My Lords, the issue of state aid goes beyond even the points that have already been made, because there is theoretically a possibility of reach-back into Great Britain depending on whether a product was subsidised before it left Great Britain and was part of, or added to, another product of a business in Northern Ireland. The truth is that the Minister does not know the answer to these questions.
I do not understand why there is surprise. The Minister may not wish to comment, but the situation in which we find ourselves is a direct consequence of the proposals made by the Prime Minister to the European Union. He proposed the protocol. When I hear the phrase “Let’s get Brexit done”, it drives me mad. Brexit is done for 97% of the United Kingdom; we are still in the European Union for as much as half of our activities.
This was entirely anticipated, but it was not worked out. So, the protocol came along in late 2019 as the deathbed plan to get Brexit done in a couple of months, and this is one of the pickles we are left in. I may have some issues with the wording of the amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Dodds, but its heart is in the right place. He said, if I picked him up correctly, that it is a probing amendment to try to get answers. I totally support that; it is the right thing to do.
5.30 pm
However, let us not mess about as to where the genesis of this issue lies. The fact is, if I am correct, that this is now part of domestic as well as international law. Therefore, we do not know because no cases have been taken. We do not even know in which courts they will be heard because it would appear that we now have a choice. Part of our economy is ruled by a foreign power while another is ruled by the national courts, so we in Northern Ireland are to some extent an EU protectorate for a large part of our activities. I have no doubt that this was not the intention of what a lot of people sought in the referendum but, sadly, that is where we are.
In responding to the amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Dodds, might the Minister set out for us whether there is a pathway to finding out exactly how this will work? Until a case is taken, which has not yet happened, it is hard to know. There is also no guarantee that there will be no reach-back into the rest of the United Kingdom with regard to these issues. There can be connections: what if a company happens to be a subsidiary in Northern Ireland? What happens if products are moved to Northern Ireland and become part of another product that is then exported to the European Union? There is a whole range of areas where we could be going.
The Minister will probably struggle with this because, I believe, nowhere in the Government do they have a clue as to how to get us out of it; we will be faced with this problem for a long time to come because, as the
noble Lord, Lord Dodds, mentioned, divergence will grow over time. I hear people say, “We have the best of both worlds: we can be in both markets.” That is all well and good until somebody takes a case. If they lose it, it may well prove a barrier to investment. It could do the Province a lot of harm. So, because of the fact that we are in uncharted waters, this will not go away. It will be here for a long time. I wish the negotiations with the European Union well.
I see where the Command Paper is trying to come from, but let us look briefly at this. I hear people say, “Get rid of the protocol”; they said it in the House earlier when we discussed the Private Notice Question. The Government are not even trying to do that. I have here a letter from the Minister; it is about two weeks old. I also have an answer from the noble Lord, Lord Frost, to a Parliamentary Question about Article 16. This is to safeguard it, not get rid of it. They are looking to make it more worker-friendly, but they are not even trying to get rid of it. People need a sense of reality. I hope that, when he replies, the Minister will be able to give us chapter and verse to clear up all the ambiguities—and away we go.