DUP peer says exposing Irish Sea border legislation to debate is 'vitally important' - after criticism from Lord Bew
The House of Lords will debate a DUP motion on the latest regulations to implement the internal UK trade border on Tuesday night – a move Lord Dodds has described as vital, after criticism from Lord Bew last week.
The DUP peer has laid a ‘regret motion’ in the chamber – ensuring that new regulations on the movement of goods can be examined. Without the motion, the new rules may have faced little or no scrutiny.
The Windsor Framework deal between the UK and EU embedded the Irish Sea border by keeping the United Kingdom divided into two regulatory zones, with Northern Ireland following Brussels rules and Great Britain free to pursue its own policies. To implement that deal, legislation is regularly passed at Westminster.
Much of the scrutiny of sea border legislation has taken place in the upper chamber – but last week at a Together UK Foundation event, unionist peers were criticised by colleague Lord Bew for their approach. While acknowledging the passion of arguments by fellow peers in the Lords, he accused them of a “sore thumb” approach, and of complaining about something that wasn’t going to change.
He said while the deal wasn’t “fair” there is no possibility of reopening the questions around the protocol, arguing that it is “a complete waste of time, it's over”.
Lord Dodds of Duncairn’s motion says that the draft Movement of Goods (Northern Ireland to Great Britain) (Animals, Feed and Food, Plant Health etc.) (Transitory Provision and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024, will “implement the Northern Ireland Protocol and Windsor Framework which prevent Northern Ireland being a full part of the United Kingdom’s internal market, and undermine the democratic and constitutional rights of the people of Northern Ireland”.
Lord Dodds told the News Letter: “Once again, we are able to force the Government into having a debate by tabling a motion in the House of Lords against a Windsor Framework/Protocol piece of legislation. Otherwise the Government would hope to get away with just nodding it through at a committee. This exposure to debate is vitally important.
“Otherwise, there will no spotlight put on the way we are now being governed in hundreds of areas affecting our economy. These are matters that should be properly proposed, developed, and amended either in the Assembly or at Westminster. None of this can happen whilst we are subjected to a foreign jurisdiction.
“For as long as this position pertains, we will continue to use whatever means are available to highlight that it is unjust, undemocratic and unacceptable”.