The largely positive response in Westminster today to Boris Johnson’s Brexit proposal – sketched out in his keynote conference speech – implied that Johnson has struck gold with a new deal. Meanwhile, on the other side of the negotiating table, the proposals have been met with raised eyebrows and scepticism. Where does this leave us?
In parliament, it looks as if Johnson is getting key groups on side. Despite having no majority since expelling 21 Conservative rebels – the numbers very much might be there. They come from the DUP support, which in turn guarantees at least some ERG support, and then votes from Labour rebels (mostly those in Leave voting constituencies), and most of those 21 Conservative rebels – who supported May’s deal.
Even though Boris might just have the numbers, he has still been met with considerable opposition in parliament. Anna Soubry of Change UK, a Tory defector, congratulated him on striking a deal with the “ERG and DUP”, while Sylvia Hernon, an independent unionist MP, and the only Northern Irish MP in the chamber at that moment, said the proposal indicated that Johnson simply doesn’t understand the complexities.
But Mark Francois, stalwart of the ERG, has said that he thinks Johnson could get the numbers to get a deal over the line, with these proposals forming its basis. Crucially – the so-called “Spartans” of the ERG will only offer their support if the DUP are onside.
Which is just as well, since Arlene Foster has indicated her approval of the proposals, saying it is a “sensible way forward.”
“It allows the people of Northern Ireland consent in a way not provided by the anti-democratic backstop. We hope that people will look at it in a serious way.”
So long as the DUP is happy, Johnson can obtain something verging on parliamentary consent, it seems. But getting support in parliament, and having the EU sign off on the proposals are not the same thing.
In the same way that the Conservatives are largely beholden to the approval of the DUP, the EU is, at least in part, beholden to the support of Dublin. While both Dublin and the EU have expressed their gratitude that the UK has finally put forward tangible and negotiable proposals, both are clear that as they stand, the plans fall short of something they could accept.
Donald Tusk, President of the EU Council, tweeted:
“My message to Taoiseach [Leo Varadkar]: We stand fully behind Ireland.
My message to PM [BorisJohnson]: We remain open but still unconvinced.”
The European Parliament Brexit Steering Group said that this is not an agreement the EU parliament could consent to: “The proposals do not address the real issues that need to be resolved if the backstop were to be removed, namely the all-island economy, the full respect of the Good Friday Agreement and the integrity of the Single Market.”
Leo Varadkar said in a statement that the proposals fall short in all areas. He said he was glad that Boris Johnson made verbal commitments to avoiding any kind of border infrastructure as part of his proposal, but added that this statement directly contradicts the way the plan is laid out on paper. His deputy, and Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney told the Dáil this morning that “if this is the final proposal, there will be no deal”, citing the “fundamental problems” on customs and consent of Stormont.
On Stormont, he is referring to the condition of the proposal that gives the Northern Irish Assembly power to withdraw from the arrangements on an ongoing basis – something that would not only require more customs checks, but also a condition that effectively grants the DUP with a veto on maintaining regulatory alignment.
Trickily for Boris Johnson, it is precisely that de facto veto handed to the DUP that has won him their support. What is acceptable to the DUP then is fundamentally unacceptable to the EU and Dublin, and vice versa.
Arlene Foster, responding to Coveney’s statement said his remarks were “deeply unhelpful, obstructionist and intransigent… the Irish government’s preparedness to dump the consent principle for their country’s expediency is foolishness in the extreme and sends a very clear message to unionists.”
Boris Johnson’s entire political strategy with this proposal depends on him looking like he has parliament behind him – so long as that is the case, the EU, wanting to avoid no deal, will have to be open to negotiating with Johnson on these terms, runs the logic.
If they don’t, they will look like the clear obstructionists to an orderly exit from the EU, and the architects of no deal. However, they are also bound by certain principles themselves and commitments they have made to Ireland, which means they will only be able to sign Johnson’s deal with some further compromise. The more Johnson compromises, if he compromises, the faster his alleged support in parliament falls away. Both sides are trapped, and any wrong step could tip the balance into a no deal outcome.