DOCSLIB.ORG

Ian Marshall – Written Evidence (IIO0003)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ian Marshall – Written Evidence (IIO0003) Ian Marshall – Written evidence (IIO0003) NAME: Ian Marshall Queens University Belfast. Institute for Global Food Security DATE: 09:06:21 Experience and Expertise Ian Marshall was elected as an Independent Senator in 2018 to Seanad Eireann, making history as the first ever Ulster Unionist elected to the upper chamber of the Irish Parliament in 100 years, serving from 2018-2020. As well as his work within the Seanad he served on the Committee for the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, the Joint Oireachtas Committee for Climate Change and Environment, and the Joint Committee for Rural and Community Development. He has attended British Irish Association (BIA) events and has participated in British Irish Parliamentary Association (BIPA) meetings as part of his role as a Senator. Ian’s unique position within the Seanad created a platform to build relationships and facilitate cooperation across the island and between two islands, north, south, east and west, across many areas of business, trade, and education. He focused on breaking down barriers, uniting people and building relationships. A former President of the Ulster Farmers Union, he worked extensively between Belfast, London and Brussels representing UK farming interests in the European Union, as part of the UK farming unions’ team. Ian was a member of the Agri-Food Strategy Board for Northern Ireland, responsible for developing the ‘Going for Growth’ strategy document as a template to grow and develop the industry to maximise opportunities and realise future industry potential. As well as a deep understanding of politics and political lobbying in Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, and the United Kingdom, he has an extensive knowledge of business and the agri-food industry from ‘farm to fork’. He currently works in the Institute for Global Food Security (IGFS) in Queens University Belfast, as a Business Development Manager, linking research and development with the industry in food security and integrity, food, health and nutrition, and farms of the future. Ian completed an Msc in Agri-Food Business Development in 2009 at Ulster University and Babson College Boston, USA, and is a Professional Member of the Institute of Agricultural Management through the Royal Agricultural University, Cirencester. In addition, he has over 35 years’ experience across all sectors of the agri-food industry and currently manages the family farm business in Armagh, in partnership with his son. Institute for Global Food Security The Institute for Global Food Security (IGFS) focuses on three ‘Grand Challenges’ or areas of research. Farms of the future, global food integrity, and food, nutrition and health. IGFS connects research institutes, farmers and the agri-food industry, government bodies and NGO’s locally nationally and internationally to deliver world leading research with real-world application supporting government policy decisions by delivering evidence based policy. The implementation of the Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol will undoubtedly impact on the agri-food industry in Northern Ireland with the potential to disrupt or change trading relations between NI and ROI, and between GB and NI. Appropriate implementation will be critical to minimise interruption and capitalise on opportunities in the short, medium, and long term. This is the rationale for this submission. QUESTIONS 1. What is your assessment of the overall socio-economic and political impact upon Northern Ireland of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland since it came into force on 1 January? The impact to date has been wide and varied across a number of different sectors, with the agri-food industry being particularly exposed due to the significance and importance of SPS regulations across the sector. How businesses have dealt with protocol disruption has been largely dependent on size and scale of the business, prior knowledge of exporting or trading across jurisdictions, and the availability of information or lack of clarity in the specific area of business. Positive and negative impacts can be highlighted, however any gains or losses have been overshadowed by the political ‘spin’ and potential threat to the NI position within the UK, future constitutional arrangements, or disregard for identity or culture during the entire Brexit conversation over the last 6 years. 2. What would you identify as the main practical issues that have so far arisen in relation to the Protocol’s operation, including both for GB and Northern Ireland-based businesses? How significant have these problems been, and what impact have they had on the ground? The main practical issues arise in the agri-food sector or land based industries with trade or movement in animals, plants and foods being especially exposed. Practical issues revolve around increased costs, increased bureaucracy, time delays and general disruption to supply chains. This disruption has resulted in some ‘pivoting’ of supply chains to source raw materials and goods from ROI or suppliers not currently disadvantaged by the UK position as a third country. 3. What impact has the Protocol, and UK withdrawal more broadly, had on trade flows between Great Britain, Northern Ireland and Ireland, and the rest of the EU? Many businesses have continued to trade relatively uninterrupted as a consequence of the grace period. However, where there has been disruption businesses have focused on the ‘path of least resistance’ to trade with partners in the UK, ROI, and the EU. The agri-food industry functions on large turnover and very slim margins. In addition, it has established as a ‘just in time’ supply chain for many companies, unable to deal with interruption to supply, logistical inconvenience, or addition costs to product, process, transport, or access to the market. Specific issues have been identified in areas of the agri-food industry that will present huge challenges after the expiry of the grace period. 4. Has the Protocol had any positive impact for Northern Ireland? As discussed widely the protocol could present some positive outcomes for NI business and industry. However, it must be noted that without resolution to the industry specific problems around SPS regulations, capitalising on these opportunities will be challenging. 5. Is there a viable alternative to the Protocol? The Protocol has been stigmatised and become divisive. It is a legally binding arrangement but needs adjusted and amended to address and acknowledge the size and nature of the NI economy and the relationship between Northern Ireland, the United Kingdom, and the Republic of Ireland. Flexibility and pragmatism are required in conjunction with an acknowledgement of the sensitivities around identity to detoxify the Protocol and utilise mechanisms available to make it work to our advantage. Not current alternative exists. 6. How would you characterise the attitudes of the communities in Northern Ireland in relation to the Protocol? How significant, compared to other issues and concerns, has the Protocol been as a contributory factor to the recent community disturbances in Northern Ireland? At least two different attitudes current exist in Northern Ireland in relation to the Protocol. Firstly, a nationalist/republican position is evident where the feeling is that Brexit was foisted on them against their will, with the Protocol being an outworking of this and a necessary component of the new relationship between NI, the UK, ROI, and the EU, and something this community is quite content to accept. On the other hand, unionism and loyalism feel that the Protocol has emerged as an alternative to any checks on a land border and has been imposed in order to comply with the terms of the GFA, even though they believe the Protocol actually breaks these terms from their community’s perspective. Ultimately, what is crucial to understand is that the ‘perception’ of what the Protocol actually threatens is critically important. Loyalist unrest is partly due to a feeling that identity is being further eroded and that no one from the British and Irish government has been listening to their concerns for the last three years. 7. What action would you wish to see the Northern Ireland Executive take in relation to the Protocol, including in its engagement with the UK Government, the EU and the Irish Government? Firstly, the Northern Ireland Executive must clarify and explain exactly, without ambiguity, what the Protocol delivers or threatens, and the reality that it cannot be completely removed now or in four years’ time. Media reporting and opinion pieces have distorted and often misrepresented the reality. They must clearly identify the instruments at their disposal to make it workable, where there are concessions to be make, and where there are any threats to identity of culture, perceived or real. The Northern Ireland Executive must genuinely listen to all concerns across civic society and political groups. 8. What is your assessment of the UK Government’s approach to the Protocol, and its engagement with Northern Ireland stakeholders, since it came into force? I believe the UK Government’s approach was well intentioned however I think there was a lack of understanding of the subtleties and nuances of what the Protocol represented to the PUL communities beyond the realms of business, trade and commerce, especially with regard to culture and identity. The UK Government’s work to deliver a grace period was welcomed but unfortunately does not provide solutions whenever this time elapses. I fully understand the desire to take back control and deliver independence and autonomy outside the constraints of the EU, however, genuine concerns exist for businesses and stakeholders. These businesses could potentially offer a range of solutions within their specific sectors if a consultation process was embraced. 9. What is your assessment of the EU’s approach to the Protocol, and its engagement with Northern Ireland stakeholders, since it came into force? I believe the EU’s endeavours were also well intentioned from the outset.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Brexit’ for the EU Agri-Food Sector and the CAP: Budgetary, Trade and Institutional Issues
    DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Research for AGRI Committee - Implications of ‘Brexit’ for the EU agri-food sector and the CAP: budgetary, trade and institutional issues WORKSHOP This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. RESPONSIBLE FOR THE POLICY DEPARTMENT Research manager: Albert Massot Project and publication assistance: Virginija Kelmelytė Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies European Parliament B-1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE PUBLISHER To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to its monthly newsletter please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in November 2017. © European Union, 2017. Print ISBN 978-92-846-2354-9 doi:10.2861/965335 QA-06-17-353-EN-C PDF ISBN 978-92-846-2353-2 doi:10.2861/947214 QA-06-17-353-EN-N This document is available on the internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602013/IPOL_STU(2017)60201 3_EN.pdf DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Research for AGRI Committee - Implications of ‘Brexit’ for the EU agri-food sector and the CAP: budgetary, trade and institutional issues WORKSHOP Abstract This is the reference document of the Workshop on ‘The Implications of ‘Brexit’ for the EU agricultural sector and the CAP’ of 9th November 2017, organised by COMAGRI and the Policy Department B.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Ireland and the EU Referendum
    House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee Northern Ireland and the EU referendum First Report of Session 2016–17 HC 48 House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee Northern Ireland and the EU referendum First Report of Session 2016–17 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 25 May 2016 HC 48 Published on 26 May 2016 by authority of the House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Northern Ireland Office (but excluding individual cases and advice given by the Crown Solicitor); and other matters within the responsibilities of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (but excluding the expenditure, administration and policy of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Northern Ireland and the drafting of legislation by the Office of the Legislative Counsel). Current membership Mr Laurence Robertson MP (Conservative, Tewkesbury) (Chair) Tom Blenkinsop MP (Labour, Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) Oliver Colvile MP (Conservative, Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) Mr Nigel Evans MP (Conservative, Ribble Valley) Mr Stephen Hepburn MP (Labour, Jarrow) Lady Hermon MP (Independent, North Down) Kate Hoey MP (Labour, Vauxhall) Danny Kinahan MP (Ulster Unionist Party, South Antrim) Jack Lopresti MP (Conservative, Filton and Bradley Stoke) Dr Alasdair McDonnell MP (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South) Nigel Mills MP (Conservative, Amber Valley) Ian Paisley MP (Democratic Unionist Party, North Antrim) Gavin Robinson MP (Democratic Unionist Party, Belfast East) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No.
    [Show full text]
  • The EU Referendum and Northern Ireland: Information Resources
    Research and Information Service Briefing Paper Paper 34/16 20 May 2016 The EU Referendum and Northern Ireland Information Resources Research and Information Service briefings are compiled for the benefit of MLAs and their support staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of these papers with Members and their staff but cannot advise members of the general public. We do, however, welcome written evidence that relates to our papers and this should be sent to the Research and Information Service, Northern Ireland Assembly, Room 139, Parliament Buildings, Belfast BT4 3XX or e-mailed to [email protected] Providing research and information services to the Northern Ireland Assembly 1 Briefing Paper CONTENTS 1 Introduction 3 2 Legislatures and governments 4 Northern Ireland Assembly National Assembly for Wales Scottish Parliament House of Commons UK Government Tithe An Oireachtas/Houses Of The Oireachtas Government of Ireland 3 Academia and Think Tanks 10 4 Interest groups and others 14 5 Opinion Polls 16 6 Press 17 7 Forthcoming events 34 If you experience difficulties in opening links directly from this paper, please try copying and pasting the link into your browser. Providing research and information services to the Northern Ireland Assembly 2 Briefing Paper 1) INTRODUCTION The European Union Referendum Act 2015 provides for the question of whether the United Kingdom should remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union to be put to a referendum held in the United Kingdom and Gibraltar. The date for the referendum has now been set as 23 June 2016 and the question that is to appear on ballot papers is: ‘Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union’ The answers that are to appear on the ballot papers are: ‘Remain a member of the European Union’ and ‘Leave the European Union’.
    [Show full text]
  • The Main Bilateral Agreements Between Switzerland and the EU
    The main bilateral agreements between Switzerland and the EU © pixabay The main bilateral agreements between Switzerland and the EU As of February 2021 Title, date, speaker Main bilateral agreements 1. Free trade 2. Insurance 3. Customs facilitation and security Benefit: removing barriers to trade The main bilateral agreements between Switzerland and the EU Title, date, speaker 1 Free trade Contents Relevance • Establishes a free trade area for • Crucial to the Swiss economy: industrial goods and also covers trade in 51% of Swiss exports go to the EU (approx. CHF processed agricultural products (for example 124 bn.), while 69% of Swiss imports (approx. CHF chocolate, backed goods, soups, children food, 142 bn.) come from the EU (2019). A large part of pasta and ice cream) these exchanges are governed by the free trade • Abolishes customs duties and prohibits agreement. quantitative restrictions, i.e. quotas, and other measures having an equivalent effect for industrial products in Switzerland and the EU Came into force 1973 2019. Source: Swiss-Impex The main bilateral agreements between Switzerland and the EU Title, date, speaker 2 Insurance Contents Relevance • Ensures, on a reciprocal basis, freedom of • Important for insurance companies operating establishment for agencies and branches of internationally undertakings pursuing the activity of non-life • Insurance industry is major component of the insurance (home contents, motor vehicle, Swiss economy, employing around 48,000 people travel, third party liability insurance, etc.), or the in Switzerland and some 100,000 outside option to acquire such undertakings Switzerland Came into force 1993 2019. Source: Swiss Insurance Association The main bilateral agreements between Switzerland and the EU Title, date, speaker 3 Customs facilitation and security Contents Relevance • Facilitates customs clearance for goods traded • Greatly facilitates customs clearance, e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Agriculture, Animal Health, and Food and Drink Manufacturing (Including Catering, Retail and Wholesale) Sector Report
    Agriculture, Animal Health, and Food and Drink Manufacturing (including Catering, Retail and Wholesale) Sector Report This report covers Agriculture animal health and food and drink manufacturing, as well as Catering: retail and wholesale. 1. This is a report for the House of Commons Committee on Exiting the European Union following the motion passed at the Opposition Day debate on 1 November, which called on the Government to provide the Committee with impact assessments arising from the sectoral analysis it has conducted with regards to the list of 58 sectors referred to in the answer of 26 June 2017 to Question 239. 2. As the Government has already made clear, it is not the case that 58 sectoral impact assessments exist. The Government’s sectoral analysis is a wide mix of qualitative and quantitative analysis contained in a range of documents developed at different times since the referendum. This report brings together information about the sector in a way that is accessible and informative. Some reports aggregate some sectors in order to either avoid repetition of information or because of the strong interlinkages between some of these sectors. 3. This report covers: a description of the sector, the current EU regulatory regime, existing frameworks for how trade is facilitated between countries in this sector, and sector views. It does not contain commercially-, market- or negotiation-sensitive information. Description of Sector Sector Coverage 4. This paper covers market access and trade issues around forestry, retail, agricultural, animal and plant health, food and drink manufacturing and related biotech products. This includes: ● Basic agricultural commodities (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Brexit Governance NI – Explainer 1
    Post-Brexit Governance NI – Explainer 1 Trade in Goods under the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland: an explainer Billy Melo Araujo Introduction The Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol is a legal instrument annexed to the Withdrawal Agreement (WA) between the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK). It governs trade in goods between Northern Ireland (NI) and the EU. From a trade perspective, its primary objective is to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland. To do so, the Protocol creates a complex and hybrid trading regime where Northern Ireland formally remains within the UK customs territory and internal market for goods but is also required to comply with EU customs, internal market and valued added tax rules. This explainer provides an overview of the main features of the Protocol in relation to trade in goods and highlights some of the current and future implementation challenges. This explainer is subdivided into six sections. Section 1 explains the purpose of the Protocol’s provisions in relation to trade in goods. Section 2 provides an overview of the Protocol rules relating to tariff barriers. Section 3 addresses the issue of non-tariff barriers with a particular focus on regulatory barriers to trade. Section 4 addresses the impact of the Protocol on Northern Ireland’s ability to benefit from EU and UK trade agreements. Sections 5 and 6 briefly discuss the value added tax and state aid regimes established by the Protocol. 1. Understanding the Protocol from a trade perspective There are, very broadly speaking, three things that happen at a border with respect to trade in goods: - First, customs authorities collect tariffs (customs duties) or apply tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) on imported goods.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuarascáil Na Fothoghcháin Don Seanad 2018
    Na Fothoghcháin don Seanad 27 Aibreán 2018 Tuarascáil ón gCoimisiún um Chaighdeáin in Oifigí Poiblí chuig an gCeann Comhairle de bhun an Achta Toghcháin, 1997, arna leasú. Iúil 2018 An Coimisiún um Chaighdeáin in Oifigí Poiblí, 18 Sráid Líosain Íochtarach, Baile Átha Cliath 2, D02 HE97 T.: (01) 6395666 | [email protected] | www.sipo.ie | Twitter:@SIPOCIreland Clár Ábhar Brollach ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 Caibidil 1: Réamhrá ................................................................................................................................... 3 Caibidil 2: Nochtadh Síntiús ag iarrthóirí nár éirigh leo ........................................................................ 4 2.1 Ráitis Síntiús agus Deimhnithe Síntiús Airgid a fuarthas ó iarrthóirí nár éirigh leo ............... 4 2.2 Síntiúis a nochtadh .......................................................................................................................... 4 Caibidil 3: Ráitis Síntiús a chuirtear ar fáil don Choimisiún um Chaighdeáin a fhoilsiú .................. 5 1 Brollach Tá áthas orm an tuarascáil seo a chur faoi bhráid Chathaoirleach Dháil Éireann (Ceann Comhairle) de réir fhorálacha alt 4(1) den Acht Toghcháin, 1997, arna leasú (an tAcht). Maidir leis na ráitis síntiús dá dtagraítear sa tuarascáil, tugadh don Choimisiún um Chaighdeáin in Oifigí Poiblí iad de bhun alt 24(2)(b) den Acht. Maidir leis na deimhnithe síntiús airgid/dearbhuithe
    [Show full text]
  • MINIMISING SPS FRICTION in EU TRADE a New Process Design for the New Relationship with the EU
    MINIMISING SPS FRICTION IN EU TRADE A new process design for the new relationship with the EU A paper from the SPS Certification Working Group Minimising SPS Friction in EU Trade Introduction and recommendations The way we export to the EU changed dramatically on 1 January 2021 when the post-Brexit transition period ended and the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) took effect. Rapid transit and integrated supply chains built up over nearly three decades, underpinned by a robust regulatory regime which the UK, as a member of the EU, helped to frame, were overturned overnight. As a “third country” in EU trade terms, our products, though unchanged, were immediately subjected to the requirements imposed on imports from non-Member States, including international sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) controls: a stringent and bureaucratic regime of export health certificates (EHCs), advance electronic notification procedures and inspections at border control posts (BCPs), as well as customs and contractual procedures. Whilst the reduction in exports, delays at ports and rejection of some consignments in January were initially attributed to “teething troubles” by the government, the burdensome bureaucracy of “third country” trading is now the norm under the TCA and is seriously eroding the capability and profitability of exporting products of animal origin to the EU and Northern Ireland (NI). There are no alternative markets or trade deals that can compensate for the loss of trade and income to our sectors from our EU market share. If these sectors are to survive and thrive, new ways of managing the system need to be agreed.
    [Show full text]
  • FRL30 RSPCA Cymru
    Wales’ future relationship with the European Union EAAL(5) FRL30 Evidence from RSPCA Cymru Executive Summary ● Leaving the EU represents an opportunity to continue to raise animal welfare standards in the UK, but there are also threats and challenges arising from this decision ● This briefing details the impact that 5 different Brexit scenarios can have on specific areas related to animal welfare; it summarises the threats and opportunities brought by each model ● The UK will lose full access to TRACES under all options except remaining an EU Member State. Losing access could lead to increased checks on animals at borders ● The UK will lose access to institutions such as the European Centre for the Validation for Alternative Methods (ECVAM) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) under all options except maintaining access to the Single Market and contributing to the EU budget. Losing access could increase the risk of duplication in animal safety testing, and slow down progress with the developments and acceptance of humane alternatives. ● In all Brexit scenarios, the UK will have the ability to change its farm support system to better prioritise farm welfare ● If the UK concluded a Customs Union with the EU, it would limit its ability to conclude comprehensive FTAs with other partners due to the existence of shared external tariffs, but it would also allow the elimination of checks on origin at the EU-UK border, reducing waiting times. Checks on animals could even be fully eliminated if regulatory equivalence on animal health occurs
    [Show full text]
  • Introductory Report
    HOUSE OF LORDS European Affairs Committee 2nd Report of Session 2021-22 Report from the Sub-Committee on the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland: Introductory report Ordered to be printed 21 July 2021 and published 29 July 2021 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords HL Paper 55 The European Affairs Committee and the Sub-Committee on the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland The European Affairs Committee was appointed to consider matters relating to the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union and the European Economic Area, including the implementation and governance structures of any agreements between the United Kingdom and the European Union; to consider European Union documents deposited in the House by a minister; and to support the House as appropriate in interparliamentary cooperation with the European Parliament and the Member States of the European Union. The Sub-Committee on the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland was appointed by the European Affairs Committee to consider all matters related to the Protocol, including scrutiny of: EU legislation within the scope of the Protocol; relevant domestic UK legislation and policy; the Northern Ireland-related work of the governance bodies established under the UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement; the Protocol’s political and socio-economic impact on Northern Ireland; and its impact on UK-Irish bilateral relations; as well as conducting interparliamentary dialogue, including with the Northern Ireland Assembly and Irish Oireachtas. Membership The Members of the European
    [Show full text]
  • Irish Security Soundings Implications of a Customs U
    Irish Security Soundings powered by SAR Contributions from Sheelagh Brady and Eileen Langat A SIGN OF BETRAYAL – THE POSSIBLE IMPLICATIONS OF A CUSTOMS U-TURN ON LOYALISTS IN NORTHERN IRELAND In the context of hostilities in Northern Ireland (NI), the potential target of loyalist frustrations has historically been seen to be republicans and the Irish State. But could the UK’s government’s U-turn about the custom arrangements at Northern Irish ports be enough to divert frustrations to a new target, at least for the time being? Could loyalists view this as a public sign of betrayal; a betrayal by those whom loyalists have always, and often vehemently, given their allegiance. If so, could it be seen as an indication of a crack within the loyalist faction. If this is the case then what might this mean for the Republic of Ireland (ROI) from a security perspective, especially amid calls for consideration to be given to a poll on a united Ireland? Such questions challenge the often binary lens by which the conflict in the north is frequently viewed; loyalists versus republicans. However, like most conflicts, this narrow focus often ignores more complex dynamics that are at play, something all too well understood by those living within certain communities in NI. This sounding aims to examine how these dynamics might impact the ROI. Potential hostilities in the Loyalist Camp Since the signing of the peace agreement, much of the narrative about the conflict in NI has focused on republican paramilitary activities and this has continued to be the case in the aftermath of the Brexit vote.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Ireland and Ireland: Position Paper by the United Kingdom
    Northern Ireland and Ireland POSITION PAPER Position Paper by the United Kingdom Northern Ireland and Ireland This paper outlines the United Kingdom’s (UK) position on how to address the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland and Ireland in light of the UK’s withdrawal from, and new partnership with, the European Union (EU). Introduction 1. The United Kingdom welcomes the establishment of a dialogue on Northern Ireland/Ireland issues between the UK and the EU negotiating teams. The UK believes that this dialogue should be substantial and detailed, and seek to address the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland and Ireland in a comprehensive and flexible way. The UK and the EU had positive exploratory discussions in the July round of negotiations covering the UK’s proposals in relation to the Belfast (‘Good Friday’) Agreement and the Common Travel Area and associated rights. 2. The UK’s withdrawal from the EU, and the development of a new, deep and special partnership between the UK and the EU, has important implications for Northern Ireland and Ireland. While continuing to take account of these interests across the board, the UK believes that there are four broad areas where a specific focus on the unique relationship between the UK and Ireland, and the importance of the peace process in Northern Ireland, is required in the initial phases of the dialogue. This paper sets out the UK’s proposals for these areas as follows: ● Section 1: upholding the Belfast (‘Good Friday’) Agreement in all its parts; ● Section 2: maintaining the Common Travel Area and associated rights; ● Section 3: avoiding a hard border for the movement of goods; and ● Section 4: aiming to preserve North-South and East-West cooperation, including on energy.
    [Show full text]