Benn rejects use of the Stormont Brake

A little over a month ago Unionist parties pulled the Stormont Brake to block new EU rules on the packaging and labeling of chemicals. We then waited for the Secretary of State to make his ruling, which was duly delivered yesterday. As the Newsletter puts is…

“The government has turned down an attempt by unionist MLAs to halt updated EU laws under the controversial Stormont Brake mechanism – but pledged to avoid divergence between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. While Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn believes the request made by Stormont in September was genuine, he does not believe that it meets the test of creating “a significant impact specific to everyday life of communities in Northern Ireland in a way that is liable to persist”.It means EU laws on the labelling of products such as household cleaning products and industrial chemicals, continue in place.”

The Brake was designed so that it would only take thirty members from two parties in the Assembly to pull it, likely a requirement given that Nationalist parties and the Alliance would probably be extremely unlikely to use the mechanism. The consequence of that however is that Unionist parties are incentivised on pulling the brake as often as it possibly can to demonstrate to their voters that they are standing up to the Windsor Framework even where use of the brake may be unwarranted. As a result, this first use was on a matter that did not meet the test for the UK government and was thus denied by the Secretary of State.

Unionist politicians have been giving their reaction to the decision with Jim Allister writing an article on the TUV website saying

“The decision of the Secretary of State to uphold EU colonial rule in Northern Ireland, by rejecting the united unionist demand to pull the Stormont Brake, is not just a calculated slap in the face of all democrats but creates a moment of truth for the DUP. The DUP, in packaging their ignominious climbdown to return to the Stormont Executive, claimed that through the Stormont Brake they had cut the pipe through which EU law flowed into effect in Northern Ireland. This, along with the lie that they had removed the Irish Sea border, was a key plank in their con of their own supporters. Now that the Stormont Brake has so demonstrably failed, the big challenge from today is to the DUP. Having enthroned Sinn Fein as First Minister on these false pretences, how can the DUP continue in the Executive now that the Stormont Brake has been shown to be useless. To carry on propping up unabated EU colonial rule should not be an option for any unionist. The Secretary of State has thrown down the gauntlet to the DUP. They need to pick it up and demonstrate, while they still can, that unionism will not be humiliated in this way. It’s time to call time on the Executive and the DUP’s implementation of EU rule.”

DUP leader Gavin Robinson takes a different tack and argues that the government underestimated the impact the proposed changes would have on the Northern Irish economy

“The Government’s decision not to activate the Stormont Brake on this important issue is wrong. The Secretary of State’s decision to ignore publicly presented evidence from industry representatives about the updated EU law (Regulation 2024/2865) on chemical labelling is a grave mistake that will exacerbate trade friction between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Trade flows in chemicals between Great Britain and Northern Ireland are worth in the region of £1bn annually. Industry experts have warned that the harmful consequences of this regulation will be increased costs for manufacturers and new barriers to trade within the United Kingdom. We note the decision of the Government to now run a consultation on chemical trade flows and its so-called commitment to no new barriers to trade relating to this. The question is, why did they not do so before this process had to be invoked?

This updated EU law will lead to increased friction and again demonstrates the impact of the application of such law. The DUP remains fully committed to restoring Northern Ireland’s place within the United Kingdom, including removing the application of EU law in our country and the internal Irish Sea Border it creates.There are elected representatives in Parliament and the NI Assembly who close their eyes to the impact divergence is and will have. This is utter foolishness. Our job is to stand up for Northern Ireland.It is high time the Government stopped abdicating responsibility and started standing up for Northern Ireland with conviction, rather than surrendering to EU diktats in the absence of a coherent or credible plan.”

Former UUP leader Steve Aiken responded on behalf of his party, writing

“The news from the Secretary of State fundamentally undermines the safeguards that are supposed to be in place to protect the people of Northern Ireland. Democratic consent and effective scrutiny of proposed EU changes to legislation and directives was parroted by many as a method of ensuring that the increasing divergence from our own nation would not be implemented unless it could be shown not to have a detrimental impact on our people. Sadly, this year has shown that one of the so-called safeguards, the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee, is anything but; instead it has become a party political tool of SF and the Alliance Party to further their pro-EU agenda.

“The next safeguard was supposedly the Stormont Brake. As someone who has been involved with the whole panoply of BREXIT since 2016, our party only sought to utilise the ‘brake’ as a last resort – the decision to support the calling for the brake to be applied was not taken lightly. A careful examination of the regulation, coupled with the cumulative impact of multiple changes now being imposed, shows that this is creating increasing and significant divergence from our largest market, our own country.  That this is the case should be readily apparent to the Secretary of State, if he just bothered to look. If these two measures, supposedly designed to protect NI, are ignored, it shows that much of the so called ‘protection’ from divergent EU rules is a sham. Northern Ireland is far from being in the ‘best of both worlds’ and Hilary Benn had an opportunity to actually examine the impact of this divergence, he has demonstrably failed at this first hurdle.”

Dr. John Coulter advocated using the brake as a wrecking tool in an article to the Newsletter earlier this month when he wrote that “Unionism must act now and use the Stormont Brake to wreck the Windsor Framework from the inside without collapsing the Assembly.” That he wrote this article suggests there seemed to be some lingering sense within some circles that the brake COULD be used in such a fashion, even as any examination of the rules behind the brake showed that would need an extremely sympathetic Secretary of State willing to take a political decision to accommodate such an approach for it to work. Hilary Benn is not that man, and his party seems interested in operating the Windsor Framework as designed. Those who argued that the brake was “practically useless” appear to have been vindicated but Benn disagrees as a report on the BBC states

“The Northern Ireland secretary has denied the UK government’s relationship with the European Union was a factor in his decision on the Stormont brake. Hilary Benn also said he had no concerns that refusing to use the post-Brexit mechanism would destabilise power sharing. The secretary of state said although the request from Stormont’s unionist parties was rejected, the process was “working”.

The mismatch appears to be that some see that the brake should be a veto, wherein any time it is pulled the UK government’s only legitimate reaction is to apply the brake and sort out the consequences with the EU whereas the UK government seems intent on operating the brake as it was designed to be used, in only the most onerous circumstances. DUP leader Gavin Robinson believes other opportunities to use the brake will arise though, so we will surely see this process repeated in the future.

Our mod team uses this account to share quick posts and relevant links. Content here should not be interpreted as Slugger’s editorial position. Slugger welcomes all views and does not take editorial positions on issues.