Owen Polley: Naive or worse, the UK government's approach to the Irish Sea border is patently failing

It should be said, though, that Ms Reeves spoke much less persuasively about the Windsor Framework. She repeated the government’s line that the Irish Sea border must be implemented in its entirety, with the goal of creating better relationships with the EU.

In theory, the argument is that a warmer friendship between Britain and Brussels will help ease ‘trade frictions’ when they do business together. To that end, Labour ministers heralded a ‘reset’ earlier this year and a mooted agreement on food that is yet to come to fruition.

Unfortunately, every previous attempt to rely on the EU’s good faith has been entirely in vain.

The Conservative government under Boris Johnson claimed, for example, that any sea border would apply only to a few sensitive goods, like firearms or exotic animals. This belief, while it was naive, was probably genuine, on a straightforward reading of the NI Protocol.

The protocol established that goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland would be subjected to customs processes, tariffs and paperwork, if they posed a ‘risk’ to the EU’s market. While, by default, all products were deemed ‘at risk’, the agreement set up a joint committee to exempt categories of goods from this definition.

In theory, this work could have quickly eliminated many aspects of the sea border, allowing everyday products and materials to move freely.

The problem with the process was that it relied entirely on the EU acting with common-sense and without malice. Predictably, all these years later, every type of good is still treated as a ‘risk’ to Brussels’ single market.

It’s a sign of British government weakness, and the submissiveness of most politicians at Stormont, that this barely attracts comment.

The lesson is clear though. You cannot rely on the EU to be reasonable. Any concessions it makes will be forced.

Brussels still sees its power-grab over Northern Ireland as a just punishment for Brexit and a way of exerting control over Westminster.

In contrast, Downing Street effectively argues that, if damaging new measures are imposed on this province now, they are more likely to be removed later. For example, new border posts must be operated at the EU’s prompting, precisely so that, in the future, they can stand idle and unneeded, as Brussels overspills with generosity toward the UK.

It is a plan so cunning that it could have been conceived by the TV character Blackadder’s hapless sidekick, Baldrick.

And Keir Starmer would not welcome the comparison, but there are parallels too with Boris Johnson’s approach when he was prime minister.

Johnson thought the protocol was justified to ‘get Brexit done’, while Starmer believes better relationships with Brussels make the sea border worth it. They are both knowingly causing harm to Northern Ireland, arguing that this is okay, because it is for a greater good and can be undone later.

In both instances, this tactic is naive, irresponsible or disingenuous, depending upon your degree of cynicism. Every piece of infrastructure that is built, every new aspect of the sea border that comes into force, every time-consuming form that business incorporates in its daily workload, becomes exponentially more difficult to remove, even if we could trust the EU, which we patently cannot.

The protocol and framework came with safeguards that were supposed to protect Northern Ireland and the UK from many of the things that have happened since 2021. The protocol included an ‘emergency brake’; called Article 16, which could be pulled if there were ‘serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties,’ or ‘diversion of trade’.

These tests have been met many times over, but successive governments have declined to use Article 16, in case it offended the EU.

This Labour administration has refused to use the Stormont Brake or Applicability Motions, which were created by the Windsor Framework, purportedly to prevent new EU law from causing more divergence with the rest of the UK.

Brussels consistently takes the most severe attitude to Northern Ireland, while our leaders at Westminster snivel and cower in case the EU takes objection.

That is perhaps not surprising, when you look at some of Labour’s other foreign policy decisions. Its extraordinary plan to pay tens of billions of pounds to give away the strategically important Chagos Islands. Or its capitulation to the pro-Hamas, anti-semite left, which threatens to reward terrorism and recognise a Palestinian state.

Unfortunately, on Northern Ireland, the Conservatives’ position is currently little better.

Kemi Badenoch and other senior Tories still claim that the Windsor Framework is necessary. They have never acknowledged the hurt caused by semi-detaching this province from the rest of the UK and they have failed to explain how they would remove the framework’s most obnoxious features.

The big Westminster parties can try to ignore the pain that they have knowingly inflicted on Northern Ireland. But the sea border is only getting harder and, sooner or later, they will be forced to confront what they have done.