Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland – Written evidence (NIP0007)
Overview
The primary damage caused by the Protocol has been constitutional. This constitutional change has been found to be at odds with the Act of Union. This constitutional change received no consent from the people of Northern Ireland and does not command cross community support. There has of course been significant disruption to Northern Ireland’s economy due to the displacement of trade, the unavailability of goods and the erosion of Northern Ireland’s place in the UK single market.
The UK Government may have ‘got Brexit done’ for Great Britain, but they certainly have not delivered Brexit for the United Kingdom. The UK Government have been expedient and complicit in delivering the wholly unacceptable position whereby a constituent part of the UK has been ‘left behind’ – still subject to EU laws, customs, vat regime and subservient to the ECJ.
The NI Protocol Bill goes some way to addressing the concerns of those issues however it is light on detail and is effectively merely enabling legislation. In order to properly address the issues of the NI Protocol, the Bill needs to be more robust so that its content effectively removes and supersedes the harmful constitutional and economic threats contained in the Protocol.
The Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland did not support the Belfast Agreement. Our members believe that it has delivered an appeasement process rather than a peace process. However, it must be recognised that the Protocol clearly contravenes the spirit and substance of that Agreement. The Protocol ignores the need for cross community consent for constitutional change. Furthermore it undermines the East-West dimension of the Agreement to protect and enhance, at all costs, the North-South dimension.
Without the support and consent of the Unionist community on the arrangements regarding the Protocol, there should be no return to the political institutions of the Northern Ireland Assembly.
If the Protocol Bill delivers its aims of restoring sovereignty over NI to the UK Government, then there will certainly be a better chance of restoring political stability.
Due to the excesses of the Protocol, Northern Ireland’s economy has become increasingly orientated towards Dublin with a huge upturn in cross border trade. As Unionists, we believe this is to the detriment of our place within the United Kingdom and that the resulting increased economic homogony, is a dangerous precursor which strengthens the case of those seeking political unification.
Any resolution which restores NI’s place within the UK single market and removes impediments to free trade within the UK will have a positive impact on the NI and UK economies.
The UK Government does not require any justification for taking steps to undo
the damage caused to the nation’s constitution.
Northern Ireland intentionally or otherwise has been created a ‘place apart’ under the Brexit arrangements despite the assurances of successive Prime Ministers that no such constitutional damage would occur. It is therefore entirely right that the UK Government seek to make good on their promises to the people of Northern Ireland and take whatever steps necessary to fix the mess they helped create.
If Northern Ireland’s sovereignty within the UK is to be fully restored and respected the imposition of any checks for goods staying within the UK single market is unacceptable.
If the EU are insistent that goods moving to the EU via Northern Ireland need to be checked, these checks must be carried out in a territory where the EU has jurisdiction.
Red and Green lanes sound plausible in theory – however this solution still
requires a ‘hard border’ between UK and NI when these checks, if needed should be carried out by the EU in the Republic of Ireland for goods entering that jurisdiction.
Any solution which treats NI to UK trade, or UK to NI trade, differently than the same trade within other UK regions simply reinforces the fact that NI is a place apart – a ‘third country’ in trading terms.
There should be no legal implications of the UK Government making decisions on the fiscal and constitutional integrity of its territory.
Such a development would facilitate the restoration of the UK single market in its true sense and remove the interference of a foreign power in the tax and vat affairs of the UK.
Those who negotiated and signed up to the Protocol should never have allowed the ECJ to retain interventionist powers in the internal affairs of the United Kingdom. By removing the need to comply with EU laws, the need for ECJ oversight and intervention is also removed.
We reiterate the fact that there should be no legal implications of the UK Government making decisions on the fiscal and constitutional integrity of its territory.
The threshold for triggering Article 16 has been met long ago. The lack of functioning government in Northern Ireland precipitated by the withdrawal of the DUP from the Northern Ireland executive clearly constitutes ‘societal difficulties’.
The ongoing reorientation of the NI economy towards Dublin also clearly
illustrates ‘financial difficulties’ and the inability of NI consumers to source basic
items including medical items from GB suppliers clearly illustrates
‘environmental difficulties’.
Article 16 is of course not an answer in itself to the difficulties caused by the Protocol – but by enacting it the UK Government would show a statement of intent and a recognition that the status quo cannot continue.
The EU have been bullish and arrogant in their approach to Northern Ireland. They have clearly ignored the concerns of the Unionist community and have made no constructive effort to understand the flaws and consequence of their policy. They have been aided in this regard by the Dublin government who have irresponsible at times in their commentary.
There has been no evidence to suggest that recent ‘warm words’ from the EU or Dublin will in fact deliver any satisfactory outcome on the Northern Ireland Protocol. The recommencement of infringement proceedings again brings into question the EU’s willingness to offer any form of compromise.
It must be remembered that many of the worst excesses of the Protocol are yet
to be felt in Northern Ireland thanks to the continuing ‘grace periods’.
The UK Government needs to act unilaterally to restore sovereignty to all parts of the United Kingdom.
The mistakes made in the Brexit withdrawal agreement need to be corrected and Northern Ireland fully restored as an integral part of the UK internal market.
It seems unlikely that the EU will voluntarily give away the ability to enforce their laws and tax/vat arrangements on Northern Ireland.
Whilst negotiations may help smooth some operational difficulties, our problem is not with how the Protocol operates – it is fundamentally with the very existence of the Protocol.
Both sides should recognise the shortcomings of their previous negotiations which resulted in a flawed withdrawal agreement and Protocol.
Northern Ireland must be treated in exactly the same way as the other constituent regions of the United Kingdom. There should no hindrance or additional bureaucracy applied to GB-NI trade. In doing so, economic and constitutional sovereignty will be restored.
If the EU want to check goods entering their trading area – then they should be free to do so on territory over which they have jurisdiction. Furthermore, the EU must move to permanently postpone the ending of so called ‘grace periods’ which have the potential to effectively deprive Northern Ireland of essential medical and veterinary supplies.
27 October 2022