Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Boris Johnson’s plan to unilaterally rewrite part of his Brexit withdrawal agreement will break international law, Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis has admitted – prompting a wave of condemnation from across the political spectrum.
Speaking in parliament on Tuesday afternoon, the cabinet minister said the proposals unveiled by the government this week were unlawful in a “very specific and limited way”.
Theresa May warned her successor that other countries might think twice before trusting the UK in future, while other MPs from Mr Lewis’s own party accused the government of putting Britain’s honour up “for sale”.
The minister made the admission to a stunned House of Commons just hours after the government’s top lawyer, Sir Jonathan Jones, abruptly quit his post amid reports that he was concerned about the unlawful move. He is the sixth senior Whitehall civil servant to walk out this year.
“Yes, this does break international law in a very specific and limited way," Mr Lewis told MPs during a debate on the proposals.
"We are taking the powers to disapply the EU law concept of direct effect required by article 4 in a certain, very tightly defined circumstance. There are clear precedence for the UK and indeed other countries needing to consider their international obligations as circumstances change."
Reaction to the minister’s admission on Tuesday came in fast. Sir Bob Neill, the Conservative MP who chairs the Commons Justice Committee, said: “Any breach, or potential breach, of the international legal obligations we have entered into is unacceptable, regardless of whether it’s in a ‘specific’ or ‘limited way’. Adherence to the rule of law is not negotiable.”
Veteran Tory MP Sir Roger Gale said the UK must not "undermine out international credibility", adding: "Britain is an honourable country and that honour is not for sale or barter."
George Freeman, the Tory MP who previously chaired the No 10 policy unit, added: “That sound you hear? It’s the sound of the Supreme Court preparing to remind ministers that intentionally breaking the law – even in a very specific and limited way – is, well, unlawful.”
The comments also caused a stir abroad. Nathalie Loiseau, an MEP who sits on the European parliament’s Brexit coordination group, said: “Mister Secretary, you don’t ‘break international law in a specific and limited way’. You do break it or you don’t. You can’t be half illegal, as you can’t be half pregnant.”
Britain is an honourable country and that honour is not for sale or barter
In Ireland, Fine Gael politician Neale Richmond quipped: “Is it OK if someone steals a car or robs a bank in a very specific and limited way? No, it is not.”
Earlier in the day, Theresa May warned that backtracking on international agreements might damage the UK’s reputation with other countries. She asked Mr Lewis in person: "The UK government signed the withdrawal agreement with the Northern Ireland protocol, this parliament voted that withdrawal agreement into UK legislation. The government is now changing the operation of that agreement. Given that, how can the government reassure future international partners that the UK can be trusted to abide by the legal obligations of the agreements it signs?"
Under the withdrawal agreement, the UK has agreed to sign up to implement the EU customs code in Northern Ireland. The code includes so-called exit summary declarations – effectively paperwork that traders must fill out when they export goods. Despite agreeing to implement the code, the UK government now says these declarations should not be required.
During the general election Boris Johnson claimed the withdrawal agreement would not impose new paperwork on Northern Irish businesses exporting to Great Britain, which is not true. The details of implementing the protocol are being hashed out at a joint committee of EU and UK officials; the British delegation is led by Michael Gove.
The pound tanked against the US dollar on Tuesday amid rising fears of a no-deal Brexit, falling 1.6 per cent to $1.30. EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier is due to arrive in London on Wednesday to continue talks. Both sides have been downbeat at the prospect of progress this week, with just a month to go until the middle of October when Mr Johnson said he will walk out of talks.
Asked if Mr Johnson now regretted signing up to the withdrawal agreement and its Northern Ireland protocol, the prime minister’s official spokesperson said: “No.”
He insisted that the government remains committed to implementing both, despite the upcoming legislation which will allow UK ministers unilaterally to override measures agreed with Brussels.
The spokesperson said: “We signed up to the protocol in the belief that its ambiguities would be resolved this year at [the] joint committee. That may still happen.
“We hope an agreement is still possible but as a responsible government we can’t allow temporary default positions to kick in.”
The spokesperson said that Mr Johnson had previously “publicly ruled out” the implementation of a number of provisions contained in the withdrawal agreement reached with Brussels.
“The prime minister has publicly ruled out export summary declarations on goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain and tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland on several occasions,” said the spokesperson.
“He did that in advance of the withdrawal agreement being agreed with the European Union.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments