Exposed: How the EU and Irish government conspired to break up the UK

Facts4EU.Org presents documented evidence of an international scandal

Montage © Facts4EU.Org 2022

Following the backlash from the Republic since our Sunday exclusive, this is a ‘must read’

In 2017, committees of the Dáil Éireann and the House of Commons were told by the heads of their respective customs authorities that no border infrastructure would be necessary as a result of Brexit – even in the event of a ‘no-deal Brexit’. In 2018 the committee of the EU parliament was told the same thing by the expert they commissioned to produce a report.

Journalists please note: We kindly request you contact us before lifting our copyrighted reports, thank you.

The story never told by the BBC

Five years ago Facts4EU.Org published the testimony of the heads of the Irish Revenue and HMRC, followed up by the testimony of the EU parliament’s expert.

All of them made it clear there was no need for a “Northern Ireland Protocol”.

The EU then conspired with the government of Leo Varadkar to prevent the customs services of the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom from talking to each other.

Today, together with CIBUK.Org – of which Facts4EU.Org is an affiliate member - we are placing the facts on record once again.

The testimonies

Facts4EU.Org has chapter and verse of the testimonies of the key parties involved in ensuring trade would continue normally across the North-South border in Ireland following Brexit.

Below we present some key extracts which make it clear that there was never any need for an N.I. Protocol and that Mr Varadkar’s government and the EU Commission did what they did in order to divide the United Kingdom – for their own political ends.

Back in 2017, testimony to the parliaments was given on the basis that the entire UK (including Northern Ireland) would be OUT of the Single Market, and OUT of the Customs Union. In other words, with no Protocol.

Brexit Facts4EU.Org Summary

Damning evidence against the EU and Irish government over the N.I. Protocol

1. What HMRC said about there being no need for a Protocol

Q: “In the event of no deal, would it be possible to achieve no border infrastructure?”

Sir Jon Thompson, CEO of HMRC, 2017 : "We do not believe we require any infrastructure between Northern Ireland and Ireland under any circumstances."

2. On the EU preventing the UK and Irish Customs organisations from implementing solutions

Q: “Have you had any dealings with the Irish about this?”

Sir Jon Thompson, Head of HMRC: “There are no formal conversations with either the French or the Irish. We cannot talk to Customs or taxation management organisations in either of those countries. There are only informal conversations with the Belgians and the Dutch.”

3. What the Irish Revenue said about there being no need for a Protocol

Liam Irwin (Irish Revenue Commissioner):

“We are planning for trade facilitation, enabling goods to move. We have absolutely no plans for anything along the Border at this stage.”

Q: “Revenue has identified several locations where customs posts could be erected in------”

Mr Liam Irwin (Irish Customs): “That is not true.”

Q: “That is not true?”

Mr Liam Irwin (Irish Customs): “That is not true.”

4. On the EU preventing the UK and Irish Customs organisations from implementing solutions

Q: “Could Mr. Cody clarify whether there is a legal impediment to negotiations between us and-----”

Mr Niall Cody (Irish Customs): “Yes.”

Q: “-----so we can have discussions but not negotiations?”

Mr Niall Cody (Irish Customs): “The European Union will be negotiating with the United Kingdom in regard to Brexit.”

5. What the EU Parliament’s independent expert said about there being no need for a Protocol

Lars Karlsson, author of the EU parliament’s ‘Brexit Border/Customs Report’ and the EU parliament’s chosen expert, former Director of the World Customs Organization, speaking to the Exiting The EU Committee in Mar 2018:

"There would not need to be any necessary infrastructure and not need to be either CCTV cameras or number plate readers."

Question: “But the technology proposed in this report is untested, that’s correct isn’t it?” asked Joanna Cherry MP (SNP). “The proposal you’ve put here hasn’t actually been tested at any location anywhere in the world.”

Karlsson: “No that’s not correct. It actually has.”

Observations

An international scandal

The evidence we have presented above is nothing short of an international scandal.

Those who were actually responsible for cross-border trade (the EU’s justification for the N.I. Protocol) were absolutely clear to their political masters. There was NO need for a Protocol. Had they been allowed to continue to talk to each other to sort out the details, they would have done so without any drama.

Getting the facts out there

To our international readers - and especially those in the United States - we would suggest two conclusions can be drawn:-

The EU Commission deliberately confected a problem where there wasn’t one, in order to punish Brexit Britain by dividing it, and
Leo Varadkar’s Irish government colluded with the EU Commission, in their desire to see a united Ireland – something which the majority in Northern Ireland still do not wish.

Even a significant proportion of Nationalists in Northern Ireland want to stay as part of the United Kingdom to this day.

If Facts4EU.Org had the funding of the Rejoiner organisations we could mount a campaign to MPs, MEPs, and elected representatives in the US and around the world. They deserve to know the truth.

Facts4EU.Org needs you today

We are a 'not for profit' team (we make a loss) and any donation goes towards the actual work, not plush London offices, lunch or taxi expenses, or other luxuries of some organisations.

We badly need more of our thousands of readers to donate. Could this be you, today? Maybe you've been thinking about it, but just haven't got around to doing it? If so, let us reassure you. It's quick and easy and we use two highly secure payment providers. And we do NOT ask you for further donations if you donate once - we just hope that you keep supporting us. Your donation stays anonymous unless you tell us otherwise.

Please don't assume that other people will keep us going - we don't receive enough to survive and we need your help today. Could you help us?

Most of our readers are well-informed and appreciate our fact-based articles, presented in a way you won't see anywhere else. If you value reports like the one above, please help our work with a donation. We have far more to do in researching, publishing, campaigning and lobbying Parliament than we have in terms of the financial resources to fulfil these tasks. We badly need funding to continue - we rely 100% on public donations from readers like you.

If you believe in a fully-free, independent, and sovereign United Kingdom, please make a donation now. It’s quick, secure, and confidential, and you can use one of the links below or you can use our Donations page here. You will receive a personal, friendly ‘thank you’ from a member of our team within 24 hours. Thank you for reading this.

[ Sources: UK Parliament | Irish parliament | EU Commission ] Politicians and journalists can contact us for details, as ever.

Brexit Facts4EU.Org, Wed 03 Aug 2022

Click here to go to our news headlines

Please scroll down to COMMENT on the above article.
And don't forget to actually post your message after you have previewed it!

Something to say about this? Scroll down for reader comments

Since before the EU Referendum, Brexit Facts4EU.Org
has been the most prolific researcher and publisher of Brexit facts in the world.

Supported by MPs, MEPs, & other groups, our work has impact.

We think facts matter. Please donate today, so that we can continue to ensure a clean Brexit is finally delivered.

Any credit card user

Quick One-off

From £5 - £1,000

Monthly

From £3 per month

Paypal Users Only - Choose amount first

Quick One-off

Monthly

PLEASE NOTE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT : You can write your comment under any existing comments below. After you have clicked to preview your comment, you MUST then click on the CAPTCHA system and send you comment, for it to be published. Thank you!

Reader Comments 15

11. jon livesey , Wednesday, August 03, 2022, 22:57:

10. Garrett . You write an awful lot but you miss the only two important points. The NIP, as written, could have been administered fairly, but instead the EU discriminates against goods from the rest of the UK and in favour of goods from the EU. Just telling us the well-known history of this mess does not help. We've heard it all before.
You - Ireland - are going to be the losers in the end, because your support of EU anti-Unionist discrimination is just going to be yet another reason to reject unification. The main effect of the NIP - apart from economic discrimination - has been to bring NI and the rest of the UK closer together, and to make NI politics important at Westminster in ways it was not before.
The EU, Sinn Fein and Ireland thought they were being very clever, but many people, including me, greeted the NIP with a shrug because we knew it could not survive for very long. I said exactly that, right here, two years ago.

12. Andy , Thursday, August 04, 2022, 16:26:

The EU doesn't seem to have a problem with Kaliningrad and goods from Russia possibly ending up in its sacred Single Market, so the same principle applies to Northern Ireland. If Kallinigrad is Russian Sovereign Territory then NI is UK Sovereign Territory and, just as with Kaliningrad and Russia, the UK is entitled under International Law to transfer goods within its own territory. The EU Customs Union, Single Market and external borders are purely a matter for the EU. That is where the border has to be.

13. Steve Henry , Friday, August 05, 2022, 12:58:

Garrett. Lars Karlsson’s EU commissioned report mentioned above, is totally workable relying on Trusted Trader program and supporting technology. The EU rejected this to insist part of the U.K. remain in the CU & SM in a highly sensitive political region. 25% is ALL EU customs checks are performed there, it is obviously politically motivated and is not being operated in good faith & with respect to each parties internal market as intended. If the U.K. had insisted on Karlsson’s non intrusive proposal as the only acceptable solution, it would have to have been accepted by the EU & Ireland, the only alternative is that they themselves would have put a customs border in the island.

14. Apt , Sunday, August 07, 2022, 19:39:

Exposed: How Brexit voters voted to break up the UK. Then conspired to pretend as if it's a good thing.
This article is still being written.

15. Pat , Monday, August 08, 2022, 06:31:

Apt, are you struggling with actually writing that so that it sounds believable, is that what you're saying? Are you looking for help? Ask the guy shouting "NO BREXIT" in front of the Parliament for years, I'm sure he's got a lot of insights to offer. ;)

15 comments, page 2 of 2

Add comment:

Please note: Your email address is never published unless you choose to enter it.