Trying to change NI Protocol Bill is like ‘trying to put lipstick on pig’

Efforts to secure changes to controversial legislation enabling parts of the post-Brexit deal on Northern Ireland to be ripped up is like “trying to put lipstick on a pig”, Parliament has been told.

The criticism was levelled at Westminster by a former top diplomat as the House of Lords continued its detailed scrutiny of the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, which critics warn breaks international law and risks a trade war with the European Union (EU).

It followed calls to require the approval of the Northern Ireland Assembly before the legislation could be invoked.

However, Stormont is currently not sitting, with the DUP refusing to return to power-sharing until decisive action is taken over the protocol, which has created economic barriers on the movement of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The UK Government has vowed to secure changes to the protocol, either by way of a negotiated compromise with the EU or through proposed domestic legislation which would empower ministers to scrap the arrangements without the approval of Brussels.

But opponents have likened the Bill to “placing a gun on the table” at talks with the EU aimed at finding a solution and said it threatens to damage the UK’s global standing.

Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, who served as British ambassador to Washington and Brussels and was author of the Article 50 mechanism which the UK used to leave the EU, has previously described it as “a pig of a Bill”.

Referring to the proposed revisions, the independent crossbencher said: “Here what we are doing is trying to put lipstick on the pig. It will still be a pig even if this amendment is approved.”

Earlier, he told the upper chamber: “It would not make an illegal act less illegal if the Northern Ireland Assembly voted for it.”

Labour frontbencher Baroness Chapman of Darlington said: “You could apply a whole face of make-up to this Bill, it really wouldn’t help.”

Liberal Democrat former leader Lord Campbell of Pittenweem questioned the need for the contentious legislation given the safeguards mechanism within the protocol itself, known as Article 16.

This allows either party to take temporary measures if the agreement leads to “serious economic, societal, or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist”, or to “diversion of trade”.

But former deputy leader of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) Lord Dodds said the proposed triggering of the provision in relation to the protocol had previously been “absolutely opposed tooth and nail” by critics.

He recalled members from Labour, the Liberal Democrats and even the Tory benches had been “vociferous and vehement in their opposition to any notion of the implementation of Article 16″.

“I hear with interest what people are saying now about Article 16, but that certainly was not what was being said a few months ago,” Lord Dodds said.

Former chief Brexit negotiator and minister Lord Frost said he had been seen as “some sort of barbarian” by many for contemplating using the provision when in Government.

Highlighting the problems caused by the protocol, the Tory peer said: “This is a real situation. It is a real situation that must be dealt with. This Bill is a way of dealing with that situation. We have to take real-life action to deal with the problems that exist on the ground in Northern Ireland.”

He added: “I believe the best way to deal with it would be to expedite this Bill, not to delay it, defer it, withdraw it.

“I think the best contributor to stability in Northern Ireland would be to get this on the statute book and enable people to know what they were dealing with.”

Northern Ireland Office minister Lord Caine said calls for Stormont to approve the legislation before it could be used were effectively “wrecking amendments”, given the current political stalemate.

He said: “We are very committed to restoring a fully functioning executive and assembly, but I would remind the House that it’s because of the operation of the protocol in its current form that the Northern Ireland Assembly has not been sitting since February this year. We cannot be sure, sadly, for how long that state of affairs will persist.”

He added: “We do not think it would be right to make implementation of measures in this Bill contingent on the restoration of the institutions given the urgency of the situation in Northern Ireland.”