Tory leadership: What candidates think about Northern Ireland Protocol

Boris Johnson promised to "Get Brexit Done" but his successor will inherit a bogged-down dispute about special arrangements that were agreed for Northern Ireland.

His government recently introduced a bill in the House of Commons which could override parts of the post-Brexit deal between the UK and the EU - known as the Northern Ireland Protocol - and make it easier for some goods to flow from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.

If passed, the bill would not only affect the UK's relationship with the EU, but also rules for businesses in Northern Ireland and the future of Northern Ireland's devolved government at Stormont.

It collapsed in February after the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) walked out in protest against the protocol, pledging not to return unless its concerns were addressed.

And there are some other Northern Ireland-related issues which contenders have taken positions on.

So where do the candidates stand?

The Northern Ireland Protocol keeps Northern Ireland in the EU's single market for goods, preventing a hard border with the Republic of Ireland.

But it means new checks and controls on commercial goods which come into Northern Ireland from other parts of the UK, creating a trade border in the Irish Sea.

It is opposed by Northern Ireland's unionist parties, who say it undermines their place in the UK.

Other parties - including Sinn Féin, Alliance and the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) - say the protocol is a necessary compromise to mitigate the effects of Brexit in Northern Ireland.

The treaty was signed by Boris Johnson in January 2020, as part the Withdrawal Agreement.

The EU has put forward its own proposals to ease checks, but negotiations between Brussels and London on how to fix problems with the treaty have stalled.

Brussels views the protocol bill as a clear breach of international law and has urged the UK to "step back" from its approach.

Senior EU figures have warned that Britain risks damaging trust as well as its reputation abroad.

The European Commission has launched legal action over Britain's alleged failure to implement parts of the treaty and the BBC understands further so-called infringement proceedings could follow.

If the bill becomes law and ministers do start changing parts of the treaty, the EU's suggested it could also impose trade sanctions. This is why you might have heard warnings of a possible trade war.

UK access to the EU's Horizon research programme has also been described as collateral damage in the dispute. There is currently a block on the UK re-joining the £81.2bn funding scheme.

In May, Mr Sunak told Bloomberg that the way the protocol was operating was posing enormous challenges to "the stability of the situation" in Northern Ireland.

He said it had become a barrier to re-establishing power sharing at Stormont.

Mr Sunak said the government's preference was a negotiated settlement and added that he wanted to ensure Northern Ireland's place in the United Kingdom was secure.

At the end of 2021, the Daily Telegraph reported that Mr Sunak urged Boris Johnson and his former chief Brexit negotiator Lord Frost not to "blow up " talks with the EU about the protocol.

The paper said Mr Sunak raised concerns over the potential impact this would have had on the economy and that he did not have the same sense of "urgency" as others in cabinet about dealing with the protocol.

At the time the Treasury declined to comment.

He did not vote on the protocol bill at second reading.

Mr Sunak's bid to become leader has been supported by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Shailesh Vara.

In Brussels, many view Boris Johnson as the blustering Brexit poster boy who tried to backtrack on a deal for Northern Ireland that he himself had signed.

So while they aren't shedding a tear about his downfall, they're also wary of who might come next. No candidate has disowned the bill that could allow the UK to override parts of the protocol.

Indeed one of the contenders, Liz Truss, was responsible for drafting it while another, Suella Braverman (who has since been eliminated) wants to toughen it up.

With Jeremy Hunt and Tom Tugendhat also out of the race, diplomats here may hope that someone Penny Mordaunt or Rishi Sunak would take, as they'd see it, a more pragmatic approach.

But even though there are candidates who likely wouldn't have chosen the current prime minister's approach, now the bill's in motion, no one appears prepared to stop it.

The difference between contenders, in the end, may be between those who really are prepared to risk a so-called trade war with the EU versus those who aren't.

But that's a test that won't come for months at least, if at all.

For now, the contenders are broadly holding the line set by Mr Johnson.

A key watch will be whether anyone in the race signals a desire to give negotiations another push. However don't expect anyone to volunteer the idea that they're open to making concessions to Brussels.

A wider question is whether a new prime minister can reset strained relations with the EU. But again, in this contest, that doesn't appear to be a fashionable cause.

Ms Truss is the only candidate so far to have mentioned the protocol in the public speech for her leadership bid.

As foreign secretary, she was responsible for introducing the bill to scrap parts of the protocol.

In her leadership pitch she said: "In the face of EU intransigence I developed the Northern Ireland Protocol bill.

"It breaks the deadlock in a legal way, upholding the Belfast Good Friday Agreement and preventing the tearing apart of our precious union."

Speaking in the House of Commons when the bill was first debated, she told MPs that due to "the grave situation in Northern Ireland", there was a "necessity to act to ensure institutions can be restored as soon as possible".

In a letter to the Financial Times in June, Ms Truss said the protocol was undermining the Good Friday Agreement, had created practical problems and "a growing sense that the rights and aspirations of some parts of the community are being undermined".

She said new legislation was necessary because "all other options within the current EU mandate are currently exhausted".