Of human rights and Brexit: the importance of the EU Charter.

Yesterday, as you may be aware, was Day Two of the Commons’ consideration of the Lords amendments to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill. Lords amendments that were up for debate in the House included Amendment no. 1 (to prevent the repeal of the 1972 Act unless the UK government sets out plans to negotiate a continued customs union post Brexit); amendment no. 51 (to oblige the UK government to prioritise continued participation in the EEA during the negotiations); and amendment no. 5 (to allow for the transposition of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights into domestic law post Brexit). I had been glued to the Commons livestream and BBC Parliament throughout Tuesday (13 June), Day One of consideration, and Wednesday, Day Two of same.

Yesterday, I recalled how I had followed as the Lords inflicted defeat after defeat on the UK government on the Bill. I remembered feeling so utterly relieved that vital issues had been raised in the Lords, and that important amendments had been tabled to the Bill (including an amendment to uphold the provisions of the Good Friday Agreement, to allow for continued North-South co-operation, and to prevent a hard border on the island). I had felt so frustrated at the government’s lack of consideration of such pressing issues, at their continuous intent to pursue a hard Brexit, at their seemingly haphazard Brexit policy. To see the Lords debate and consider the issues which the government seemed intent to ignore was refreshing and uplifting. Finally, I thought, finally issues like the Good Friday Agreement and the need to prevent the imposition of a hard border in Ireland were being considered and would be inserted into draft legislation. Finally, human rights and equality protections were being recognised, and tabled for inclusion in the draft legislation.

You see, the outcome of the European Referendum in the United Kingdom which led to the Brexit result always had vast political, economic and social implications. There remains, however, considerable uncertainty as to what those ramifications will be – including the implications for human rights standards and protection. This uncertainty has not been helped by the repeated dismissals of the UK government that human rights and equality protections would not diminish – even as the White Paper on the then-named Great Repeal Bill was published, with the deliberate ommission of the EU Charter.

The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill when introduced in the Commons last year in accordance with the White paper did not make provision for the retention of the Charter. The UK government considered then (and still does now) it to be an exception to the incorporation of EU law into UK law, with the Bill stating the Charter shall not be part of domestic law on or after exit day. The Bill states this does not affect the retention of any fundamental rights or principles which exist irrespective of the Charter. The UK Government has emphasised that the Charter did not create new rights; rather it codified rights and principles already present in EU law.

This claim is inaccurate.

All EU member states have signed up to the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Charter was given legal status in 2007 through the Lisbon Treaty, and was introduced in December 2009. The Charter complements the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and recognises at Article 52(3) that wherever Charter rights correspond to Convention rights, the meaning and scope of the rights are the same as those laid down by the Convention. This provision does not prevent EU law providing more expansive protection. Indeed, EU law has availed of this, as outlined below.

Now, the scope of the Charter is narrower than the ECHR, in that it applies the convention rights only to public bodies and only when they make decisions within the scope of EU Law. Moreover, the Charter has not been incorporated into domestic law through the Human Rights Act 1998. However, in other respects, the Charter offers greater scope through enforcement at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The CJEU can disapply national law and provide remedies. In contrast, recognised breaches of Convention rights in primary legislation can only lead to a declaration of incompatibility, thus leaving any remedy to Parliament. Moreover, the Charter also goes beyond the Convention in outlining social and economic rights alongside civil and political rights under the headings of dignity, freedom, equality, solidarity, citizen’s rights and justice.

Therefore, whilst rights similar to most Charter rights can be found in ECHR and domestic laws, it is important to note that similar is not necessarily the same. The Charter protects important rights that may not be fully secured by other sources.

The Charter is widely considered to be the most advanced document of its kind, and includes rights that cannot be found in any other directly enforceable fundamental rights instrument to which the UK is a party. Unlike older instruments, the Charter contains ‘third generation’ rights – such as to data protection and guarantees on bioethics – that have proven especially important in protecting people’s rights in light of rapid technological and societal change.

UK law does not have the domestic equivalent of the Charter, meaning there could be a gap in human rights protections for such outlined third generation fundamental rights ie socio-economic rights post-Brexit.

Lord Pannick moved the amendment in the Lords which sought to allow for the transposition of the Charter into UK statute post Brexit. He emphasised the significant protections it provides, the legal uncertainty that would be generated should it not be incorporated into domestic law, and the loss of rights protections which are not present in current domestic legislation. The majority of peers who voted on his amendment understood the significance of the Charter, and voted in favour of retaining it. And so the government was defeated.

The government had avoided an embarassing defeat previously in the Commons. In November 2017, the former Attorney General Dominic Grieve MP tabled an amendment that would have enshrined the EU Charter into UK law as part of the EU (Withdrawal) Bill. During the third day of debate on the Bill, the Solicitor General, Robert Buckland, said the UK Government was willing to work with Mr Grieve to see how rights under the Charter could be kept after Brexit, and would introduce its own amendment to this effect later in the bill’s passage. Mr Grieve said that was sufficient reassurance for him, and so he would not press for a vote on his amendment.

On the 5th December 2017, the UK Government published its Right by Right analysis of the Charter. The conclusion was that there would no weakening of rights protections post-Brexit, even if the Charter ceased to be part of UK statute. However, the UK Government’s Right by Right analysis, contrary to its aim, clearly demonstrates what will be lost when the Charter is abandoned. As highlighted by Liberty and Amnesty, the analysis cites the general principles of EU as providing equivalent rights -yet these are the very same principles whose enforceability is eroded by the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill.

In addition, the Equality and Human Rights Commission sought independent legal advice which found that, as opposed to the prevention of weakening of rights protections, rights would in fact be lost, such as those which do not have direct equivalents in other UK human rights law e.g a freestanding right to non-discrimination, protection of a child’s best interests and the right to human dignity.

The Opinion concluded:
In summary, therefore, my principal conclusion is that the approach currently taken in the Bill does not achieve the Government’s stated intention that the protection of substantive rights conferred by the Charter will not be weakened. That intention can only be achieved by 13 incorporating relevant provisions of the Charter in the corpus of EU law which is retained after Brexit.

And so we come full circle, to Lord Pannick’s amendment receiving support from a majority of peers in the Lords, to that amendment returning to the Commons for a potential showdown in accordance with parliamentary ping pong. I followed the debate with interest.

In April this year, at the SDLP annual conference, I proposed my motion which included a provision to note with concern that the UK government’s EU (Withdrawal) Bill omitted to transpose the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights into domestic law upon withdrawal from the EU. I noted my concern that the government’s Brexit policy was not considering vital human rights and equality protections. My motion overall called for the prevention of any weakening of human rights protection post-Brexit.

I spoke in my capacity as the SDLP’s International Secretary, and said (half jokingly!) how since I was elected to the post, I had not stopped talking about the ramifications of Brexit to NI, but particularly my concerns about implications for human rights and equality standards.

Yesterday, I watched as the House of Commons voted by just twenty votes (321-301) to reject the amendment from the House of Lords to the EU (Withdrawal) Bill that would have incorporated the EU Charter into domestic law.

Watching as the vote was confirmed, I felt a crushing sense of loss.

The EU Charter provides for additional recognition and protection for third generation, fundamental rights, socio-economic rights such as workers’ rights (including collective bargaining). The Charter has allowed for the evolution of important rights we now take for granted. It has been a valuable addition to equality and non-discrimination law, specifically around LGBT rights, children’s rights, and rights of the elderly. I could not, and today I still cannot understand how MPs could vote to reject important provisions on human rights, equality, and non-discrimination protections.

I was disappointed, but sadly not surprised. After all, the party of government has long supported the repeal of the Human Rights Act 1998, and its replacement with a British Bill of Rights. Moreover, the Conservative party would also been keen to see the UK withdraw from the ECHR – a deeply concerning prospect.

No matter what the UK government, various ministers, or the UK government’s ‘right by right analysis’ state, UK law does not have the equivalent of the EU Charter. Excluding the EU Charter from the EU (Withdrawal) Bill, with the implication that it will not be retained post Brexit, will result in a significant reduction in human rights protections. There will be a gap in human rights protections for those third generational rights, those socio-economic rights, as well as generate legal uncertainty and confusion.

There will also be a specific impact on NI: the Good Friday Agreement provided that there would be an equivalence of human rights and equality standards across the island of Ireland. If NI loses the protections advanced by the EU Charter whilst the Republic retains them, then citizens in NI will suffer from a diminution of human rights standards, recognition, and protection. The UK government is a co-guarantor of the Agreement; it should be aware that its desire to refrain from incorporating the EU Charter into domestic law clashes with the Agreement.

The overall decision to leave the European Union has highlighted -and in conjunction with the UK government’s current Brexit policy, threatened -the Good Friday Agreement’s aim of ensuring an equivalent level of human rights protection across the island of Ireland. The potential loss of the Charter in conjunction with the ongoing absence of a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland means human rights protections could be undermined. The UK government as a co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement must understand it has a responsibility to support the full implementation and realisation of all provisions of the Agreement, including those which require equivalent human rights standards and protections. Apparently, the UK government is not aware of this important responsibility.

At the SDLP annual conference, I concluded my speech by saying, “Theresa May says Brexit means Brexit. We must say human rights mean human rights.”

I am disappointed and frustrated by yesterday’s vote and the continuation of the UK government to pursue a purist Brexit ideology which is ignoring human rights and equality provisions. We deserve better. Our human rights deserve better.

Advertisements

Davis/Barnier press conference after fifth round of talks.

(Given the recent Brexit developments, including the European Council summit and Theresa May’s Brussels dinner, I thought to share a summary of the last Brexit talks’ presser.)

Speaking after four days of negotiations, the Chief Negotiator for the EU, Michel Barnier, said the EU and the UK are in “deadlock” over the UK’s financial commitments, but progress could be made by Christmas.

Mr Barnier said the EU and the UK share the same objectives: protecting rights of EU citizens, safeguarding the peace process in Northern Ireland and getting a financial settlement.

Regarding citizens’ rights, he said there were two common aims: ensuring the withdrawal agreement has direct effect, and ensuring the interpretation of these rights is “consistent” between the EU and the UK. Both sides were working on this, and it would involve the European Court of Justice.

On the issue of the island of Ireland, Mr Barnier said the EU and the UK reached an agreement on the Common Travel Area (CTA). “Intensive work” had been taken on the Irish question, with more work to come. Both sides were examining North/South co-operation.

Mr Barnier said that on the issue of the UK’s financial commitments, both sides had reached “deadlock” which he described as “very disturbing”. With the UK still not ready to outline its commitments, he added this meant not enough progress had been made in the negotiations. Concluding his remarks, Mr Barnier said with political will, “decisive progress is within our grasp over the next two months”.

Following the EU’s Chief Negotiator, the Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, David Davis, said whilst there was still a lot of work to do, they have come a long way.

On citizens’ rights, they focused on ensuring how rights could be guaranteed in a fair way. The UK and the EU had not yet reached an agreement on how to enforce these rights, but various options were being examined and both sides were confident a deal would be reached.

Mr Davis said that with regards to the Irish question, more work was required but further progress had been made. Both sides have agreed to start working on common undertakings to protect the Good Friday agreement.

On the financial settlement, Mr Davis said that would be a “political issue”. Concluding his remarks, he stressed that both sides must discuss the future relationship, and expressed a hope that the European Council will allow Mr Barnier to let talks progress to discussing a future trade relationship.

Further talks over the next two months have been agreed.

Brexit, Borders, and lack of progress – news round-up.

Brexit negotiations: round four

Brexit: Fresh round of negotiations to take place [BBC News]

Brexit: Davis sees ‘no excuse for standing in way of progress’ [BBC News] The fourth round of Brexit negotiations commenced this week. This was the first opportunity for the EU delegation to respond to Theresa May’s recent speech in Florence.

As talks commenced, the EU’s Chief Negotiator, Michel Barnier, called for a “moment of clarity” from the UK. Mr Barnier said the process had been going six months and progress on key separation issues was essential. Mr Barnier said he was “keen and eager” for the UK to translate the “constructive” sentiments in Mrs May’s recent Florence speech into firm negotiating positions on issues such as citizens’ rights, the Irish border and financial issues, including the UK’s so-called divorce bill.

He issued a reminder that the UK was “six months into the process” and “we are getting closer to the UK’s withdrawal.”

Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis, said he hoped for progress on all fronts – but made clear any agreement on financial matters could only be reached in the context of the UK’s future partnership with the EU. He said there were “no excuses for standing in the way of progress”.

About progress…

Brexit: Donald Tusk says not enough progress in talks [BBC News]

Donald Tusk: ‘No sufficient progress yet’ in Brexit talks [POLITICO EU] European Council President Donald Tusk has said not enough progress has been made to move to the next phase of Brexit talks in Brussels. Speaking after talks with Prime Minister Theresa May, Mr Tusk said: “I feel now we will discuss our future relations with the UK once there is so-called sufficient progress. The two sides are working and we will work hard at it. But if you ask me and if today member states ask me, I would say there is no sufficient progress yet. But we will work on it.”

Mr Tusk’s comments come barely a month before the European Council will decide whether sufficient progress has been made to begin trade talks, as the UK wants. If it is determined that ‘sufficient progress’ has not been made, the EU’s negotiators will be directed to continue focusing the negotiations on the issues of citizens’ rights, the financial settlement and the Northern Irish border. They will not allowed to move to discussions about a transition period or the future trade relationship sought by the UK.

Northern Ireland and the border: round four

Brexit: Northern Ireland and Irish border on talks agenda [BBC News NI] Northern Ireland and the Irish border were discussed at the Brexit negotiations on Wednesday. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis, said UK and EU negotiators will be “crunching through the technical detail” of the Good Friday peace agreement and the Common Travel Area (CTA).

Meanwhile, the view south of the border…

Leo Varadkar: ‘Too early’ to assess Brexit progress [BBC News] Prime Minister Theresa May met Taoiseach Leo Varadkar in London for talks on Brexit and Northern Ireland’s political deadlock. During her recent speech in Florence, Mrs May had reiterated the UK’s position that there would be no hard Irish border after Brexit. Although the UK will be leaving both the customs union and the single market, she said that both the UK and EU had “stated explicitly” they would not accept any “physical infrastructure”. Speaking after the talks, Mr Varadkar said he had encouraged Mrs May to be “more specific” about her view of the future UK-Irish relationship. He added that he thought it was too early to determine whether the UK has made sufficient progress during the Brexit negotiations.

News round-up: Brexit, Island of Ireland, and UK responsibility.

Welcome to the Houses of the Oireachtas

There will be a special meeting of the several committees with Guy Verhofstadt MEP, the European Parliament’s Brexit Coordinator, this morning from 10:30am.

The committees meeting Mr Verhofstadt for engagement are: Joint Committee on European Union Affairs meeting with the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defence, and the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement.

Further shores

In his address, Mr Verhofstadt reiterated that “the Irish border and all things related are a priority for negotiations” for the EU. The “unique solution” to Brexit issues in Northern Ireland is the responsibility of the UK government, which must consider the Good Friday Agreement. He suggested Northern Ireland could continue to be in the customs union and the single market post-Brexit as way to prevent a hard border on the island.

Mr Verhofstadt concluded his address with a lovely Seamus Heaney quote: “believe that a further shore is reachable from here.”

Brexit expedition

Mr Verhofstadt is on the second day of a two-day Brexit fact-finding mission on the island of Ireland. He met Northern Irish political party leaders on Wednesday, and will meet the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar on today.

Guy Verhofstadt: UK must find ‘unique’ Irish border solution [Politico EU]

Yesterday, Mr Verhofstadt said the UK had the responsibility to find a “unique solution” to the border issue. He suggested that Northern Ireland could continue to be in the customs union and the single market after Brexit as a way to prevent a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland – but this was a decision for the UK.

All eyes on Theresa

A special cabinet meeting at Downing Street this morning will give its formal backing to Prime Minister Theresa May’s landmark Brexit speech, which she will deliver in Florence tomorrow.

But remember: devolution revolution

Scottish and Welsh governments set out Brexit bill amendments [BBC News]

This week, Scottish and Welsh governments published proposals for amendments to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill. First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon and First Minister of Wales, Carwyn Jones said the Bill is a “power grab” of devolved responsibilities. Writing to the Prime Minister, they said their amendments would allow the bill to “work with, not against, devolution”.

News roundup: delay in talks, a sudden speech – it’s all about Brexit.

Whose Brexit is it, anyway?

Following on from yesterday’s news, Theresa May to deliver Brexit speech in Florence [Politics Home]

Prime Minister Theresa May will make a major speech in Florence on 22 September to set out her vision for the next stages of the Brexit talks. Downing Street said the PM will underline the UK’s wish for a “special partnership” with the EU after Brexit – May to set out post-Brexit ‘partnership’ [BBC News]

The speech will come almost six months to the day after Mrs May invoked Article 50. Little progress has been made, with the next round of Brexit talks have been delayed to provide for this latest intervention. The speech is being made a month before the important EU Council summit on 22 October – when the EU27 leaders will discuss whether “sufficient progress” has been made to start trade talks. The UK needs the EU27 to determine that ‘sufficient progress’ has been made, as without it, no talks on future UK-EU trade deals can commence. However, at the conclusion of August’s round of negotiations, Michel Barnier said no decisive progress had been made. A breakthrough is now needed.

See: Next round of Brexit talks delayed by a week, Government confirms [Politics Home] It has been confirmed that both the EU and the UK have agreed the next round of Brexit talks will take place on 25 September. Negotiators from both sides had been expected to re-start their discussions on 18 September.

Parliamentary Corner:

Conservatives accused of ‘running scared’ after dodging votes on pay cap and tuition fees [Politics Home] The Conservatives have been accused of “running scared” of he UK Parliament after shying away front confronting two Commons votes they were set to lose. No Conservative forced a division following Labour-led debates on the public sector pay cap and tuition fees. This came after it was revealed that the DUP were planning to vote with Labour on both issues, robbing the Conservatives of their working majority.

Labour’s motions passed on Wednesday without being pushed to a vote after it became clear the government had no majority to oppose the call for an end to the public sector pay cap for NHS workers nor the £250 a year increase in student fees.

It is the first example of the DUP breaking with May since they struck a confidence and supply agreement to vote together on crucial legislation after the general election.

The question becomes: might Labour be able to exploit differences between the Conservatives and the DUP in the future in order to inflict future defeats on the Government?

Parliamentary… sovereignty?

Brexit: EU repeal bill wins first Commons vote [BBC News] On Tuesday morning, after two days of debate and around 100 MPs contributing, MPs backed the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill by 326 votes to 290. The Bill’s committee stage will take place when MPs return to Parliament after their party conferences. The Bill will be heard by a Committee of the Whole House, and around eight days have been set aside for the process.

From a NI perspective: all ten DUP MPs supported the Government. Lady Sylvia Hermon (Ind, North Down) supported Labour’s amendment, and voted against the Government.

The UK Government has won one battle, but has the war entire to still fight for. MPs have tabled 29 new clauses and 136 amendments to the EU (Withdrawal) Bill. Labour’s proposed amendments would deny ministers ‘Henry VIII’ powers, meaning the UK Parliament would have to vote to implement a withdrawal agreement and give some repatriated powers to the devolved assemblies. Those backed by Tories -including Dominic Grieve, Ken Clarke, Nicky Morgan and Anna Soubry – involve transposing the Charter of Fundamental Rights into UK law, limiting ministers’ powers to amend EU law, and a requirement for the final deal with the EU to be approved by Parliament.

And finally…

The UK Government won its crucial Commons vote on Tuesday night to give the Conservatives a majority on every law-making committee of the parliament, despite not having an overall majority in the House. The Conservatives had to rely on the 10 DUP MPs to ensure the motion was passed.

  • The UK Parliament goes into recess this afternoon, as party conference season gets underway. First up is the Liberal Democrats’ party conference (16th-19th September), followed by the Labour Party (24th-27th September). The Conservatives will gather later (1st-4th October).

Devolution revolution

The Scottish and Welsh devolved governments are teaming up once more. Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and Welsh First Minister Carwyn Jones previously issued joint statements opposing the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill in its current form when it was initially published, criticising its lack of provision for devolving powers to the devolved nations. Now, the two governments have published their respective legislative consent memos on the Bill. The Scottish memo can be read here. The Welsh memo can be read here.

Don’t bother looking for a statement or similar memo from Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland’s devolved government collapsed in January, and has not been functioning since the snap March election.

Today
The public inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire opens this morning.

Inquiry Chair Sir Martin Moore-Bick is to make his opening statement at 10.30AM.

News round-up: EU Withdrawal Bill, Northern Ireland, and Parliamentary sovereignty

Parliamentary sovereignty:

Tories’ £1bn DUP deal will need parliament’s approval [Politics Home]

The breaking news today sees a hurdle for the UK Government to pass. The UK Government has had to concede that its confidence and supply agreement with the DUP – which includes £1bn of funding for Northern Ireland – must have Parliamentary authorisation. In response to a letter from Gina Miller, and the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain who had challenged the deal’s legality, the Treasury solicitor, confirmed that the offer “will have appropriate parliamentary authorisation” and that as yet “no timetable has been set for the making of such payments”.

Stormont Stalemate addressed:

Secretary of State for Northern Ireland’s speech to 2017 British Irish Association Conference [NIO] Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, James Brokenshire, spoke at a recent meeting of the British-Irish Association in Cambridge. He spoke of the need to “see a fully functioning, power sharing devolved government at Stormont”, “need to address legacy issues”, and the “necessity of making a success of Brexit, to which the UK Government is fully committed.” Addressing the current political impasse at Stormont, Mr Brokenshire said “the situation simply is not sustainable and if it is not resolved within a relatively short number of weeks will require greater political decision making from Westminster.” He added that this would have to begin with legislation to provide Northern Ireland with a Budget.

More from the British-Irish Association meeting:

Simon Coveney urges UK to remain in Customs Union [BBC News NI] The Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney, urged the UK government to consider remaining in a customs union with the EU after Brexit. He said he found it “difficult to accept” that the option should be ruled out before negotiations on trade have even begun.

Micheál Martin calls for NI to be ‘special economic zone’ [BBC News NI] The leader of Ireland’s main opposition party suggested that Northern Ireland should become part of a “special economic zone” (SEZ). Micheál Martin said Northern Ireland as a SEZ could be recognised by the EU as being “distinct from the rest of the UK in terms of single market and customs union access.”

Parliamentary Corner:

Brexit: Ministers warn of ‘chaos’ if repeal bill rejected [BBC News]

Voting against EU bill means ‘chaotic’ Brexit, claims David Davis [Politics Home]

  • The Commons will hold a special late-night sitting tonight as MPs cast their first votes on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill. MPs will debate until midnight, before holding a series of votes on the bill’s second reading. Both sides expect a narrow win for the UK Government, with potential Tory rebels holding fire until the bill’s eight-day committee stage – due to start next month. In a statement issued overnight by the Department for Exiting the European Union, Secretary of State David Davis said those voting against the bill want “a chaotic exit from the European Union.” Labour says it will oppose the bill, claiming it represents a “power grab”.
  • Mr Davis said: “The British people did not vote for confusion and neither should Parliament…Providing certainty and stability in the lead up to our withdrawal is a key priority. Businesses and individuals need reassurance that there will be no unexpected changes to our laws after exit day and that is exactly what the Repeal Bill provides.”
  • The UK Government faces pressure from all sides of the House. MPs on all sides have raised concerns that Ministers are giving themselves too much power through so-called Henry VIII clauses, which allow them to change legislation after it has passed through Parliament.
  • Conservative whips are not the only ones facing a headache this evening/Tuesday morning. Some Labour MPs are hardcore Brexiteers, and will want to support the Withdrawal Bill – which would be in defiance of Leader Jeremy Corbyn’s imposed three-line whip.
  • Mr Corbyn’s authority might also face another challenge over the Bill. The question remains if any of the MPs from Brexit-supporting constituencies who, worried by Labour’s new-found ‘soft’ Brexit and the reaction to it from Labour-voting Brexiteers, might abstain on the vote.
  • The Commons will also vote to approve nominations for Select Committee membership today. The real drama re Committee membership is yet to come: the Committee of Selection’s membership approval vote takes place on Tuesday. The Conservative Government is facing accusations it is attempting a ‘power grab’.

EU corner

This week is about European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s State of the European Union (SOTEU) speech, on Wednesday 13th September.

The Committee on Constitutional Affairs in the European Parliament will today discuss proposals to reduce the number of MEPs to 700 after the next election, keeping the remaining 51 in reserve for a possible pan-EU list of MEPs.

Publication on EU Brexit position paper on Ireland/Northern Ireland

The European Commission today published its Brexit position paper on Ireland/Northern Ireland.

The ‘Guiding principles transmitted to EU27 for the Dialogue on Ireland/Northern Ireland‘ paper contains the guiding principles of the EU position on the issue of Ireland/Northern Ireland post-Brexit and is to be presented to the UK in the context of the dialogue on Ireland/Northern Ireland.

Notably, the EU is taking the position that the responsibility to devise the flexible and imaginative solutions necessary to prevent a hard border on the island of Ireland rests with the UK Government. There is a strong emphasis on the GFA, and maintaining the Peace Process.

Emphasising the ‘unique circumstances’ of Northern Ireland, the paper does not suggest solutions for the Irish border. It notes that the onus to propose solutions which’ overcome the challenges created on the island of Ireland by the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, and its decision to leave the customs union and the internal market remains on the UK.’

The paper outlines:

  • that as an essential element of the withdrawal process, there needs to be a political commitment to protecting the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts, to protecting the gains of the peace process, and to the practical application of this on the island of Ireland,
  • ‘flexible and imaginative solutions’ are required which must respect the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland, and avoid the imposition of a hard border,
  • North South cooperation between Ireland and Northern Ireland is a central part of the Good Friday Agreement and should be protected,
  • the UK should ensure that no diminution of rights is caused by the its departure from the EU,
  • the Withdrawal Agreement should respect rights, opportunities and identity that come with EU citizenship for the people of Northern Ireland who choose to assert their right to Irish citizenship,
  • that the continued operation of the Common Travel Area is fundamental to facilitating the interaction of people in Ireland and the UK and should be recognised, and
  • the EU has supported the Peace Process through  PEACE, INTERREG etc. Therefore the UK and the EU need to honour their commitments under the current Multi-annual Financial Framework.