The Irish Sea checks* are : “Not fit for purpose”
thejournal.ie/eu-checks-bet … 3-Jan2022/
Facilities and staff aren`t there.
*part of the Northern Ireland Protocol, negotiated and signed by Johnson.
Franglais:
The Irish Sea checks* are : “Not fit for purpose”
thejournal.ie/eu-checks-bet … 3-Jan2022/
Facilities and staff aren`t there.*part of the Northern Ireland Protocol, negotiated and signed by Johnson.
A Protocol that was unnecessary… and was a means to an end.
To paraphrase ‘All’s fair in love and war’
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Monkey241:
Franglais:
The Irish Sea checks* are : “Not fit for purpose”
thejournal.ie/eu-checks-bet … 3-Jan2022/
Facilities and staff aren`t there.*part of the Northern Ireland Protocol, negotiated and signed by Johnson.
A Protocol that was unnecessary… and was a means to an end.
To paraphrase ‘All’s fair in love and war’Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
True…partly.
The protocol was only needed because of the particular type of Brexit chosen.
“All`s fair in love and war”?
A trade agreement is neither.
And that expression has been used as an excuse for many naughty things.
Franglais:
Monkey241:
Franglais:
The Irish Sea checks* are : “Not fit for purpose”
thejournal.ie/eu-checks-bet … 3-Jan2022/
Facilities and staff aren`t there.*part of the Northern Ireland Protocol, negotiated and signed by Johnson.
A Protocol that was unnecessary… and was a means to an end.
To paraphrase ‘All’s fair in love and war’Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
True…partly.
The protocol was only needed because of the particular type of Brexit chosen.“All`s fair in love and war”?
A trade agreement is neither.
And that expression has been used as an excuse for many naughty things.
It had indeed. Realpolitik is where its at.
You aren’t well placed to take the moral high ground with the EU. Your indignation is all too contrived.
The Protocol wasn’t necessary at all
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Full Marks to Monkey: - Brexit’s new Carryfast 
whisperingsmith:
Full Marks to Monkey: - Brexit’s new Carryfast
If you feel able to refute the points, crack on.
If personal attack is all you have, I can play that game too [emoji6]
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Curiouser and curiouser.
Edwin Poots* has instructed his officials to end the checks between UK mainland and NI.
All part of the Brexit agreement and NI Protocol.
youtube.com/watch?v=aoqKxN7akR0
So, firstly the officials have to decide whether or not it is a legal instruction, then if it is, and then stop the required checks, the UK will be in breach of its deal with the EU. Or...summat...or not... And with the NI power sharing agreement, yes he is a minister, but, its complicated.
*Minister of Agriculture in NI Assembly (Stormont)
Member (ex leader) of DUP.
Good job the Westminster Gov is in such a strong and stable position to deal with such matters, innit?
Franglais:
Curiouser and curiouser.
Edwin Poots* has instructed his officials to end the checks between UK mainland and NI.
All part of the Brexit agreement and NI Protocol.youtube.com/watch?v=aoqKxN7akR0
So, firstly the officials have to decide whether or not it is a legal instruction, then if it is, and then stop the required checks, the UK will be in breach of it
s deal with the EU. Or...summat...or not... And with the NI power sharing agreement, yes he is a minister, but, its complicated.*Minister of Agriculture in NI Assembly (Stormont)
Member (ex leader) of DUP.Good job the Westminster Gov is in such a strong and stable position to deal with such matters, innit?
Perhaps because 95% of the checks are unnecessary which all sides can see so why not reduce the checks to those that are necessary, nothing wrong with amending something after it has been signed once it becomes clear that it can be improved without compromising any standards. It is clear that both sides have signed an unworkable agreement partly brought in to keep the Green side of N.I. happy whilst giving no thought to the Orange side and who’d have guessed that this would cause a problem obviously no one living outside of N.I.
No mention of Sinn Fein refusing to discuss this in the Stormont and which now looks like it will cause the collapse of the Stormont so another period of no governance.
The strength of the government in Westminster is irrelevant if your job is to carry out these checks and you are told that if you do your life could be in danger would you go to work? Would a stong Westminster government tell these people to just get on with their job and regardless of the consequences. Checks have already been suspended once due to intimidation.
It’s very easy for people who live outside N.I. to break it down to either Boris bad or EU bad depending on which side of the fence you’re on to those of us living here the reality is very different but nice to see that people outside think we can be used to point score in their arguements
Mazzer2:
Perhaps because 95% of the checks are unnecessary which all sides can see
Well, no.
The checks are necessary and agreed upon, and signed, by Johnson and the EU. Would Johnson have agreed to summat that wasn`t needed?
Why necessary? Because of Brexit…Like it or lump it, that is the way it is.
You dont want them, Johnson doesnt want them, EU doesnt want them, I dont want them, but they are inextricably tied into the Fudge/■■■■-up of what was signed.
They are good for Nobody, but are part of the real world consequences of Brexit.
Frost who hailed the deal and then spent months trying to change it, now we have Truss trying to alter it.
Why if was good enough for Johnson to claim such a great deal?
If you want to say the NI Protocol is mad?
Agreed.
But it was negotiated and signed by Johnson and is a key part of his Brexit.
Therefore…
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
Perhaps because 95% of the checks are unnecessary which all sides can seeWell, no.
The checks are necessary and agreed upon, and signed, by Johnson and the EU. Would Johnson have agreed to summat that wasn`t needed?
Why necessary? Because of Brexit…Like it or lump it, that is the way it is.You don
t want them, Johnson doesnt want them, EU doesnt want them, I dont want them, but they are inextricably tied into the Fudge/■■■■-up of what was signed.
They are good for Nobody, but are part of the real world consequences of Brexit.Frost who hailed the deal and then spent months trying to change it, now we have Truss trying to alter it.
Why if was good enough for Johnson to claim such a great deal?If you want to say the NI Protocol is mad?
Agreed.
But it was negotiated and signed by Johnson and is a key part of his Brexit.
Therefore…
But are the checks necessary? Just because it has been signed doesn’t mean that they are necessary a year in and it is apparent that 95% are not so why not take a look at it and modify it. Sainsbury’s and ASDA are two of the biggest food providers in N.I. with no footprint in the Republic yet are subject to the same checks are someone who has, any need for these pointless checks?
The EU claims to want to protect the peace yet would rather workers lives were put in danger than drop unnecessary checks, throughout all the negotiations we were continually reminded of Gerry Adams’ phrase " We haven’t gone away you know" well that could be equally applied to both sides yet no one thought of that when they kept telling us that Republicans would resort to violence if they felt slighted that the other side might too.
As for your comment like it or lump it perhaps you would like to repeat that to people who have been threatened trying to implement these unecessary checks or should it ever come to it at one of their funerals. People’s lives are at risk here as is the political process in N.I. two things that are far more likely to damage the peace process than whether a UK sausage finds it’s way to Dublin. It reflects badly on both sides that an agreement cannot be reached but perhaps political dogma is more important than a solution.
Mazzer2:
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
Perhaps because 95% of the checks are unnecessary which all sides can seeWell, no.
The checks are necessary and agreed upon, and signed, by Johnson and the EU. Would Johnson have agreed to summat that wasn`t needed?
Why necessary? Because of Brexit…Like it or lump it, that is the way it is.You don
t want them, Johnson doesnt want them, EU doesnt want them, I dont want them, but they are inextricably tied into the Fudge/■■■■-up of what was signed.
They are good for Nobody, but are part of the real world consequences of Brexit.Frost who hailed the deal and then spent months trying to change it, now we have Truss trying to alter it.
Why if was good enough for Johnson to claim such a great deal?If you want to say the NI Protocol is mad?
Agreed.
But it was negotiated and signed by Johnson and is a key part of his Brexit.
Therefore…But are the checks necessary? Just because it has been signed doesn’t mean that they are necessary a year in and it is apparent that 95% are not so why not take a look at it and modify it. Sainsbury’s and ASDA are two of the biggest food providers in N.I. with no footprint in the Republic yet are subject to the same checks are someone who has, any need for these pointless checks?
The EU claims to want to protect the peace yet would rather workers lives were put in danger than drop unnecessary checks, throughout all the negotiations we were continually reminded of Gerry Adams’ phrase " We haven’t gone away you know" well that could be equally applied to both sides yet no one thought of that when they kept telling us that Republicans would resort to violence if they felt slighted that the other side might too.
As for your comment like it or lump it perhaps you would like to repeat that to people who have been threatened trying to implement these unecessary checks or should it ever come to it at one of their funerals. People’s lives are at risk here as is the political process in N.I. two things that are far more likely to damage the peace process than whether a UK sausage finds it’s way to Dublin. It reflects badly on both sides that an agreement cannot be reached but perhaps political dogma is more important than a solution.
If I ruled the world…I wouldnt need to apologise for endangering lives. There would be no checks. How can threats of violence (I grant you credible ones) affect daily lives? That is letting terrorists win isnt it?
The checks are there because of the Brexit deal that Johnson made.
The NI Protocol is a bizarre fudge.
The peculiar situation needed a carefully thought out, well planned scheme, and I for one dont have any idea what shape that would have been. I dont know who has such a scheme.
The one we have certainly isn`t one is it? Can we agree on that?
Although it was hailed by himself as some sort of triumph, it has been the subject of re-negotiation ever since.
Sainsburys and Asda have to go through checks? Crazy!
Who agreed to that? Johnson, part of his Brexit deal.
Telling the EU to stop the checks that the UKs actions have made necessary, and that the UK negotiated and signed up to, is just not credible. No more that the EU looking at a deal and saying to the UK, "we dont like that bit of the deal we freely signed, so we aint doing it"! We wouldnt stand for that. Why would they?
As we take a divergent path to the EU in the future, then those checks will become ever more necessary.
Importing Aussie meats? They may not conform to EU standards although they may be OK under new UK laws.
How can they have
free access… Aus into the UK
free access… UK into NI
free access…NI into Eire
free access…Eire into rest of EU
if there is
<no free access Aus into the EU ?
There must be a border somewhere. And a border with no checks isn`t a real border.
Every possible border location will upset someone.
Im not going to say any place is better or worse than any other place. Theyre all equally, for different reasons of course, bad.
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
Perhaps because 95% of the checks are unnecessary which all sides can seeWell, no.
The checks are necessary and agreed upon, and signed, by Johnson and the EU. Would Johnson have agreed to summat that wasn`t needed?
Why necessary? Because of Brexit…Like it or lump it, that is the way it is.You don
t want them, Johnson doesnt want them, EU doesnt want them, I dont want them, but they are inextricably tied into the Fudge/■■■■-up of what was signed.
They are good for Nobody, but are part of the real world consequences of Brexit.Frost who hailed the deal and then spent months trying to change it, now we have Truss trying to alter it.
Why if was good enough for Johnson to claim such a great deal?If you want to say the NI Protocol is mad?
Agreed.
But it was negotiated and signed by Johnson and is a key part of his Brexit.
Therefore…
Garbage
As was shown in the lead up to Brexit, there was no need for a hard border.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Franglais:
If I ruled the world…I wouldnt need to apologise for endangering lives. There would be no checks. How can threats of violence (I grant you credible ones) affect daily lives? That is letting terrorists win isnt it?The checks are there because of the Brexit deal that Johnson made.
The NI Protocol is a bizarre fudge.
The peculiar situation needed a carefully thought out, well planned scheme, and I for one dont have any idea what shape that would have been. I dont know who has such a scheme.
The one we have certainly isn`t one is it? Can we agree on that?
Although it was hailed by himself as some sort of triumph, it has been the subject of re-negotiation ever since.
Sainsburys and Asda have to go through checks? Crazy!
Who agreed to that? Johnson, part of his Brexit deal.Telling the EU to stop the checks that the UK
s actions have made necessary, and that the UK negotiated and signed up to, is just not credible. No more that the EU looking at a deal and saying to the UK, "we dont like that bit of the deal we freely signed, so we aint doing it"! We wouldnt stand for that. Why would they?As we take a divergent path to the EU in the future, then those checks will become ever more necessary.
Importing Aussie meats? They may not conform to EU standards although they may be OK under new UK laws.
How can they havefree access… Aus into the UK
free access… UK into NI
free access…NI into Eire
free access…Eire into rest of EU
if there is
<no free access Aus into the EU ?There must be a border somewhere. And a border with no checks isn`t a real border.
Every possible border location will upset someone.
Im not going to say any place is better or worse than any other place. Theyre all equally, for different reasons of course, bad.
Obviously never seen at first hand the effects these threats have on people it’s easy to take them lightly when they will never affect you or people you know. Whether it is letting terrorists win or not the fact is it happens and until all weapons are taken out of circulation and terror groups dissolved (thank you Tony Blair for ensuring neither of these two things happened) it will continue to happen and people will decide what action they personally want to take on receiving such threats in the main most prefer to live.
I haven’t said no checks if in the case you describe Austrailian meat is exported to the EU via the UK then yes it must be checked that is not the same as meat from UK to N.I. whose journey stops in N.I.
We both agree that the protocol is ‘mad’ yet your solution seems to be to leave it mad whatever the consequences, the first of which could be the collapse of the Stormont on Tuesday rather than keep trying to find a solution that both sides can if possible agree to.
Monkey241:
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
Perhaps because 95% of the checks are unnecessary which all sides can seeWell, no.
The checks are necessary and agreed upon, and signed, by Johnson and the EU. Would Johnson have agreed to summat that wasn`t needed?
Why necessary? Because of Brexit…Like it or lump it, that is the way it is.You don
t want them, Johnson doesnt want them, EU doesnt want them, I dont want them, but they are inextricably tied into the Fudge/■■■■-up of what was signed.
They are good for Nobody, but are part of the real world consequences of Brexit.Frost who hailed the deal and then spent months trying to change it, now we have Truss trying to alter it.
Why if was good enough for Johnson to claim such a great deal?If you want to say the NI Protocol is mad?
Agreed.
But it was negotiated and signed by Johnson and is a key part of his Brexit.
Therefore…Garbage
As was shown in the lead up to Brexit, there was no need for a hard border.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Going well is it ?
August 2020 Johnson said: “There will be no border down the Irish Sea - over my dead body’”.
Why are there customs checks between two regions of the same country?
Why has Frost given up and quit?
Mazzer2:
Franglais:
If I ruled the world…I wouldnt need to apologise for endangering lives. There would be no checks. How can threats of violence (I grant you credible ones) affect daily lives? That is letting terrorists win isnt it?The checks are there because of the Brexit deal that Johnson made.
The NI Protocol is a bizarre fudge.
The peculiar situation needed a carefully thought out, well planned scheme, and I for one dont have any idea what shape that would have been. I dont know who has such a scheme.
The one we have certainly isn`t one is it? Can we agree on that?
Although it was hailed by himself as some sort of triumph, it has been the subject of re-negotiation ever since.
Sainsburys and Asda have to go through checks? Crazy!
Who agreed to that? Johnson, part of his Brexit deal.Telling the EU to stop the checks that the UK
s actions have made necessary, and that the UK negotiated and signed up to, is just not credible. No more that the EU looking at a deal and saying to the UK, "we dont like that bit of the deal we freely signed, so we aint doing it"! We wouldnt stand for that. Why would they?As we take a divergent path to the EU in the future, then those checks will become ever more necessary.
Importing Aussie meats? They may not conform to EU standards although they may be OK under new UK laws.
How can they havefree access… Aus into the UK
free access… UK into NI
free access…NI into Eire
free access…Eire into rest of EU
if there is
<no free access Aus into the EU ?There must be a border somewhere. And a border with no checks isn`t a real border.
Every possible border location will upset someone.
Im not going to say any place is better or worse than any other place. Theyre all equally, for different reasons of course, bad.Obviously never seen at first hand the effects these threats have on people it’s easy to take them lightly when they will never affect you or people you know. Whether it is letting terrorists win or not the fact is it happens and until all weapons are taken out of circulation and terror groups dissolved (thank you Tony Blair for ensuring neither of these two things happened) it will continue to happen and people will decide what action they personally want to take on receiving such threats in the main most prefer to live.
I haven’t said no checks if in the case you describe Austrailian meat is exported to the EU via the UK then yes it must be checked that is not the same as meat from UK to N.I. whose journey stops in N.I.
We both agree that the protocol is ‘mad’ yet your solution seems to be to leave it mad whatever the consequences, the first of which could be the collapse of the Stormont on Tuesday rather than keep trying to find a solution that both sides can if possible agree to.
I certainly dont want to downplay the reality of the *genuine risk that has been caused by this brexut deal*. Dont accuse me of that please. It is a genuine risk, yes.
I don`t accept that pointing out the genuine risks caused by this deal is being partisan it is being realistic.
The deal as signed off caused these risks.
You rightly point out the risk of violence.
You say its a bad arrangement. But you dont accept that one leads to the other?
You say there are real risks for those involved. I agree.
This ■■■■-up has caused them!
The fact it is a bad and crazy deal gives rise to all of this.
It is Johnsons crazy, magic, "border that isnt a border", illusion that is fading.
The particular Brexit chosen is a bunch of contradictory promises. You can`t patch up a illusion with sticking plasters.
How can you separate Aus meat from UK meat, without customs checks?
And of course everything else; more and more as time goes on as we diverge from the EU. And if we don`t diverge from the EU WTF are we doing anyway?
Franglais:
Monkey241:
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
Perhaps because 95% of the checks are unnecessary which all sides can seeWell, no.
The checks are necessary and agreed upon, and signed, by Johnson and the EU. Would Johnson have agreed to summat that wasn`t needed?
Why necessary? Because of Brexit…Like it or lump it, that is the way it is.You don
t want them, Johnson doesnt want them, EU doesnt want them, I dont want them, but they are inextricably tied into the Fudge/■■■■-up of what was signed.
They are good for Nobody, but are part of the real world consequences of Brexit.Frost who hailed the deal and then spent months trying to change it, now we have Truss trying to alter it.
Why if was good enough for Johnson to claim such a great deal?If you want to say the NI Protocol is mad?
Agreed.
But it was negotiated and signed by Johnson and is a key part of his Brexit.
Therefore…Garbage
As was shown in the lead up to Brexit, there was no need for a hard border.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Going well is it ?
August 2020 Johnson said: “There will be no border down the Irish Sea - over my dead body’”.
Why are there customs checks between two regions of the same country?Why has Frost given up and quit?
Frost has told us why he quit.
You of course no better.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
Franglais:
If I ruled the world…I wouldnt need to apologise for endangering lives. There would be no checks. How can threats of violence (I grant you credible ones) affect daily lives? That is letting terrorists win isnt it?The checks are there because of the Brexit deal that Johnson made.
The NI Protocol is a bizarre fudge.
The peculiar situation needed a carefully thought out, well planned scheme, and I for one dont have any idea what shape that would have been. I dont know who has such a scheme.
The one we have certainly isn`t one is it? Can we agree on that?
Although it was hailed by himself as some sort of triumph, it has been the subject of re-negotiation ever since.
Sainsburys and Asda have to go through checks? Crazy!
Who agreed to that? Johnson, part of his Brexit deal.Telling the EU to stop the checks that the UK
s actions have made necessary, and that the UK negotiated and signed up to, is just not credible. No more that the EU looking at a deal and saying to the UK, "we dont like that bit of the deal we freely signed, so we aint doing it"! We wouldnt stand for that. Why would they?As we take a divergent path to the EU in the future, then those checks will become ever more necessary.
Importing Aussie meats? They may not conform to EU standards although they may be OK under new UK laws.
How can they havefree access… Aus into the UK
free access… UK into NI
free access…NI into Eire
free access…Eire into rest of EU
if there is
<no free access Aus into the EU ?There must be a border somewhere. And a border with no checks isn`t a real border.
Every possible border location will upset someone.
Im not going to say any place is better or worse than any other place. Theyre all equally, for different reasons of course, bad.Obviously never seen at first hand the effects these threats have on people it’s easy to take them lightly when they will never affect you or people you know. Whether it is letting terrorists win or not the fact is it happens and until all weapons are taken out of circulation and terror groups dissolved (thank you Tony Blair for ensuring neither of these two things happened) it will continue to happen and people will decide what action they personally want to take on receiving such threats in the main most prefer to live.
I haven’t said no checks if in the case you describe Austrailian meat is exported to the EU via the UK then yes it must be checked that is not the same as meat from UK to N.I. whose journey stops in N.I.
We both agree that the protocol is ‘mad’ yet your solution seems to be to leave it mad whatever the consequences, the first of which could be the collapse of the Stormont on Tuesday rather than keep trying to find a solution that both sides can if possible agree to.I certainly don
t want to downplay the reality of the *genuine risk that has been caused by this brexut deal*. Dont accuse me of that please. It is a genuine risk, yes.
I don`t accept that pointing out the genuine risks caused by this deal is being partisan it is being realistic.The deal as signed off caused these risks.
You rightly point out the risk of violence.
You say its a bad arrangement. But you dont accept that one leads to the other?You say there are real risks for those involved. I agree.
This ■■■■-up has caused them!
The fact it is a bad and crazy deal gives rise to all of this.
It is Johnsons crazy, magic, "border that isnt a border", illusion that is fading.The particular Brexit chosen is a bunch of contradictory promises. You can`t patch up a illusion with sticking plasters.
How can you separate Aus meat from UK meat, without customs checks?
And of course everything else; more and more as time goes on as we diverge from the EU. And if we don`t diverge from the EU WTF are we doing anyway?
If we don’t diverge yada yada …
What we aren’t doing is driving down wages by uncontrolled immigration.
What we aren’t doing is paying a mock Parlt billions to make decisions that we already have an elected govt to make
As for NI, lots of hot air right now.
It’s a scenario that allows your selective morality to make hay with.
The reality is the EU itself conducted a study that says a hard border is unnecessary.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Funny though … the EU as we know it took over 40 years to evolve
But on Brexit you petulantly demand an instant fix. Think of the Protocol as part of the evolution- like many iterations of the EU it’ll disappear
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Monkey241:
Frost has told us why he quit.
You of course no better.
Dear Boris,
I have led our EU exit process for the two and half years since you became Prime Minister. In those years we have restored the UK’s freedom and independence as a country and begun the process of building a new relationship with the EU. That will be a long-term task. That is why we agreed earlier this month that I would move on in January and hand over the baton to others to manage our future relationship with the EU. It is disappointing that this plan has become public this evening and in the circumstances I think it is right for me to write to step down with immediate effect.
It has been a huge honour and privilege to work with you over the last five years, first in the Foreign Office and then in No.10. You have been an outstanding leader at a moment of grave constitutional crisis for this country. Many said that it would be impossible to deliver what we did: an end to political turbulence by implementing the referendum result, a stunning election victory, an exit from the EU which gave us full freedom about our future choices as a country, and finally putting in place the world’s broadest and indeed only zero-tariff free trade deal. You and I have always shared the same approach on Brexit and I do not think we would have achieved so much without that close common understanding of our aims.
Brexit is now secure. The challenge for the Government now is to deliver on the opportunities it gives us. You know my concerns about the current direction of travel. I hope we will move as fast as possible to where we need to get to: a lightly regulated, low-tax, entrepreneurial economy, at the cutting edge of modern science and economic change. Three hundred years of history show that countries which take that route grow and prosper, and I am confident we will too.
We also need to learn to live with Covid and I know that is your instinct too. You took a brave decision in July, against considerable opposition, to open up the country again. Sadly it did not prove to be irreversible, as I wished, and believe you did too. I hope we can get back on track soon and not be tempted by the kind of coercive measures we have seen elsewhere.
Together we have put this country onto a new path. I am confident that under your leadership this newly free Britain can succeed and prosper hugely. I wish you and the Government every success in that.
David
…
Dear David,
Thank you for your letter tendering your resignation as Minister of State at the Cabinet Office.
I was very sorry to receive it, given everything you have achieved and contributed to this Government for which I am very grateful. I particularly want to pay tribute to your unique contribution towards getting Brexit done. First, as my EU Sherpa to ensure a smooth withdrawal from the EU on 31 January 2020. Then, as the chief negotiator to secure the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, which fully restored the UK’s sovereignty as we took back control of our laws, borders, money, trade and fisheries.
Many said that it would be impossible to secure such a comprehensive agreement — the first zero tariff, zero quota deal the EU had ever agreed — in such short time, even before the COVID-19 pandemic struck. It simply would not have been possible without your relentless hard work, resolve and vision. You should be immensely proud of your historic service to this Government and this country.
After joining Cabinet as Minister of State at the Cabinet Office in March, you have helped oversee the implementation of the TCA, guided our relationship with the EU and pushed this Government to maximise the economic and political opportunities of Brexit. Crucially you have helped highlight and sought to address the destabilising impact the current operation of the Northern Ireland Protocol is having on communities in Northern Ireland, which is undermining the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement and the territorial integrity of this country.
Once again, I am grateful for all you have achieved and hope that you will be able to serve this country again in the future.
Boris
…
Highlights are mine.
Monkey241:
Funny though … the EU as we know it took over 40 years to evolve
But on Brexit you petulantly demand an instant fix. Think of the Protocol as part of the evolution- like many iterations of the EU it’ll disappearSent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
It survived over 40 years because the initial deal was realistic.
It was based on firm foundations that the participants tried to honour and not renegotiate before the ink was even dry.