Beware direct rule, UUP warns unionists

The party has warned “those unionists calling for the total collapse of Stormont and the reintroduction of direct rule until the protocol issues are resolved” to be “careful of the long-term implications of such a strategy”.

In a statement, East Antrim MLA John Stewart said: “Firstly, in 1998 unionists were desperate to return powers to Stormont via the Belfast Agreement in order to end the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement which was universally unpopular with unionists due to the consultative role given to Dublin.

“Secondly, anyone who wants a return to direct rule should ponder on the history of direct rule and be absolutely clear as to what could emerge, not least an Anglo-Irish Agreement Mark 2, whereby London deals directly with Dublin on Northern Ireland issues and bypasses Belfast – and unionism – completely.”

He also sounded a note of caution around the current leadership of the UK government, adding: “Thirdly, they [unionists advocating for a return to direct rule until the protocol is resolved] need to reflect upon the fact that the protocol was negotiated by the UK government – led by Boris Johnson – with the EU, and then imposed upon Northern Ireland.

“Collapsing Stormont because you want to see the removal of the protocol, and returning all powers to the very prime minister who negotiated the protocol in the first place does not seem to be a very logical or tactically sound strategy from a pro-Union perspective.”

He also accused the DUP of a change in approach when it comes to the protocol, saying: “The Ulster Unionist Party has never supported the protocol and is totally opposed to an Irish Sea border. We have been consistent in that approach since the protocol first emerged in October 2019.

“That is not something which the DUP can say.”

Mr Stewart added: “The key question now is how we oppose the protocol without causing even greater damage to Northern Ireland and gambling with the future of the Union itself.

“Those who call for the collapse of Stormont and the return of direct rule should be careful of the long-term implications.”