UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson appears certain to move forward with legislation that has been the subject of considerable acrimony in recent weeks between Britain and the European Union.
Despite arguing himself that “the rules-based international order which we uphold in Great Britain is an overwhelming benefit for the world as a whole,” his own government has admitted that the so-called Internal Market Bill will breach international law. Northern Ireland Secretary and Conservative party MP, Brandon Lewis, told MPs in early September that the bill would breach international law in a “very specific and limited way.”
What is the Internal Market Bill?
The bill’s stated chief objective is to avoid a hard border between The Republic of Ireland, which will continue to be part of the EU’s single market, and Northern Ireland, which will be part of the UK’s internal market, by giving ministers new and necessary powers.
The idea that underlines the bill is to ensure that the UK’s four nations - England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales - can continue to trade with one another, unfettered by trade barriers, once the Brexit transition period comes to an end on December 31 2020.
When the Union between England, Wales and Scotland was created in the 1700s, the internal market was forged to ensure that there was “an open and unhindered” trade path across the frontiers of the constituent nations. However, once the UK joined the EU in 1973, the majority of Britain’s internal trading laws were supplanted by EU regulations.
Now, with the UK’s looming Brexit, Boris Johnson’s government has introduced the Internal Market Bill to apparently ensure the integrity of the UK’s market as a contiguous whole, across internal borders. The Internal Market Bill aims to forge a system of common rules across the entire UK, replacing the EU’s ability to set trade policies, in time for the end of the transition period.
According to the government’s website, the bill will be “introduced to protect trade and jobs across the UK by preventing new burdens on business when the Transition Period ends.”
Why is it So Controversial?
One of the main points of the bill which is proving to be the most controversial is that it will give UK ministers the power to “disapply” regulations agreed to on Northern Ireland in the withdrawal treaty with Brussels in January 2020.
The Internal Market Bill, if made into law, will give ministers the power to make regulations relating to customs procedures for trade between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. The UK government argues that the powers to be given to ministers are a “safety net” necessary to “ensure the integrity of the UK’s internal market.” It would, the government says, help to maintain peace in Northern Ireland if negotiations with the EU on how to manage cross-border trade fail.
The EU on the other hand wants to make sure that there is no open border with its member state The Republic of Ireland - often simply called Ireland - that could function as a regulatory backdoor for British goods into the European market from Northern Ireland. In order to overcome this, under January's agreement, Northern Ireland would be given a special status following Brexit whereby it would stay under the EU's customs union in order to avoid regulatory checks on goods passing between Ireland and Northern Ireland, as is currently the case. Instead, the customs and regulatory checks would take place at the border between Northern Ireland and Britain.
Critics argue that the main problem with the Internal Market Bill is that it gives ministers express permission to bypass those parts of the withdrawal agreement made with the EU as part of BoJo’s “oven-ready Brexit deal.” Specifically, it risks bypassing parts of the Northern Ireland Protocol, which highlights the importance of frictionless trade across the whole of the UK as well as throughout the island or Ireland, as part of the Good Friday Agreement.
The Northern Ireland Protocol was designed to avoid the need for a border on the island of Ireland. The idea is that goods should freely pass back and forth between Northern Ireland and Ireland without any customs checks. Thus, according to the EU and UK-based critics, as well as by the government’s own admission mentioned above, the bill appears to have the potential to undermine this arrangement, thus breaking international law.
However, the controversy is not just limited to trade.
Politically, an open border between Ireland and Northern Ireland was seen as a prerequisite to peace between previously warring Catholics and Protestants, and was thus enshrined in the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. Critics of Boris Johnson’s Brexit stance fear that he may now be risking that peace with the Internal Market Bill.
What Have the Reactions Been?
The EU has threatened legal action against the UK, and accused Boris Johnson of “seriously damaging” relations between the two sides.
Head of the EU council, Ursulla Von-der Leyen has Tweeted that she is, “very concerned about announcements from the British government on its intentions to breach the withdrawal agreement.”
So far, all living former Prime Ministers, including five ex-Tory Party leaders and 30 of their current MPs have condemned the Internal Market Bill.
Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon last week slammed the bill, as a “naked power grab which would cripple devolution,” and will lead to a “race to the bottom” on food standards.
What Comes Next?
The Internal Market Bill will have to go through the British Parliament to become law.
It will have to pass through the House of Commons, where Boris Johnson’s Conservative’s have an 80-seat majority. Following that, it will go through the House of Lords, the upper chamber, where it does not have a majority and is expected to face a stiffer challenge.
So far, the bill has passed the first hurdle in the Commons by 340 votes to 263.
Once the bill has moved through the lower house, a process that is expected to be finished by September 29, then it will move on to the House of Lords. There, it is expected that it will take most of October and November for consideration before a final verdict is reached.
