THE DUP has accused Boris Johnson of losing his nerve and striking a bad Brexit deal in a desperate bid to avoid an extension.
Deputy leader Nigel Dodds said Johnson had been “too eager by far” to come to an accommodation “at any cost” with the EU.
His comments came as DUP leader Arlene Foster accused London, Brussels and Dublin of turning their back on powersharing arrangements that form the cornerstone of the Good Friday/Belfast peace agreement.
READ MORE: Brexit: Last-ditch bid to halt PM’s deal to be heard in Scots court
Dodds said: “The Benn Act has forced Boris Johnson into somewhat of desperation measures in order to avoid trying to get an extension.
“He has been too eager by far to get a deal at any cost, and the fact of the matter is, if he held his nerve and held out he would, of course, have got better concessions that kept the integrity, both economic and constitutionally, of the UK.”
Foster said the agreement created several economic borders down the Irish Sea, which separated Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.
“This gives us a border in the Irish Sea in terms of VAT, in terms of customs and in terms of single market rules, without any consent that is meaningful for the people of Northern Ireland,” she said.
READ MORE: Kirsty Hughes: A Brexit deal has been done ... but what’s in it?
The party leader said allowing Stormont to vote on retaining the arrangements on the basis of a straight majority vote, rather than using a peace process mechanism that requires a majority of unionists and nationalists, undermined the principle of powersharing. “For the first time in 21 years we are moving away from powersharing, we are moving away from the majority of unionism and the majority of nationalists, we are moving to single majority vote,” she said.
Foster said it would represent a fundamental change to the 1998 Northern Ireland Act that enshrined the peace treaty. “If we are going down this route in terms of majority rule, what does that mean for devolution?” she asked.
“What does it mean for the return of devolution, and all those things will have to be taken into account.”
She added: “All of that together makes this deal unacceptable for us as guardians of Northern Ireland in terms of the economy and in terms of the constitution.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel