Reflecting on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal, I have many questions.
Why are people who rejected the possibility of Northern Ireland being subject to EU rules and regulation via a contingent backstop now embracing the certainty of that happening?
How could anyone reasonably expect the DUP to sign up to something that really does make Northern Ireland a very, very different part of the Union? Something they were repeatedly promised would never be conceded.
Why are none of the people who used to be furious about the ‘£39 billion’ (actually less now but never mind) objecting to paying it now?
Why shouldn’t MPs have at least a superficial analysis of the economic trade-offs made in this deal? In short, the deal means we’re prepared to definitely do less trade with our biggest trading partner in exchange for the possibility of doing more with partners with whom we have less trade such as the US. That’s a legitimate cost for a country to make, but our representatives should be able to debate the numbers involved before they sign up to it on our behalf.
Why, when it comes to the negotiation of a future trade deal, would the EU budge on the level playing field when they now know that even a Tory government isn’t prepared to die in a ditch over ‘Singapore-on-Sea’? Expect future British politics to be all about that deal, the trade-offs such a deal – and others – will entail.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in