Northern Ireland Protocol: Rishi Sunak has so far kept his Brexit talks trump card under wraps – this is what could be in the deal and why it could face trouble ahead
Enemies are circling, Brexiteers are already pronouncing it dead, and the DUP are warning it undermines the Union.
But as opponents line up to try and assassinate Rishi Sunak’s forthcoming deal with Brussels to rework Northern Ireland’s post-Brexit future, Sky News can reveal that Number 10 is yet to play its trump card.
Despite weeks of headlines and column inches about the talks, Downing Street has so far kept under wraps what some believe is perhaps the biggest negotiation win.
Far from giving ground to the EU, they think they have turned the tables and forced a concession.
In short, Westminster will set VAT rates, taxation and state aid policy in Northern Ireland, not Brussels.
Mr Sunak has made addressing the disparity over VAT a priority ever since his last budget as chancellor, when Northern Ireland could not benefit from his decision to slash the tax on solar panels and other energy efficient purchases elsewhere in the UK because it must follow EU single market rules.
More on Brexit
Related Topics:
Downing Street is unwilling to reveal any change is coming publicly, insisting that “intensive” negotiations are still under way, giving them nothing yet to announce.
However, Sky News understands that the concession by Brussels is likely to feature at the heart of the reform package.
Advertisement
Image: DUP Leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson
Some MPs have been alerted to the likely inclusion of this change, it is welcomed privately by senior DUP figures, and it is understood to be one of the three major changes at the heart of the Sunak deal with Brussels. The DUP’s only reservation is that they want to see the legal text to check the concession is as described.
It is not clear, however, whether it will be enough.
After months of official negotiations, what some see as basic errors – and an information vacuum – may have allowed too much of a head of steam to build up behind the opposition.
As a result, it is now unclear whether the changes hammered out with Brussels since December will ever be implemented.
Mr Sunak is facing splits amongst key allies over how and whether to proceed, with warnings that he’s not strong enough to face down his party and growing anxiety in Brussels that the first prime minister they have trusted since Brexit may be about to let them down.
The next few days could end up being the most consequential of his premiership.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:07
‘Collapse of Good Friday Agreement absolute catastrophe’
What is in the forthcoming deal?
The patchwork of measures and agreements to change the Northern Ireland Protocol have been prepared in utmost secrecy.
Taken together, those involved say it required the EU to change its negotiating mandate and agree to alter the text of the Protocol – something Brussels said was not possible during the premierships of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss.
Under the Sunak proposals, three key changes to that arrangement are likely to be agreed.
The first has been well trailed: businesses that have signed up to a “trusted trader scheme” will be allowed to avoid all checks when moving goods from the GB mainland to Northern Ireland.
In exchange, the EU will be able to access “real-time” UK data on trade flows across the Irish Sea. The handful of companies who are not signed up to the trusted trader scheme would have to continue labelling and filling in paperwork as at present.
The second – known as the “Stormont Lock”, first mentioned in The Sunday Times – is designed to go some way towards addressing concerns that Northern Ireland will remain subject to EU single market rules under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice as the price of avoiding border checks between the North and the Republic.
Image: Rishi Sunak leaves the Culloden Hotel in Belfast, after holding talks with Stormont leaders last week
It is very complicated, but essentially it will give Northern Ireland some of the rights also enjoyed by Norway – which is also out of the EU but in the single market, so it has a say on the rules being imposed by Brussels.
Under the terms of the proposed deal, the EU will have to give the UK notice of future EU regulations intended for Northern Ireland. The Joint Ministerial Committee will then be able to lodge an objection, which may then result in the EU voluntarily choosing to disapply the regulation in Northern Ireland.
Alternatively, the Speaker of the Stormont Assembly could put the issue to a vote, which could delay when the forthcoming regulation comes into force. If the EU decides to take legal action because of a failure to implement the rule, then a Northern Ireland court would have to rule on the issue first, resulting in further delays.
This movement is likely to be welcomed by some. But this is arguably the biggest area of compromise for Brexiteers and unionists, since it does not give the outright veto on future EU regulations, which is something the DUP want.
The third change is the one revealed at the start of this article: that control of the so-called level playing field of measures, like VAT rates and state subsidy policy, will revert to Westminster. For constitutionalists, this will be seen as an important change.
Almost complete for some time, according to sources, none of this package has been formally briefed to the parties or the public.
Number 10 insists that negotiations are live, but other government sources suggest there is almost no activity still going on, and the principles of the agreement are settled even if there is some haggling on wording still to do.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:32
PM ‘won’t sell anyone out’
How the deal was done
Mr Sunak came into office wanting to establish a reputation for sorting out problems, particularly the poor relations with the EU and – to a lesser extent the US – over Brexit.
The PM wanted to ensure President Biden turns up in Northern Ireland for the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement this Easter, meaning he needed to do a deal to ensure the Stormont Assembly was back up and running by then.
For this to happen, the PM needed the DUP to agree to a deal on the Protocol, and then go back into powersharing with Sinn Fein in order to form a government.
So, one key objective throughout these negotiations has been for Mr Sunak to get the hardline unionists on board. It was always a tall order, but it was one he chose to attempt. But it is on precisely this issue that Number 10 took an extraordinary – and some think reckless – gamble.
Despite needing the DUP onside, they decided not to talk to them personally. They decided that they did not want them involved in any way in the negotiations or feeding in thoughts, fearing this would make the talks unmanageable, so they were shut out.
Senior DUP sources tell me there were “no backchannels” to try and scope out what they needed, which they said was a contrast even from the Theresa May era.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:32
Sunak and Starmer clash over Protocol
Instead, the UK negotiating team were told to look up the DUP’s seven tests for a Northern Ireland Protocol replacement – which feature prominently on their website and in speeches by leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson – and find a solution to each one. One insider described it as the “spreadsheet approach” to the issue.
“We assumed that if you solve the problems in the seven tests, the DUP would be on board. That was certainly the presumption all the way along,” said one government source.
Then in an extraordinary moment three weeks ago, government sources started briefing the newspapers that the deal had successfully answered every one of the DUP’s tests, but without offering an explanation of how or why.
This entire approach flabbergasted the DUP. The tests were drawn up 18 months ago, in another political environment. They range from the broad – number four is “Giving NI people a say in their laws” – to the specific, such as number five, which states “No checks on goods between GB/NI”.
They were devised after conversations with the Johnson government, and were not designed to have a binary answer. Whether the tests were met was to be judged by the DUP alone.
Yet now the government was briefing journalists that the DUP’s concerns had been soothed, and their objections dealt with, without even telling them how.
“These tests weren’t designed to be used in that way”, said one senior DUP member. “If we’d known they were going to assume this level of importance we would have rewritten them and sharpened them”, they said.
Meanwhile, the DUP baulking at the tests has caused huge anger in government. Privately, some accuse the party of game playing and moving the goal posts. The DUP retort that if the goal was to get them on side, they should have opened a dialogue with them in person.
This move worsened the politics, although both sides also acknowledge that however badly Number 10 may have handled this, there was perhaps no deal ever to be made that satisfied both the DUP and the EU.
The trouble is, Downing Street only now appears to be grappling with this outcome afresh, with Brexiteers rowing in behind the DUP to make clear they are going to oppose the deal outlined.
So what next?
It is unclear how the prime minister will proceed. He has three options: press ahead, fully renegotiate or abandon his plan.
If he presses forward in the face of DUP and ERG opposition, he could face trench warfare in the Commons, whether or not any deal is put to a vote.
Mr Sunak would try to become the first Tory PM since 2010 to take on the Eurosceptics and not lose – as David Cameron did ultimately in 2016, then Theresa May did in 2019.
Alternatively, Mr Sunak could fully resume the negotiations, which despite the rhetoric, are mostly on pause at the moment.
However, the EU is unlikely to give more, and cannot bow to the DUP demand that Northern Ireland is no longer bound by future EU rules – for fear of destabilising member states and Norway, which is also in the single market but not the EU.
Or Mr Sunak could abandon the reforms, which would make clear the limits of his power and raise questions about whether he was running a “zombie” regime locked in coalition with truculent and weary Tory MPs.
If he does not do a deal, he will also have to decide whether to press ahead with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, which would give the UK government unilateral power to rip up the Northern Ireland section of the original Brexit treaty.
Image: Rishi Sunak speaks during PMQs
Sky News understands that this is facing 90 amendments in the House of Lords, meaning that it is all but impossible to get through without resorting to the Parliament Act – the legislative nuclear option to override a veto by peers.
It is understood the PM is arguing against this in sessions with MPs, suggesting that a bitter parliamentary fight over the passage of the bill would reduce leverage with the EU rather than increase it as the ERG claim.
Mr Sunak has no easy options.
Once he is done with this, the next fight will be over legislation on migration, which some Tories believe will fail unless it goes further than is permitted by the European Convention on Human Rights – something that would enrage the EU all over again. The parade of Tory MPs raising this issue today in PMQs alone made clear the scale of the fight on that.
Meanwhile, within weeks, the privileges committee inquiry into whether former PM Boris Johnson lied at the despatch box will begin, with televised hearings raking over the wounds of one of the most painful episodes of recent Tory history.
The prime minister may have calmed things down, but there are toxic challenges ahead. Can he prove he’s not running a lame duck administration, or will it get worse?
The presumption in Westminster is the next general election will take place in the back half of next year.
But it only takes 37 Tory MPs to defy the PM and vote in a confidence vote alongside the opposition to trigger an election. Could things get that heated?
A balcony of onlookers stare as three diggers gnaw at the four-storey building that was a fixture of their daily view.
The roads of Silwan’s Wadi Qaddom neighbourhood are blocked off by Israeli police as residents watch the demolition in the valley from every vantage point. The block of flats was home to around 100 of their neighbours – many of them are now homeless.
An elderly woman sits at the bus stop near the police checkpoint closest to the demolition site. As she walks back down the hill, she looks back at the destruction. Her cheeks are red with anger when she hails that God is their only protection.
“Where are the Arab countries? No one is here to help us,” she exclaims.
Of the 230 buildings demolished in East Jerusalem’s Palestinian neighbourhoods in 2025, the block of roughly 13 flats is considered to be the largest and took 12 hours to completely demolish.
Image: The demolition of a building in Silwan’s Wadi Qaddom neighbourhood
The building was without a permit, like many in Silwan, and stood on land that was not licensed for residential use. The residents were challenging long-standing demolition orders and applying for licensing when diggers arrived at dawn.
The Jerusalem Municipality said the demolition of the building in Silwan was based on a 2014 court order, and that residents were granted extensions for the execution of the order and were offered various options in order to find a solution, but they declined to do so.
But an architect and urban planner from the Israeli NGO Bimkom (Planners for Planning Rights) – which is supporting the families in their bid to license the land of the building – says their time to act was cut short.
Image: Architect Sari Kornish speaks to Sky’s Yousra Elbagir
“They were told that the demolition order would be implemented, and then they would get another six months’ recourse to try to continue with their planning. Six months is not enough for these planning processes. They take a long time,” Sari Kornish tells us in front of the Jerusalem Municipality after meeting with the building residents’ lawyer there.
Are permits granted for Palestinians in East Jerusalem?
“Very, very few, and in recent years, since October 7, less and less,” says Sari.
“It has always been discrimination. It has always been not enough.”
Far-right minister of national security Itamar Ben-Gvir posted on X about the building’s demolition.
He said: “Proud to lead the policy of demolishing illegal buildings – not only in the Negev, this morning in East Jerusalem (Silwan neighbourhood) a building that was built illegally and 100 people lived in it – was demolished! Strengthens the police and the district commander.”
Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank is illegal under international law.
Half a million Israeli settlers currently live in the West Bank, and over 230,000 live in East Jerusalem, where some are taking over homes instead of seizing land.
At least 500 Palestinians have lost their homes to lack-of-permit demolitions in East Jerusalem, and at least 1,000 people, including 460 children, are at risk of forced displacement from eviction cases filed against them in Israeli courts by settler organisations.
Image: Zuhair al Rajabbi looks out at the homes of his neighbours now marked by demolition sites
In the East Jerusalem neighbourhood of Batn al Hawa in Silwan, Zuhair al Rajabbi looks out from his balcony at the homes of his neighbours.
The landscape is marked by demolition sites, and former homes of his neighbours are marked by Israeli flags. Settlers are busy renovating the rooftops to make their own.
“They have five children, and a grandmother was in one room. Downstairs, there was a family of seven children, with the wife and mother, in that one,” he says, pointing at the roof of his neighbours.
Image: Israeli settler flags on a building in Silwan, a Palestinian neighbourhood in East Jerusalem
As we watch, a woman quietly mops the dirty water into a hole in the fence and onto the roof of the house next door.
“Look, they are even putting the dirty water on our neighbour’s roof,” Zuhair says with a sad bitterness.
“We used to live together like we live here at home – eating and drinking with them. It makes me sad when I see their home disappearing.”
Donald Trump has said the US “has to have” Greenland, claiming it needs the territory for national security.
It comes after the US president appointed Louisiana’s governor Jeff Landry as special envoy to Greenland, saying he would “lead the charge” in advocating the semi-autonomous part of Denmark to become part of the United States.
“Jeff understands how essential Greenland is to our national security,” Mr Trump said.
Image: Donald Trump has appointed Jeff Landry as special envoy to Greenland. Pic: Reuters
“We need Greenland for national security, not for minerals… If you take a look at Greenland, you look up and down the coast, you have Russian and Chinese ships all over the place.
“We need it for national security. We have to have it… Greenland is a big deal.”
Image: Trump said Greenland is a ‘big deal’. Pic: Reuters
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said in a joint statement that Greenland belongs to Greenlanders, stressing the US will not take it over.
“You cannot annex another country. Not even with an argument about international security,” they said.
The country has already summoned the US ambassador in protest, with its foreign minister saying the move shows the US is still interested in the vast Danish territory.
Mr Trump has repeatedly called for the US to take over the mineral rich and strategically located Arctic island, since winning his second term, and has not ruled out using military force to achieve it.
Denmark’s foreign minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen said everyone – including the US – must show respect for Denmark’s territorial integrity.
Image: NATO allies Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Germany and France took part in military drills in Greenland, where the US has a military base, in September. Pic: Reuters
How did we get here?
In March, US Vice President JD Vance visited a remote American military base in Greenland and accused Denmark – a NATO ally of the US – of underinvesting there.
The issue then gradually drifted out of the headlines but, in August, Danish officials again summoned the US ambassador – following a report that at least three people with connections to Mr Trump had carried out covert influence operations in Greenland.
President Donald Trump has said America ‘needs’ Greenland for ‘international security’.
The territory’s strategic position between Europe and North America makes it a key site for the US ballistic missile defence system, while its mineral wealth has heightened US interest in reducing reliance on Chinese exports.
Earlier this month, the Danish Defence Intelligence Service said in an annual report that the US was using its economic power to “assert its will” and threaten military force against friend and foe alike.
Image: Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen (left) greets Greenland’s Prime Minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen.
The report also highlighted the rising strategic importance of the Arctic to great power countries as “conflict between Russia and the West intensifies.
It went on to say that the growing security and strategic focus on the Arctic by the US would “further accelerate these developments”.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Russia is worried about NATO’s activities in the Arctic and will respond by strengthening its military capability in the polar region.
He was a senior figure. Head of the operational training directorate of the general staff, Sarvarov prepared forces for future deployment, having previously served in Chechnya and Syria.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility but Moscow believes Kyiv may have been behind it. No wonder – they’ve carried out similar attacks many times before.
He was killed by a bomb hidden in a scooter outside his apartment block, which Vladimir Putin referred to as a “major blunder” by the security services.
Image: Sarvarov was the least senior commander to be killed on Russia soil. Pic: Reuters
It’s unclear why Sarvarov was targeted – perhaps simply because his rank and apparent vulnerability.
The timing appears significant. It follows the latest peace talks between US and Russian officials in Miami over the weekend, where Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev met with Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
In the past, Ukraine has used these kinds of attacks to embarrass Moscow and to bring the war closer to home for Russians.
This time could be Kyiv’s way of undermining Moscow’s narrative in the negotiations.
The Kremlin has been trying to persuade the White House that a Russian victory is inevitable, and that it’s futile to support Ukraine, in the hope of securing a more preferential settlement.
Ukraine has been trying to convince the Trump administration of the opposite – that it’s still full of fight – and taking out Russian generals in their own backyard is one way of doing that.
It shows Washington that the Kremlin is clearly not in total control.