UK Government must deliver promise on unfettered trade – Little-Pengelly
The DUP agreed the Safeguarding the Union command paper with the previous government in 2024, which allowed it to return to the Stormont powersharing Executive at Stormont.
However, the unionist party says that all of its concerns over post-Brexit trading arrangements have not been met.
The Windsor Framework, and its predecessor the Northern Ireland Protocol, require checks and customs paperwork on goods moving from Great Britain into Northern Ireland.
Under the arrangements, which were designed to ensure no hardening of the Irish land border post-Brexit, Northern Ireland continues to follow many EU trade and customs rules.
Ms Little-Pengelly used the speech to call for unionist unity (Jonathan McCambridge/PA)
DUP MLA Ms Little-Pengelly told the gathering in Lisburn that unionism faced 'new challenges'.
She said: 'Chief amongst them is the imposition of the sea border within our own country.
'A division between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom that no unionist can ever truly accept.
'It is not enough to celebrate our culture if we do not stand to defend it.
'The union is not a distant idea.
'It is our political, economic and emotional home.
'A border in the Irish Sea undermines that home, it divides our people, disrupts our trade and dilutes our identity.'
She added: 'The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland made a clear and unambiguous promise to fully restore unfettered internal trade across this United Kingdom.
'That was a promise to the people of Northern Ireland.
'They must deliver it.'
The deputy First Minister said it was a time for 'confident and positive strong unionism'.
She described the Orange Order as a 'great unifier across many strands of our unionist conviction'.
Ms Little-Pengelly said: 'Unionism must work together outside of the Order.
'This is a time for vigilance, but it is also a time of opportunity.
'Division brings fracture and weakness, it is unity that brings strength.
'We must recognise that the bonds which pull and bind us together will always mean we have so much more in common than what can ever divide us.'
She added: 'Let us recognise the talents and abilities across all shades of unionism, and by using all such, our case will not only be strengthened, but indeed undeniable and irresistible.
'Let me be very clear, the might of the case for our continued union will always be our biggest strength.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
44 minutes ago
- Times
Trump's tariff may make normal trade impossible, says EU negotiator
President Trump's threatened 30 per cent tariffs would render usual trade between the US and the European Union 'almost impossible', the bloc's trade negotiator has warned. Maros Sefcovic issued the warning during talks with European trade ministers, as the EU prepares a €72 billion package of retaliatory measures if the US goes ahead with its tariffs on European exports on August 1. 'If you're talking about 30 per cent or 30 per cent plus, there will be a huge impact on trade,' said Sefcovic, and 'transatlantic supply chains would be heavily affected'. He added: 'It will be almost impossible to continue trading as we are used to in a transatlantic relationship.' Trump stunned European capitals at the weekend and threw negotiations into disarray with a new threat of 30 per cent tariffs on EU imports, a significant increase on the 20 per cent threatened in April, which was then dropped to 10 per cent pending negotiations. Sefcovic said that the EU would have little or nothing to lose by retaliating. 'Thirty per cent or anything above 30 per cent, any additional counter-reaction from the United States, has more or less the same effect. Practically, it prohibits trade.' Following the meeting in Brussels, Sefcovic said: 'The EU never walks away without a genuine effort, especially considering the hard work invested, how close we find ourselves to making a deal and the clear benefits of the negotiated solution. But, it takes two hands to clap.' He said that the commission would circulate its package of retaliatory 'rebalancing' measures to European capitals for approval. 'We want to use every minute of every day until August 1 to find a solution. We will negotiate first and prepare at the same time.' • Irwin Stelzer: It's pay to play in Trump's America — tariffs are here to stay Sefcovic said he would brief EU trade ministers on progress in talks with Washington over the next three weeks. The European Commission suspended the EU's first package of retaliation tariffs, which would have been worth €21 billion, and has prepared a new €72 billion package, which will probably be held in reserve until the August deadline. Initial proposals had been for €20 billion more. Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, and Giorgia Meloni, the Italian prime minister, have both urged that a deal be negotiated, and they have the support of most other EU governments. France has backed a tougher approach. The German Chamber of Commerce and Industry has calculated that the US tariff policy could reduce German exports to the world's largest economy by €1 billion a month. Lars Lokke Rasmussen, the Danish foreign affairs minister, said: 'We should prepare to be ready to use all the tools. If you want peace, you have to prepare for war. And I think that's where we are.' Laurent Saint-Martin, the French trade minister, has called on the EU to go beyond conventional trade retaliation to unprecedented 'anti-coercion' measures targeting America's services and tech sectors. 'This balance of power desired by Donald Trump is a balance of power in which you must demonstrate your ability to fight back, and this is perhaps where we need to accelerate today,' he said. European investors appeared to take the tariff threat seriously. Major indices across the bloc fell on Monday, led by sharp drops in the share prices of car manufacturers. Germany's Dax index of the 40 biggest companies was down more than 200 points in mid-afternoon, at 24,053.43, compared with a record above 24,600 achieved last week. The fall was led by Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and BMW. In France, the CAC was also in the red, losing 40.37 points to 7,788.92.
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Trump threatens Putin with 60-day ultimatum in major Russia-Ukraine announcement
Donald Trump has issued an important update about the war between Russia and Ukraine. Sat next to NATO chief Mark Rutte in the White House this afternoon, Trump told the cameras that the US would be issuing Russia with secondary tariffs if no deal is reached over the conflict in 50 days - and said he was "very, very unhappy" with the country. It comes after the US president teased that he would make a "major statement" regarding the conflict on Monday. Trump, who has appeared at times to have a strong relationship with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, has been outspoken about his hopes to end the war. Despite his warnings to Russia, Trump has so far been unable to push the idea of a total ceasefire. In April, the US president urged Putin to "stop" hammering the city of Kyiv with missile and drone attacks, before doubling down on his demands and branding Putin as "crazy". On Sunday, he said: "I am very disappointed with President Putin, I thought he was somebody that meant what he said. He'll talk so beautifully and then he'll bomb people at night. We don't like that.' Trump opened the meeting by voicing his dissatisfaction over Russia's approach to peace talks in the last few months - and said he was "disappointed in President Putin" for not coming to an agreement. "I thought we would have a deal two months ago", he told reporters. Sat next to Nato chief Mark Rutte in the White House, Donald Trump has announced that the US will be imposing further tariffs on Russia if they haven't reached a deal over the Ukraine war "in 50 days". The long-awaited statement comes after Trump confirmed the US was sending Ukraine vital weapons to defend themselves in the ongoing war. According to president, the country has given US-made Patriot air defence missiles to help it fend off Russia's terrifying aerial attacks. The 79-year-old confirmed the European Union would pay the US for the 'various pieces of very sophisticated' items it was sending. However, the EU is not allowed under its treaties to buy weapons. EU member countries are buying and sending weapons to Ukraine, just as Nato member countries are buying and sending weapons. EU countries set up the European Peace Facility so that countries which supply arms to Ukraine could be refunded to backfill their own stocks. Russia has pounded Ukrainian cities, including the capital, Kyiv, with hundreds of drones and cruise and ballistic missiles that Ukraine's air defences are struggling to counter.
New Statesman
2 hours ago
- New Statesman
Why is Boris Johnson so scared of Emmanuel Macron?
Brexitworld is in a state of outrage. It is bad enough that the French president was granted a State visit to the UK in which there are fancy dinners, speeches to Parliament, meetings with the King and everyone speaks fondly of his nation. Entente amicale, indeed. But then our guest had the temerity to point out that Brexit has not gone entirely to plan. 'Many people in your country explained that Brexit would make it possible to fight more effectively against illegal immigration,' said President Macron, 'but since Brexit the UK has no migratory agreement with the EU.' This, he argued, in combination with the absence of legal routes within Europe to come to the UK, 'makes an incentive to make the crossing, precisely the opposite of what the pro-Brexit people promised.' Not done there, Macron went on to say that the British people were 'sold a lie…which is that the problem was Europe, but the problem has become Brexit'. How very dare he? In some of our newspapers, the GB News studios and on social media, Brexiteer fury has been unconstrained. He is 'arrogant and condescending'; he is 'insulting the British people'; he has 'libelled half the country as dunces', particularly the working-classes; he has committed a 'grotesque offence against diplomacy'; his comments, according to the Shadow Home Secretary, no less, are 'damaging to democracy'; he is 'an enemy and should be treated as such'. Not to miss out on this sudden revival of 2019 rhetoric, our former Prime Minister, Boris Johnson has waded in. 'The French president is blatantly using this crisis to make a political point – namely that Brexit Britain has been unable to control its borders', thunders Johnson in the Daily Mail, shocked that anyone could stoop so low as to use a crisis to make a political point. In the interests of his readers, however, Johnson overcomes his scruples to ask who is the 'evil genius' behind the arrival of thousands of migrants on the Kent shore, a 'daily humiliation of the British state' and a 'moral, political and economic disaster'. It is all a giant conspiracy, you see, masterminded by a 'Mr Big' (or 'Monsieur Petit', hoho!), to discredit Brexit. It is President Macron who is to blame. All these young men in boats have been 'effectively recruited by Macron to embarrass the UK'; they are his 'shock troops in his continuing jihad against Brexit'. Having established his credentials as a statesman and serious thinker with all the authority of a distinguished former Prime Minister, Johnson proceeds to give his views on the UK-France migrant deal agreed last week. He points out that if the scheme is approved, the French expect to take about 50 people per week and that, on current numbers of migrants, only 6 per cent would be deported. This is a perfectly reasonable point. When it comes to addressing these crossings, it is not a silver bullet, as Ministers have acknowledged. Johnson, however, does have a silver bullet. The Rwanda scheme, he says, 'doesn't mean sending back six per cent of illegals; it means sending 100 per cent of them from Kent to Kigali'. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe This is very evidently untrue. At best, Rwanda had capacity for 500 migrants in the first year, the equivalent of ten weeks of the new French arrangement. If the scale of the new deal with France is insufficient to deter migrants from crossing the channel, so was the Rwanda scheme. Who would have expected a blatant untruth on immigration from Johnson? Truly, it is just like old times – as is the general tenor of the debate. Macron's central argument is that the leave campaign promised that Brexit would deliver simple answers to complex problems. Sufficient numbers of people believed the promises for the country to leave, Brexit was delivered, but the problems – including illegal migration – have got worse, not better. He has a point. What is fascinating is to observe how the Brexiteers – those who made the unfulfilled promises – have reacted. It is not to claim that Brexit has been a success and to reassure leave-voters that they have been vindicated. If pressed, many acknowledge that it has not gone well, but claim that it just has not been implemented properly. Instead, it is to fall back on the argument that Brexit is the 'will of the people'; that the narrow victory on 23 June 2016 was a statement of eternal truth that must be forever revered and unquestioned. Our politicians might seek to divine what it means (and, obviously, those who were supportive of Brexit from the start are best placed to do so), but should not question the judgement. It has become a matter of faith. And then comes along Emmanuel Macron. He says that the people (52 per cent of those who voted nine years ago) were wrong, that their decision was based upon untruths. Rather than venerate the wisdom of the people, he is – according to his critics – calling them stupid. He is a blasphemer from a foreign land. For advocates of Brexit, the referendum result settled the matter. To question the decision, to compare the promises made at the time and the subsequent reality is an offensive attack on democracy. The debate must be closed down. To some extent, as a tactic, it continues to work. Few mainstream British politicians make the argument that the 2016 result was a mistake, even if most of the public would agree. For those who remain Brexit-supporters, any criticism of Brexit is taken personally. But a mistake it surely was, and it should not be left to just President Macron to say so. Related
