With the backstop, may's deal is still the worst outcome for the uk | thearticle

It’s now common to hear commentators assert that the ERG’s intransigence has become the main obstacle preventing Brexit. In _The Times_, Daniel Finkelstein told the group’s members, “you

can’t count and you can’t compromise and you can’t take yes for an answer.” _The Independent_’s John Rentoul tweeted, “the ERG’s irreconcilables have no idea their project is in danger: if

we stay in the EU it will be because of them.” In case you missed it, they each think that they’re pointing out a great irony. And it is true that the keenest Brexiteers are among the most

ardent critics of the Prime Minister’s deal, which, by virtue of the fact that it is agreed by Brussels, is the easiest way to leave the EU. That doesn’t mean that the ERG is wrong to oppose

the Draft Withdrawal Agreement. Another piece of conventional wisdom observes that a perfect deal isn’t possible and that both sides in a negotiation have to compromise. For that reason, it

is said, Theresa May and her team have reached the most sensible accommodation with the EU that was available in the circumstances. I can understand that argument, and I even have some

sympathy with it, but it’s much less persuasive viewed from the perspective of a unionist in Northern Ireland. It doesn’t matter how it is spun: the whole purpose of the backstop is to

ensure that any new political and economic dividing line after Brexit runs down the Irish Sea between Great Britain and Ulster, rather than along the Irish land border between north and

south. It was extraordinary that Brussels and the Republic of Ireland insisted that this land grab was included in the agreement and it was unforgivable that Theresa May capitulated to their

demands, particularly after she’d previously said “no UK prime minister could ever agree to it”. There might be one or two Northern Irish politicians relishing their moment at the

foreground of national politics – Sammy Wilson springs to mind – but most Ulster unionists don’t want to be the sticking point that prevents Brexit. They’re just not prepared to be the

sacrifice that the rest of the UK makes before it’s allowed to leave. If the prime minister fails to change the backstop significantly, and at the moment there is no sign that she’s even

going to try, Northern Ireland cannot leave the single market and customs union with the rest of the UK. If the protocol is implemented, companies in Great Britain will have to fill in a

declaration in order to ship goods to the province and huge swathes of EU regulations will apply only in Northern Ireland. These arrangements would not be considered even for a minute if

they were going to apply to any other part of the UK. You can question the ERG’s motives – and many commentators do, claiming that they oppose the backstop as a route to a ‘no deal’ Brexit,

rather than a fundamental point about the Union. You can criticise their broader strategy and their apparent preference for a ‘Canada plus’ style trade deal. You cannot denounce them for

choosing the backstop as the feature of the Withdrawal Agreement that is least acceptable and most dangerous to the future of the United Kingdom. We’ll soon find out how genuine their

commitment is to changing this part of the deal meaningfully. The ERG recently followed the example of its DUP allies and moderated its language on the agreement. Jacob Rees-Mogg told Radio

4 yesterday that he could accept a “de facto removal of the backstop”, which could be achieved by adding legally binding text, rather than changing the original document. Mr Rees-Mogg says

he wants a “clear date that says the backstop ends”, so long as it is in the treaty or has equivalent weight to the text of the treaty. That is stronger than any proposed ‘sunset clause’

that would trigger a review after a set period and it is more reliable than empowering the UK government to pull out of the backstop unilaterally. Theresa May and her ministers have shown

such deference to the Republic of Ireland and the EU over Northern Ireland, that it’s almost impossible to see them ending the backstop on their own initiative. One can only imagine the

howls of outrage and the intensity of references to non-existent clauses in the Good Friday Agreement. Whether a future administration would be any less frightened of offending Irish

nationalists is doubtful too. The merits of the rest of the Draft Withdrawal Agreement are debated keenly, but, in a spirit of compromise and in order to secure Brexit, it may well command a

parliamentary majority. With the backstop, as it currently stands, May’s deal is worse for the integrity of the United Kingdom than ‘no deal’, it’s worse than a Norway style soft Brexit and

it’s worse even than remaining in the EU.