European Scrutiny Committee Oral evidence: The UK’s new relationship with the EU, HC 122 Monday 19 July 2021 Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on Monday 19 July 2021. Watch the meeting Members present: Sir William Cash (Chair); Jon Cruddas; Richard Drax; Margaret Ferrier; Mr Marcus Fysh; Mr David Jones; Craig Mackinlay; Anne Marie Morris. Questions 94 - 120 Witnesses I: The Rt Hon. Lord Frost CMG, Minister of State, Cabinet Office; and Julian Braithwaite CMG, Director General EU, Cabinet Office. Examination of witnesses Witnesses: Lord Frost and Julian Braithwaite. Q94 Chair: Good afternoon, Lord Frost, and welcome. It is clear that issues concerning the implementation of the Northern Ireland protocol are persisting and tensions on both sides are running high. As such, it is extremely important that you appear today, and on behalf of the Committee I would like to thank you. You are sending a clear signal that this Government value parliamentary scrutiny in the national interest. I know that we do not have very much time with you today, and in the light of this our questions will cover a number of recent high-profile UK- EU events. Before I ask the first question, I thought that it would be a good idea, as Mr Braithwaite is relatively new to the post, if he would be good enough to introduce himself. Julian Braithwaite: Certainly. My name is Julian Braithwaite. I have just returned from Geneva, where I was the UK ambassador to the World Trade Organisation, among a number of other international organisations in Geneva, and responsible for our transition in the WTO as we left the European Union. Before that, I served in UKRep as our ambassador to the Political and Security Committee of the European Union. I am delighted to be here, having just started as the director general for the European Union in the Cabinet Office about three weeks ago. I look forward to supporting the Committee, and supporting Lord Frost in his engagement with the Committee. Q95 Chair: Thank you very much. To keep the framework in order and get through everything we need to do in the time, I will ask three initial questions. I think this may be a good way to start. Given the statements made by Madame von der Leyen and some other European leaders with respect to the Northern Ireland protocol in recent months, and given your reasonable and robust criticism, Lord Frost, of those statements and EU threats of legal action, and also given the strong views that were expressed in the important debate that took place in the House of Commons last week on the Northern Ireland protocol, would you be good enough in the light of the questions I am about to ask to give us an update on the current state of play and indicate as strongly as you can the thrust of your proposals for its future operation, which we understand will be published later this week? That is the first question. The second question is this. Your colleague, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, recently suggested that the EU approach to the Northern Ireland protocol could itself be in breach of the protocol. Are you preparing to use the withdrawal agreement dispute resolution mechanism to test that assertion? In case there is no breakthrough with the EU, are the Government preparing to use the article 16 proposals on unilateral safeguards? Is there a potential triggering of article 16 in mind? Those are the three questions I have to start with. Would you be kind enough to address those questions to begin with? Lord Frost: Yes, thank you, Chair. I will have a go, although obviously, there is a limit to what I can do, given the plan to make a statement and set out our approach later this week. What I can probably say at this point is that we all know that the protocol is not sustainable in the way it is working at the moment. The only way it can be made sustainable is if we can find a way to hugely reduce or eliminate the barriers for goods moving between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and we need, as we go forward, to try to find a way of achieving that so as to reduce the burdens. We have said that a few times before. It remains the core of the problem that the boundary between Great Britain and Northern Ireland is too dissuasive, too complicated, too chilling of identity in various ways, and that is what has to be solved in terms of direction of travel. All options are on the table. That is clear, and that will remain the case after we have made our statement, because we need to remain flexible to events. It is more likely to produce a durable outcome if you can proceed by agreement. It remains to be tested on the basis of the discussions we have had so far as to whether that really is possible or not. The issue of the various legal weapons in the treaty, which we have not used but the EU has in various ways, remains out there. We will have to see what kind of discussion we can get into on the back of where we are at the moment. Q96 Chair: Let me put it this way: are you looking for changes to the text of the protocol for Joint Committee decisions, or are you looking for changes to EU legislation as it applies in Northern Ireland? Is there some balance you are striking between those two positions? Lord Frost: There, I am afraid I will have to reserve my position until we announce on Wednesday. What I can say at the moment is that it must work in a different way if we are to find a stable route going forward. We will set out the detail on Wednesday. Q97 Chair: Yes, I see. In respect of what was said in the debate last week, I am sure you got the message from the House of Commons as a whole, because there was no Division on a very important and clearly stated motion. Therefore, I would say, and you might agree with this, that it was a highly important benchmark of the opinion of Parliament in relation to these very delicate matters. What Penny Mordaunt said at the end, and the robustness with which she addressed these questions, heartened a lot of people, and we hope that we can continue that in the statements that you make later this week. Would that be fair? Lord Frost: Yes, I think it is. The debate last week was extremely interesting, and extremely helpful in all kinds of ways. Parliament expressing its view in that case in that way is extremely important. One thing that has happened over the last few months is that it has become generally more widely understood what the problems of the protocol are and why it is not working, and that something needs to be done. That was a minority opinion maybe four or five months ago, and it is a quite widely held one now as far as we can tell. That simply reflects the impact of events. Chair: Thank you. David Jones, would you like to come in on any of that, perhaps on article 16? Q98 Mr Jones: Yes, please. In fact, I raised the issue of article 16 in the debate last week. I very much hope, Lord Frost, that the Government are fully keeping their options open with regard to article 16, and that the potential for invoking it remains. Lord Frost: Again, you will have to wait and see precisely what we say on Wednesday. Certainly, all options remain on the table now and in the future. Q99 Mr Jones: What assessment have you made of the impact that the current arrangements are having on the Belfast/Good Friday agreement? Is that a concern of yours? Lord Frost: It is a core concern, to be honest. If the workings of the protocol are undermining the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, the protocol is not doing its job. One of the core elements of the Belfast agreement was that the three strands had equal status. At the moment, it feels as if the east-west elements of the protocol are not working as well as the north-south, and, clearly, that imbalance is not what the Good Friday agreement intended. That is the core of the problem. Q100 Mr Jones: Yet the European Union suggest that the reason they are being so legalistic in their approach to the protocol is precisely to defend the Good Friday agreement, which, frankly, appears to me to be surprising. Lord Frost: Yes, obviously, we hoped when we agreed it that it would prove a good defence and a good support of the Good Friday agreement. It is in the text of the protocol in several places. That was certainly the intention. I do not think it could be said that it is the only possible way of doing that. We need to find ways that constitute a new balance and bring the way things are working back in line with the balance in the Good Friday agreement. Mr Jones: Thank you, Lord Frost. Chair: Does anybody else have a further point they would like to make on that series of questions before we move on to the next one? Does anybody have any ideas on that? Q101 Margaret Ferrier: I want to ask Lord Frost about his thoughts on the meeting this morning between the DUP leader and Maroš Šefčovič.