Michael Gove has suggested that the EU is not willing to negotiate on Brexit. If I was in Brussels this is the letter I might be inclined to send him:
Dear Mr Gove
We have noted your suggestion that we in the European Union are not willing to negotiate with the United Kingdom at present. We thought it appropriate to let you know that we do not agree.
We are willing to meet with you, and hold discussions at any time, but we note that your Prime Minister has not sought to meet us.
We also note that there is in place a draft agreement that we spent three years negotiating with the government of which you, and your Prime Minister, were a part for much of that time.
We are, of course, aware that this agreement did not meet with the approval of the House of Commons, which disappointed us and your previous Prime Minister.
However, we also note that as yet we have not heard from you as to the changes that you would like to make in this agreement, barring the abolition of the Northern Ireland backstop, which we reluctantly included in that agreement in the form in which it is stated at the specific request of the Prime Minister that you previously served.
We note that this is now unacceptable to you, but would draw it to your attention that it was always agreed to be a precondition of these talks that there should be no breach of the Good Friday Agreement, which a hard border in the island of Ireland would be. We have always been open to viable alternative arrangements to such a border, but as yet we note that you have not been able to offer any, and as such we are not willing to renegotiate this clause present, but the fault is not ours: we have been patiently awaiting your viable proposals on this issue for a long time, and still do so.
In the circumstances, we would politely suggest that we have proven our willingness to negotiate on an issue, not of our choosing, over a long period of time and that in that case your suggestion does appear inappropriate.
If you would like to return to the negotiating table, with viable and workable propositions that we can consider in a spirit of mutual cooperation to seek to resolve the issues that we face we should be pleased to see you in Brussels at any time.
Best regards
etc
If only.......
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
This is from the BBC News Northern Ireland section, and dated today. It seems relevant.
‘The taoiseach (Irish PM) has said a vote on Irish unity in the wake of a no-deal Brexit would be “divisive” and “not the right way forward”.
‘Leo Varadkar was speaking during a debate at west Belfast festival Féile An Phobail.
‘Earlier, he said he still believed a no-deal Brexit could be avoided.
‘But he said a border poll following a no-deal could result in some of the mistakes made during the partition of Ireland being repeated.
‘”I think it would result in some of the mistakes made 100 years ago, when partition happened, being repeated but just the other way around – a huge number of people, those from a unionist, British, Ulster background, being brought into a united Ireland against their will.”
‘He added that without the necessary preparation, it would be “break down on sectarian lines” and “there’s a chance it would be defeated”.
‘Mr Varadkar said if his government prepared for a border poll, it would be “counter productive” as he has made efforts to persuade unionists that the EU withdrawal agreement – including the backstop – has been about protecting the status quo and not an attempt to bring about constitutional change.’
It seems that the Irish Taoiseach doesn’t want reunification, which had seemed a possible outcome of a No-Deal Brexit. I suppose he’s thinking that the DUP and its supporters would prove to be a thorn in his side – but also, I believe, he considers Northern Ireland to be an economic liability that would depress his own country’s standard of living.
But the Good Friday agreement must be maintained. How do we progress from here?
Politically he’s right to say this
And many in the Republic do not want the North for good reason – it’s going to be hard to integrate at many levels
But that does not stop the march of time…
Both UK and the RoI have already agreed that it is possible for either of them to leave the EU with or without a withdrawal agreement. Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.
They agreed this well after the GFA, so presumably they’ve agreed that leaving without a withdrawal agreement (and the consequences that flow from it) doesn’t breach GFA.
A later agreement supersedes an earlier agreement.
You might argue that neither side realised the consequences of A50 might have for the GFA when it signed Lisbon, but they both signed it.
No serious student of this issue would agree with you
Which bit do you disagree with?
Do you think the GFA was signed after Lisbon?
Do you think Lisbon wasn’t signed by both UK and RoI?
Do you think Lisbon doesnt contain Article 50 allowing either UK or RoI to leave?
Do you think Article 50 makes it impossible to leave without a withdrawal agreement?
Do you think (as a matter of contract law) that earlier contracts supersede later contracts?
Where have I erred?
You have erred by thinking the possibility of Article 50 trumped the GFA
Of course it did not: it was subject to the GFA
I’d suggest you are completely wrong legally
Providing for a country to leave the EU did not mean that wiped all its other obligations clean: that’s simply not how law works
“Providing for a country to leave the EU did not mean that wiped all its other obligations clean: that’s simply not how law works”
Doesn’t mean that Boris and Cohort don’t believe it to be so. Indeed much of the ‘Leave’ rhetoric suggests exactly such casual disregard for international agreements. It has done all along and certainly since the referendum where the entire withdrawal agreement process has been handled with a high-handed arrogance.
I rather hope that David C is talking through his hat and merely expressing his own wishful thinking.
Thanks
Can you please give some legal authority for this?
I can’t find any mention of the Belfast Agreement anywhere in the Lisbon Treaty.
A30(3) of the Vienna Convention on Treaties says:
“When all the parties to the earlier treaty are parties also to the later treaty but the earlier treaty is not terminated or suspended in operation under article 59, the earlier treaty applies only to the extent that its provisions are compatible with those of the later treaty.”
Mr Justice Maguire in the McCord case said about the interaction between the Belfast Agreement and the Lisbon Treaty:
“While the wind of change may be about to blow, the precise direction in which it will blow cannot yet be determined so there is a level of uncertainty, as evidenced by the discussion about how the Northern Ireland land border with Ireland was affected by withdrawal from the EU.”
There’s this article, where they couldn’t find the Belfast Agreement overriding A50: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596826/IPOL_STU(2017)596826_EN.pdf
With respect, you call that an authority
I suggest going away and noting the real world
@ David C
Are you sure your provided link was to the correct article?
I’ve only skimmed through quickly, but I did not get the feeling from the article that The Lisbon Treaty overrules the GFA.
In fact, if you want to continue with your line of reasoning that new treatise override older treatise, page 18 mentions two treatise which build on the GFA in 2014 and 2015.
The letter I’d probably want to write to Michael Gove would only have two words in it. In conjunction they would be regarded as constituting ‘undiplomatic language’.
I don’t think I would make much of a politician 🙂 (Mind you I don’t think Michael Gove does either)
by the way…. what’s the plan with Gibraltar?
or am I just being awkward now?
I doubt anyone knows
“I doubt anyone knows [what the plan is for Gibraltar]”
Maybe one of Boris’ booster plans is to excavate a channel to separate it from the continental landmass and build a bridge. He’s got a spare set of bridge plans; they would probably do. 🙂
You cannot argue with the arrogant ignorance that is Michael Gove.
He is an opportunist – look at his history – and he’s on a good whack to destroy the country and he will hoover up afterwards like the rest of ’em.
If I came within a few feet of him…………….well, we’ll leave it at that – this is meant to be a family show after all.