>> It’s not really about what is said and threatened in a meeting though is it?
Exactly that. We're beyond the stage of what's said within the protocols of negotiation. The UK has publicly signalled intent to renege on a treaty it entered into less than a year ago. Further, it has backed up that statement by laying a Bill before Parliament to give it explicit power to do so. The legislation is phrased in a way that looks like an attempt to oust legal challenges.
The agreement Johnson and the Teasoch made to solve the 'Irish Backstop' conundrum was obviously going to create problems between NI and GB/rest of UK. It was also evident those problems would attract the ire of Unionists. Either he wasn't on the detail at the time or he always intended to play fast/loose. I suspect the former but cannot rule out the latter.
It's also evident from the statements of people like Steve Baker and Bernard Jenkin suggesting we resile from the whole of the Withdrawal Agreement that the Conservative party has not ended its civil war over Europe.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 11 Sep 20 at 10:38
|
