Boris Johnson’s Brexit minister has blamed Theresa May for problems with the implementation of border arrangements for Northern Ireland.
Lord Frost told members of the Northern Ireland Assembly on Friday that current issues with the Northern Ireland Protocol were “to a very large degree” the fault of negotiations under Mr Johnson‘s predecessor as prime minister.
The protocol – agreed and signed by Mr Johnson and which replaced Mrs May‘s “backstop” – is designed to avoid a post-Brexit hard border on the island of Ireland and is a key part of the UK’s divorce deal with the EU.
However, Mr Johnson has said the current implementation of the protocol – which keeps Northern Ireland within much of the EU’s single market and customs rules – is having a “damaging impact” on the people of Northern Ireland.
Lord Frost is seeking adjustments to the implementation of the protocol and told assembly members on Friday that it should not be looked at as a “sort of definitive text”.
Advertisement
DUP member Christopher Stalford, whose party is opposed to the protocol due to concerns of new trade barriers between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, suggested Lord Frost had been left to “clean up the mess” of the protocol.
Mr Stalford quoted Mrs May’s former chief of staff, Lord Barwell, who last month claimed Mr Johnson’s government knew the protocol “was a bad deal” but intended to “wriggle out of it later”.
More on Boris Johnson
It’s tempting to believe that – despite all the warnings – the government “underestimated the effect of the protocol”, but I’m pretty sure it’s not true. They knew it was a bad deal but agreed it to get Brexit done, intending to wriggle out of it later https://t.co/V0eNpCNwXL
Lord Frost responded: “We intend to implement what we signed up to but it’s the fact of implementation that’s causing the problem.
“I would say that it was the inheritance that we inherited from the previous government and from the previous negotiating team that has been a significant part of the difficulty, and the reason the protocol is shaped as it is, is because we had a particular inheritance from the previous team who could not get their deal, rightly in my view, through parliament.
“Unfortunately we were not able to go back to scratch and do things in a different way and I think the previous team are to a very large degree responsible for some of the infelicities in this protocol and the Withdrawal Agreement that we might be better without but unfortunately we are where we are.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Northern Ireland Protocol is harmful’
Lord Frost this week announced the UK government would “set out our approach” to the protocol within the next two weeks, as he called for a “new balance” in its implementation.
He told assembly members: “It’s not reasonable to say, given that the situation has changed in various ways and given that parts of the protocol remained to be worked out, that it is a definitive text and as of October 2019 that’s it and there’s nothing more to say.”
The House of Lords has delayed the passing of the government’s Rwanda bill until next week – in a blow to Rishi Sunak’s attempts to get planes off the ground deporting illegal migrants to the country.
MPs overturned Tuesday’s attempts by the House of Lords to dilute the plan – but peers have now put forward even more changes to the proposed new law.
It is now expected that the Commons will consider the changes on Monday next week, dashing No 10’s hopes to get it through today.
Downing Street has been unwilling to concede any ground on the areas that peers are trying to amend, including on the treatment of people who served with or for the British armed forces abroad.
No 10 had set its sights on passing the legislation this week as part of its plans to get planes in the air in the spring.
The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill was tabled last year after the Supreme Court ruled the previous scheme to deport asylum seekers who arrived illegally in the UK was unlawful.
The current bill aims to declare Rwanda safe and not allow courts to consider the safety of the nation during appeals.
This is being done based on a new treaty agreed between the UK government and the government in Rwanda.
Advertisement
Speaking earlier on Wednesday, the prime minister’s spokesperson ruled out doing a deal on any of these changes. “We are not considering concessions,” they said.
“We believe the bill as it stands is the right bill and the quickest way to get flights off the ground.”
The proposed changes sought to: • ensure the bill complies with domestic and international law; • that Rwanda would not be declared safe until a report was completed; • that appeals based on safety would be allowed; • and that exemptions would be allowed for people who served with or for the British armed forces.
Peers want to insist on the amendments about people who assisted the UK’s armed forces, and a report advising on the safety of Rwanda, in particular.
The government was defeated on the first by 245 votes to 208 – a majority of 37, and the second by 247 votes to 195 – a majority of 52.
Labour and crossbench peers – those who do not associate with a political party – worked together to outvote the Conservatives.
A government source told Sky News: “We wanted to get it done today, but it shows Labour for their true colours.”
Responding to the latest defeats, Northern Ireland minister Steve Baker told Sky News that he was “extremely disappointed” with the delays.
He denied the government had “slammed the door” on people like interpreters in Afghanistan who worked with UK armed forces.
But Mr Baker said people wanting to come to the UK who had served with British armed forces had to go through the Ministry of Defence.
“They shouldn’t be travelling with people smugglers illegally across the channel – and that’s what we’ve got to break,” he said.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Approach to military interpreters ‘shameful’ – Labour
The amendment on people who helped the armed forces has been at the centre of a heated debate – with the government saying it is waiting for a report on the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) before setting out its steps.
But Labour’s shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Tory MPs just voted to insist that Afghan interpreters who served British armed forces can be sent to Rwanda.
“A scheme which costs £2m per asylum seeker. A £500m plus scheme for less than 1% of asylum seekers. Which now includes those who worked with our troops
Johnny Mercer, a former soldier and the government’s veterans minister, replied: “My team have worked night and day to find permanent accommodation for circa 25,000 Afghans who the UK have provided sanctuary to, without you lifting a finger to help.
“We want them to use safe routes, not undertake lethal channel crossings. Your concern is fake.”
Having forced the House of Commons to vote down the Lords’ amendments to the prime minister’s flagship illegal immigration bill three times, peers would typically have bowed out of the battle this time around and passed the Rwanda bill.
There is obvious frustration in government, with one senior figure saying: “We wanted to get it done today, but it shows Labour for their true colours.”
The Rwanda bill now comes back to the Commons next week, and could finally be passed on Monday.
All the while, the clock is ticking down on the prime minister‘s promise to get flights away by the end of spring.
More on Conservatives
Related Topics:
With that timetable already in doubt, at least this ping pong can help ministers pin this on peers should that deadline be missed.
But there is also huge frustration amongst some MPs with Number 10.
Advertisement
‘We need to get it through’
Many are asking why the government didn’t just table late night sittings and force Lords to sit into the night to ram through the legislation.
Tory MP Rehman Chishti spoke for many colleagues when he told me he didn’t understand why the whips hadn’t chosen this course.
“I think the programme motion could easily have ensured that we had a vote tomorrow because at the end of day the public want us to get on and get it done. Labour have delayed, dithered, delayed. We’ve got a plan, but we need to get it through,” he said.
“If you would have asked me, I would have put it in tomorrow and I would have a vote on it. And therefore we get those planes off and make sure that this policy delivers what it needs to be delivering, which is deterrence.”
Another senior minister told me it was “clear” to them that these were “delaying tactics because they know the version of the policy doesn’t work and they want more time and to put off the day of reckoning”.
As Labour blames the government for refusing to compromise on amendments, and “going home” instead of looking again at the bill this evening, the government blames Labour for delaying the bill because – to quote minister Steve Baker – “they are terrified it will work”.
There is talk that had the government accepted the amendment to exempt Afghans who served alongside UK forces from deportation to Rwanda, the Lords might have passed the bill.
Labour had received an assurance from the Home Office that this amendment, tabled by former Labour defence secretary Des Browne, was going to be accepted – only for it then to be blocked.
For all the drama and irritation, it is likely that the prime minister will still have his moment.
At some point, the House of Lords will have to cave. Unelected peers cannot keep ignoring the will of the Commons.
But the question then is whether he can assuage the frustration of voters who are watching the small boats still coming, with the most crossings in a single day this year – 534 people – happening this week.
‘Another failed thing they promised’
In our Sky News election target town of Cleethorpes, part of a key bellwether seat in the next general election, voters we spoke to are sceptical the government will deliver the flights at all.
One resident told us: “They tell you what they think you want to hear but when it comes down to it, they don’t deliver that.”
Another said: “No one’s gone to Rwanda. They get on the plane, and they take them off. So that’s another failed thing they’ve promised.”
And really that’s the rub of it – the prime minister will get this legislation passed.
Then the challenge is to get those planes off the ground. Anything less won’t be acceptable.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
But with even some of his own backbenchers believing the policy won’t work, a parliamentary win is only the end of the beginning.
The next question is will he, if he has to, not just take on the Lords, but take on the European courts – and those in his own cabinet – and if necessary ignore court rulings to get flights away.
The government has agreed to have an independent IT expert review of a Post Office software system predating Horizon, amid claims dozens more sub-postmasters may have been wrongly convicted.
The Capture software was rolled out across branches in the 1990s, years before the notorious Horizon system was introduced.
Post Office minister Kevin Hollinrake has met with a former sub-postmaster and a lawyer representing 35 people who believe they were wrongly accused of stealing.
It was agreed between MPs and the Post Office minister that an independent IT expert would assess evidence claiming to “prove” Capture software was prone to glitches.
Steve Marston, 68, believes he was wrongly convicted of theft and false accounting after errors caused by Capture accounting software.
Auditors found shortfalls of £79,000 at his branch in Greater Manchester in 1998. He subsequently pleaded guilty to theft and false accounting.
A predecessor to Horizon, the Capture software was developed by the Post Office and rolled out from 1992.
More on Post Office Scandal
Related Topics:
‘Extremely happy’
Mr Marston, representing numerous others claiming to be victims, met with Post Office Minister Kevin Hollinrake in Central London.
Advertisement
He tearfully told Sky News after the meeting that he was “overwhelmed” and “extremely happy” with the way the meeting went.
He presented a copy of the original Capture software, also shown to Sky News, which Mr Marston describes as “definitive proof” of wrongful convictions.
Campaigners discovered floppy disks with the software on them, dating back to the 90s.
Mr Marston says they show that errors in the system could generate false shortfalls in accounts, and believes Capture evidence was used in his prosecution.
A ‘significant meeting’
Neil Hudgell, who is representing 35 former sub-postmasters who used Capture, said it was a “significant meeting” with the Post Office minister.
“What we are going to do now, with the consent of the government and agreement of the Department for Business and Trade,” he said, “is run that past an independent person to stand up what we say is the case.
“It is a very similar pattern of IT glitches that predate the Horizon system by a number of years.”
Former sub-postmasters say that it appears errors occurred when upgrades were made to the software in the 90s.
Other factors such as power cuts are also thought to be another possible reason for faults.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Steve Lewis lost his job in 2000, after raising concerns about shortfalls and Capture software glitches.
“I’ve always been looked on as being the man who robbed the post office,” he said. “I lost my post office, the commercial buildings that I had moved my office to, and was forced to sell my family home.”
Mr Lewis claims he was warned “not to be a troublemaker” and told the issues were only happening to him.
It wasn’t until he watched the ITV drama Mr Bates Vs The Post Office that he “realised” similarities between Horizon victims and himself such as “unexplained losses”.
‘Mirror image of what Post Office did with Horizon’
Documents seen by Sky News also show that the Post Office knew Capture was prone to glitches which could cause accounting issues.
In January the government ordered the Post Office to investigate the claims related to Capture.
Labour MP Kevan Jones has taken up the cause and describes one case as being “a mirror image” of what “the Post Office did with Horizon victims”.
He continued: “Added to that, we’ve now got the original computer floppy disks where I think it proves that it does throw up shortfalls.
“I think that’s quite a compelling case for these cases to be looked at again and compensation awarded.”
‘We continue to investigate’
A Post Office spokesperson said: “We are in contact with Steve Marston and other past users of Capture and are grateful to them for all the information they have so far shared with us.
“We continue to actively investigate a number of lines of inquiry relating to Capture and throughout this we have regularly kept the Department for Business and Trade and Kevan Jones MP up to date with our findings.
“We have now shared a recommendation with the Department about what should happen next and hope to provide further information with past users of Capture as soon as we’re able to.”
A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said: “As soon as these accusations came to light, we asked the Post Office to investigate the Capture system.
“We are now reviewing all the materials provided to us, including those from postmasters and Post Office, and we will set out next steps shortly.”