There will be new restrictions on internal UK trade

Significance Under the Northern Ireland Protocol, goods in circulation in Northern Ireland will be subject to EU single market rules and EU tariffs, meaning obstacles to trade with the rest of the United Kingdom. A UK-EU free trade deal (FTA) would reduce the extent of customs and regulatory checks required. Impacts The Northern Ireland Protocol will enter into force whether there is a EU-UK FTA or not. Efforts to reduce the amount of customs and regulatory checks will persist beyond 2020. If Northern Irish parties decide after some years to withdraw consent for the Protocol, it would cease within two years.

Significance The differing perspectives of unionists and nationalists on the creation of Northern Ireland as a political entity within the United Kingdom, together with Brexit and tensions over the Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP), have brought the contentious issue of Irish reunification onto the political agenda in Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. Impacts Scottish independence would likely increase momentum for a referendum on Irish unity. Successful implementation of the NIP, giving firms access to EU and UK markets, may support arguments for maintaining the status quo. If the UK government abandons the NIP, the adverse trade impact on Northern Irish firms could increase support for unification.


Significance However, there has been a notable change in the EU’s tone. In July, the European Commission unexpectedly paused legal action against the United Kingdom for an alleged breach of the NIP, and when London announced on September 6 that it was suspending key elements indefinitely, the EU’s response was muted. Impacts France is so deeply aggrieved over AUKUS that any further UK breaches of the Withdrawal Agreement could prompt a bad-tempered response. The possibility of an early assembly election in Northern Ireland would complicate EU-UK attempts to resolve the NIP issue. The exclusion of high profile, pro-EU politicians in the UK cabinet reshuffle shows how important the Brexit agenda remains for London.


2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Beacom ◽  
Sinéad Furey ◽  
Lynsey Elizabeth Hollywood ◽  
Paul Humphreys

PurposeA number of food poverty definitions have been identified by academics and various government organisations globally; however, there exists no government-endorsed definition of food poverty in the United Kingdom (UK), and there remains a gap regarding how relevant current food poverty definitions are in the Northern Ireland (NI)/UK contexts.Design/methodology/approachInterviews (n = 19) with a range of stakeholders (e.g. policymakers, politicians, community advice centre workers, consumer sub-group representatives, food bank and food redistribution organisation representatives) were conducted to examine (1) the usefulness of a food poverty definition, (2) what a food poverty definition should include and (3) the applicability of an existing definition (Radimer et al., 1992) in the NI/UK context. Data was thematically analysed using QSR NVivo (v.12).FindingsDefinition was considered important to increase awareness and understanding. Any consideration of revising the Radimer et al. (1992) definition, or of establishing a new standardised definition, should seek to reduce/remove ambiguity and subjectivity of terminology used (i.e. more clearly defining what the terms “adequate”, “sufficient”, “quality” and “socially acceptable ways” mean in this context).Practical implicationsThis research emphasises the importance of appropriately conceptually defining social phenomena such as food poverty, as a first step to constructing and reviewing measurement approaches and ultimately assessing predictors and recommending solutions.Originality/valueThis research addresses the gap relating to stakeholders’ opinion on food poverty definition and contributes recommendations for modifying the Radimer et al. (1992) definition in the NI/UK and present-day contexts.


Significance This followed a landmark speech on January 17 in which she added more clarity and detail to her previous stance on the United Kingdom’s departure from the EU. May indicated a willingness to leave the single market, strongly implied that the United Kingdom would not be part of the customs union in its current form and asserted that she would rather quit the EU with no permanent or transitional deal agreed than accept an arrangement which limited the United Kingdom’s future freedom of action. Impacts The government is likely to meet its preferred timetable for triggering Article 50 even if it has to obtain approval from parliament. The United Kingdom will probably lose its passporting rights, which allow UK-based banks to sell their products across the EEA. Paris and Frankfurt will probably benefit as banks may seek to move some of their staff out of London.


Significance Even if it succeeds, this will have a greater disruptive impact on the trade in services than goods, because the EU’s single market enables greater cross-border services trade than is typical of other free trade agreements (FTAs). This is likely to cut the volume of EU-UK services trade, in which the United Kingdom currently enjoys a substantial surplus. Impacts The United Kingdom’s departure from the EU will diminish its appeal for multinationals over the next few years, at least. The new UK immigration system could result in staff shortages in low-skilled services sectors. The imperative of tackling COVID-19 will likely delay the conclusion of new trade deals with non-EU countries.


Subject The Bratislava summit. Significance Leaders of the EU-27 -- all EU member states except the United Kingdom -- held an 'informal' summit in Bratislava on September 16, aiming to demonstrate their shared resolve to move forward with the integration process in the wake of the Brexit vote. While leaders agreed to a roadmap of policy plans, they skirted around the most divisive issues facing the EU and did not agree on any significant new initiatives. Impacts EU governments again failed to agree to a workable plan to address the migrant crisis, rendering an EU-wide solution increasingly unlikely. Significant agreements on improved security cooperation may not be reached until well into 2017. The EU is likely to block any UK efforts to maintain its current access to the single market without allowing for free movement of workers.


Significance The UK government remains divided over how its relations with the EU’s customs union should be arranged after Brexit, while the EU is unimpressed by any of the suggestions put forward by London to date. This issue is central to both the future EU-UK trade relationship and the debate about how to resolve the question of the intra-Irish border. Impacts Any physical infrastructure on the Irish border would become a target for violence. A hard border could increase support for Irish reunification among Northern Irish Catholics. Different customs regimes in the EU and the United Kingdom could lead to smuggling.


Significance The controversial celebration of King William III's victory against the Irish at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690 is a stark reminder of the divisions that still exist in Northern Irish society and could erupt once again in the context of Brexit. All sides are thus keen to ensure that the hardening of the border does not lead to a widening division between the United Kingdom and Ireland, and, in turn, between UK unionism and Irish nationalism within Northern Ireland. Impacts Programmes operating across the border, especially those funded by the EU, are at risk of profound disruption. Increasing unemployment or declining public services could exacerbate the risk of resurgent criminal activity. Continued uncertainty around Brexit could prompt some businesses to move pre-emptively to the jurisdiction of Ireland (and thus the EU). Criminal groups could profit from illicit trade and duty evasion when the border returns to being a customs frontier.


Significance The bill establishes a new statutory regime for goods and services trade within the United Kingdom, which is essential for signing trade agreements. However, it also contains clauses on the Northern Ireland Protocol which threaten to override the legally binding EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement (WA), while giving London new powers over the devolved administrations, including on state aid. Impacts The EU is unlikely to collapse the trade talks with the United Kingdom. An EU-UK deal is still possible because the alternative would seriously threaten Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s political survival. The new bill, on top of COVID-19, will give the opposition Labour Party an opportunity to overtake the Conservatives in the polls.


Significance Through a joint EU-UK committee, the NIP's purpose is to implement a regulatory and customs border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom. Amid trade disruptions and the EU's aborted decision to suspend aspects of the NIP's operation on January 29, hard-line unionists are now calling for the protocol to be scrapped. Impacts David Frost's replacement of Michael Gove as co-chair of the joint EU-UK committee could see London harden its approach to the NIP. Victory for the nationalist Sinn Fein in elections in 2022, as polls suggest, could prompt unionists to collapse the governing institutions. Further civil unrest by loyalists opposed to the NIP could trigger counter-responses by nationalist groups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document