Boris backtracks

Asthebrexitnegotiationsrumble on between the UK and the EU the nature of the compromise which the UK will have to make drives a coach and horses through the legal commitments already given

The prime minister is seeking to convince Brussels (and Dublin) that he has a better way of achieving what the backstop does, which is to guarantee that there will be no new border-related infrastructure or checks on the island of Ireland. His proposal, however, represents a backtrack from the most basic commitments his government has made.

These commitments are not just rhetorical, they are rooted in international law, which is what the Belfast Agreement is. But it is easy to forget that they are also in British law – in the very Act under which Brexit is supposed to be conducted.

Section 10(2)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 explicitly commits the UK not to “create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU”.

This could not be clearer: what is ruled out is not just posts on the border but any infrastructure, any checks, and any controls that do

not currently exist. There is nowhere in the world where two different customs and/or market regimes have a frontier across which trade flows without checks, controls and infrastructure. But all the energy among the Brexiteers has gone into trying to escape this inescapable reality. The PM’S proposals acknowledge that even if all the magical technology works, there will still be checks, controls and (implicitly) infrastructure. The British Government has broken its own solemn legal and political commitments.

ALEX ORR Marchmont Road, Edinburgh