Michael Gove would personally lead the Stormont talks and replace the backstop with a “Stormont lock”. Could it work?

Even as the belief grows that the race to be the next prime minister is Boris Johnson’s to lose, the contest is actually hotting up. His main challenger at the moment is Michael Gove the champion who betrayed Boris last time and is now doing his best to differentiate from Boris as the Brexit candidate with realism. In an atmosphere of near hysteria about the future of the Conservative party, Gove  has injected a dangerous note of realism by admitting that the  Hallowe’en deadline may not be possible.

Now in the Daily Mail and in his pitch to MPs, he has concentrated more than others on the backstop and the border. Gove has ancient form over Northern Ireland when he opposed the GFA as a surrender to IRA terrorism.

 

As you read his words below, ask yourself: do you really believe English MPs would feel any better at being bound to the EU at the will of the Northern Ireland Assembly than the EU? There is the alternative argument that landing the Assembly with a “ veto “ called the Stormont lock could  have the unintended consequence of weakening the Union by forcing  the Tories to denounce it as the only means of freeing  themselves  from EU entanglements.  Such a veto first mooted by Theresa May didn’t impress the DUP. Why should it now?  Would Sinn Fein and the Irish government welcome a Stormont lock in exchange for the backstop, and negotiate through the GFA institutions?  Is this proposal enough for the EU to agree to an extension of the October 31 deadline?

As interesting is Gove’s pledge to lead the Northern Ireland talks personally. Would his Brexit strategy constitute an inducement to the parties to return  – before or after he concluded a deal with  the EU?   Different sequencing could make a difference. Remainers and the Irish government might well prefer to rely on the strength of the EU’s position than risk the volatilities of a restored Assembly. But might  Dublin yet  be tempted to go into detail with Gove to avert the risk of a hard border on the one hand,  or on the other, the prospect of regulatory obstacles to farm exports to GB and delays on the land bridge to the continent?

From Gove’s Daily Mail manifesto:

 

• We need a new approach to Northern Ireland – a Union guarantee. That means listening to our Unionist friends in Northern Ireland who want to see a so-called ‘Stormont Lock’ which would guarantee in international law that there won’t be any difference in laws across the UK unless the Northern Ireland assembly and executive agrees. I will also personally lead the talks to get devolved government back up and running in Northern Ireland.

 

• A full stop to the backstop. We need a dedicated minister leading the search for alternative arrangements for the Irish border – supported with proper funding and intensive technical work. We have to remove any risk that we could be trapped in a backstop, so I will work with the Irish government and Brussels to secure a clear exit mechanism, compatible with the principle of consent for Northern Ireland.

 

Spectator editor Fraser Nelson who chaired Gove’s pitch last night has reported extracts worth carrying at some length.

How I could get a better Brexit deal, by Michael Gove

[An extract from his comments at last night’s Spectator event, where he talks about changes in Irish politics increasing the chances for ‘alternative arrangements’ to the backstop.]

“There are things that we can do which will change the way in which we leave the European Union. I think that, critically, one of the issues that caused me particular concern has been the backstop. And it’s caused me concern for two reasons. One: as a unionist I didn’t like the idea of any part of our United Kingdom being treated differently. And secondly, as someone who wants all the benefits of a full Canada-style free trade agreement I don’t want to have some of the customs restrictions that are implicit in the backstop.

At the last meeting at Strasbourg, the EU committed to working alternative arrangements that could obviate the need ever to go into the backstop or could ensure that we actually replace it. I think that there are ways in which we can work with the Irish government in order to ensure that we either need never go in or if we are in that it can very quickly be superseded. I’ve had conversations with people on different sides of the Irish border. I believe there is room for movement.

There’s also a significant change as well, which has happened since those conversations. Hitherto, Sinn Fein have not wanted to get the power sharing arrangements in Northern Ireland up and running but they had a bad time in the local and European elections south of the border. Voters there did not like the approach towards devolution in Northern Ireland and the refusal to reengage. I think there is an opportunity to get the parties back on the table to get a negotiated settlement so that we restore devolution to Northern Ireland.

One of the peculiarities of the last general election is that there is no representation of nationalists in Northern Ireland in Westminster and therefore they have a missing voice. If we get the institutions back up and running in Northern Ireland, nationalists will be involved in the administration of Northern Ireland. That will make it easier for us to get those alternative arrangements in place and to provide security to border communities and also to ensure that we can have the both the safeguarding of the Belfast Agreement but also the economic benefits that have flowed since then.

The right thing to do is to make sure that we very quickly move to a situation where we recognise that alternative arrangements can supplant the need for a backstop. I think that the right thing to do is to demonstrate, practically, that all of the concerns that people have understandably raised about the border can be resolved. The EU have acknowledged that the backstop is explicitly temporary in EU law. Their commitment to work with us an alternative arrangement shows that they recognise that there can be an approach which need not tie us in to that arrangement.”

In Twitter, the BBC’s Europe editor Katya Adler still sees potential wriggle room in the EU’s position, depending on what the new PM can deliver.  But isn’t this partly a circular argument?  What the new PM can deliver depends on what the EU will accept as a deal.

 No one yet knows who next UK PM will be. What EU-UK discussions will look like come September, will depend on EU majority mood, Dublin stance and -crucially- the politics, credibility and parliamentary support of the new UK PM.

Staunch unionists in Parliament would v much object but EU has always been keen to point out how separate NI already is in terms of laws (abortion, gay marriage and more) from rest of UK plus fact that some regulatory checks already exist in Irish Sea.  Others in EU are focussing on another backstop “solution” : that the new UK PM will return to original EU idea of backstop pertaining to Northern Ireland only – thus removing opposition in Parliament from those who see a UK-wide customs union trap in backstop.

It’s been suggested to me that a time-tabled backstop could be a separate legal document added to the Withdrawal Agreement, meaning the EU could stick to its insistence on not re-opening the text. HOWEVER…   Of course this idea – which will be seen as too little by some in UK – will be seen as too much by some in EU eg Ireland. But EU leaders will be weighing up immediate likelihood +pain of no deal (IF they believe the new UK PM means business) and a slightly different backstop.

This can be dismissed of course as transparent attempt at re-packaging same thing BUT some in EU are thinking the new UK PM may well demand a fixed end date to the backstop – leading to EU thoughts of a counter-offer of a “time-tabled” backstop made up of different parts.

An oft cited example is: as soon as EU-UK post #Brexit deal is made on vetinary standards, that can fall away from backstop. EU aim: convert emotionally-charged backstop into a list of practical measures that can fall away at different times.…EU diplomats are currently at pains to underline that the backstop is not “a slab of marble” – meaning bits of it can be shaved away – quickly or gradually, depending on how post #Brexit trade talks progress..

An assessment of Gove by Johnson’s biographer Andrew Gimson in ConservativeHome

Who is the real Gove?

“Gove himself said last night at the One Nation event, and during a subsequent Spectatorappearance, that he would be prepared, if necessary, to extend the deadline for leaving the EU beyond 31st October.

Such statements will not satisfy hardline Brexiteers, including those who now support the Brexit Party. But Gove must reckon that in order to unite the Conservative parliamentary party, it is worth giving ground on the date.

He contends that with more time to bring the Brexit negotiations to a successful conclusion, there is less danger of precipitating an early general election, which Jeremy Corbyn might well win.

On yesterday morning’s ConHome, hard questions were asked about Gove’s lack of popularity with the wider public. And a shire Tory who often reflects wider opinion among traditional Tory voters this week said of him to ConHome:

“Think he is able but behaved badly last time. Feel he was probably right about education and has some good ideas. Somehow do not like him. He lacks warmth. Boris has that.”

Gove’s admirers point to his remarkable record as a departmental minister, at Education, Justice and the Environment. He himself says it is necessary to show you can change things, not just that you can charm people”.