for the Republic of Ireland who would have to put up with customs checks despite being a member of the EU Single Market.

It is though the DUP who would be utterly furious about it. It would create a border in the Irish Sea, making quite clear that Northern Ireland is separate from the British mainland.

Again though I think the DUP are being overly sensitive about this.

During the 1980's and 1990's PIRA was using coffee grinders to build fertiliser bombs in farm houses in the Armagh badlands. They would then load these bombs onto trucks and drive them onto ferries to the mainland. Where they would be used to blow up huge chunks of British cities such as London, Manchester and Warrington.

Ultimately bringing about the financial collapse of the Lloyds of London Insurance Group. Long a jewel in the crown of the City of London's financial institutions. Hence, economic terrorism.

Funnily enough during this time there was a hard, security border running down the Irish Sea. Clearly separating Northern Ireland from the British mainland.

This hard border though was based on intelligence gathering and covert surveillance. So very few people ever knew it was there. Save for the occasional invoking of Section 8 of the 1974 Prevention of Terrorism Act. A provision which became permanent, if rarely used under Schedule VII of the Terrorism Act 2000.

One of the surprising side effect of the Belfast Agreement was an increase in gun crime on the British mainland. Particularly in Manchester and Liverpool. As this hard border was gradually scaled back as part of the peace process a small percentage of, primarily Loyalist, guns were not decommissioned. They were sold on.

Despite both the Belfast Agreement and the EU Single Market there is still, a much lighter hard border down the Irish Sea. However unless you're in the business of trafficking illegal drugs or weapons you'd never know it was there.

You only need to look at the cellphones were using now to see how much technology has moved on since 1998. So it should be entirely possible to make this customs border around the island of Ireland entirely invisible and frictionless. This is known as the; "Maximum Facilitation (MaxFac)" plan.

The reason why the EU rejected it during negotiations was that it would require Britain to act as a tax collector for the EU.

Something the EU were far from convinced about with the Hard Brexiteers insisting that Britain doesn't even need to pay its existing debts.

I hope that during the Transition Period it is an idea that can be revisited.

It almost goes without saying though that anything which would inhibit the free movement of British citizens within any part of Britain is an absolute red line.

Even if they are engaging in the traditional and expected levels of smuggling for personal use.

18:35 on 17/12/18 (UK date).



https://twitter.com/MajaEUspox/status/107355177379578265