Goods Trading: Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Tuesday, 15 September 2026
Contributions
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)Traditional Unionist Voice
I beg to move, That this House has considered goods trading between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dame Siobhain. Trade within any nation should be so simple and uncomplicated that it ought not to be a focus of much debate. And so it was within this United Kingdom until some time ago. One of the founding principles of this United Kingdom, as set forth in the Acts of Union, is that all parts of the United Kingdom should be on an equal footing when it comes to trade. That, of course, would manifest itself in utterly unfettered trade among and within all parts of the United Kingdom. But then, sadly, along came the Windsor framework, previously called the protocol, which upended that equilibrium. That happened because the Windsor framework treats Northern Ireland alone within the United Kingdom as subject to the EU’s customs union. As a consequence, the EU’s customs union requires Great Britain, the other part of this United Kingdom, to be treated and regarded in trade terms as a third or foreign country, and from that flows the iniquitous Irish sea border—a full international customs, sanitary and phytosanitary and trade border—which is truncating and partitioning this United Kingdom. In consequence of the Irish sea border, we have checks and customs declarations on goods travelling from Great Britain to Northern Ireland—a part of this United Kingdom whose economy was historically very integrated with Great Britain, which is where our raw materials came from, and to where we sold most of our goods. To impose upon such an integrated economy an international customs border was inevitably going to grossly and disadvantageously affect trade, and so it did.
Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)Democratic Unionist Party
It may seem of little consequence to say that there is a customs border, but in practical terms, does the hon. and learned Gentleman accept that it means that when goods are brought from GB, they are subject to full customs checks and customs codes have to be filled in? If Laird Grass Machinery in my constituency wants to bring a tractor in, about 15 items in the tractor have to have separate customs codes. Filling in the paperwork to bring in one piece of machinery can sometimes take an hour.
The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. All our constituents in Northern Ireland who are in the business of trading goods have had many very daunting experiences in that regard. Of course, the Minister will probably tell us, “Oh, but the Windsor framework established the UK internal market system.” What a fraudulent name. An internal market is customs-free, yet under the UK internal market, previously called the green lane, customs declarations still have to be made. People make customs declarations when they are travelling from one single market to another. They have to be in a trusted trader scheme, to which they have to pay to belong. They have to undergo checks on 5% to 8% of all goods passing through, and in some circumstances, they have to pay duties—truncating and utterly upending the idea of free trade as it should operate within any national internal market.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)Democratic Unionist Party
I commend the hon. and learned Gentleman on introducing the debate. One of the greatest issues we all face is the crisis in the supply of veterinary medicines following Brexit. They continue to be subject to additional EU regulatory requirements, and farmers continue to face potentially serious consequences for animal welfare and the responsible management of antimicrobial resistance. Does the hon. and learned Gentleman therefore agree that Northern Ireland cannot continue to be economically cut off under the regulatory burdens placed on farmers and vets? Those burdens must be reduced.
I think all that is self-evident, but sadly, we have a Government who are deaf to those issues, and sadly, the hon. Member’s party seems to have come to terms with them, because in Stormont, the DUP is now prepared to implement the Irish sea border and the Windsor framework, but let me be very clear: the integrity of our single market has been utterly destroyed. Among the practical consequences of that are unimaginable levels of trade diversion. We were once a wholly integrated part of the United Kingdom. Once barriers are erected, trade is discouraged. Various surveys show that that has happened. From the Federation of Small Businesses survey, we know that 34% of GB companies that used to trade with Northern Ireland have ceased trading. Why? Because this paperwork and this checking is such a disincentive that it is not worth the bother. This week, I received figures from the Department for Transport that I find quite astounding, and they make the point with great clarity of what it means to have had trade diversion. According to the Department for Transport, in 2022, 8.6 million tonnes of goods were distributed in Northern Ireland by GB-registered vehicles—in other words, GB haulage companies bringing goods into Northern Ireland. Last year, that figure fell to a staggering 2.2 million tonnes. In just four years, there has been a fall of 75% in the quantum of goods coming from GB to Northern Ireland by GB-registered vehicles.
Alex Easton (North Down) (Ind)Independent
I thank the hon. and learned Member for securing the debate. Would he agree that the very fact that businesses face customs processes, extra paperwork and EU-derived rules when moving goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland proves that the Irish sea border is still very much in place? Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, and goods moving from one part of our country to another should not be treated as though they are crossing an international frontier. Is it not time that the Government restored Northern Ireland fully to the United Kingdom’s internal market, instead of pushing us towards an economically united Ireland?
I absolutely agree. The hon. Member makes a valid point. Some might say, “Well, what does trade diversion matter? As long as you get the goods, does it matter where they have come from?” Of course, the corollary of trade diversion is what it is doing to our economic links. It is consciously and deliberately building an all-island economy. In place of Northern Ireland being a fully integrated part of the UK economy, the whole idea of trade diversion—indeed, the whole idea of the protocol and the Windsor framework—was to build the stepping stone to an all-island economy, to step us out of the United Kingdom. And that is what is happening. When the Windsor framework was introduced, it contained article 16. It promised that if there were any trade diversion, the Government would step in and sort it out with the EU. There is lamentable and demonstrable trade diversion, but the Government are blind and deaf to the issue, refusing to act. The challenge to the Minister is this: why, in the face of demonstrable trade diversion, is that other part of the Windsor framework—article 16—not being implemented?
There are not many MPs here from other parts of the United Kingdom, but I find it even more staggering because that trade diversion has impacts on constituencies of MPs across Great Britain. If goods are being brought from the Irish Republic or other parts of Europe, that means jobs lost in GB, from suppliers that would normally have been selling goods in Northern Ireland.
Of course. The fact that 34% of businesses—many of them small—that previously serviced and supplied Northern Ireland have ceased, is obviously having a detrimental employment consequence for those firms in GB. It is not just big or small firms that are suffering but ordinary consumers. One of the most striking illustrations of that, particularly pertinent to this House, is that items purchased online from our own House of Commons shop cannot be delivered to Northern Ireland. It cannot supply to Northern Ireland because of the EU’s general product safety regulations. It is impossible to order a packet of House of Commons fudge, a leather folder, a candle, a keyring or a Christmas bauble—not even this bookmark I have here. Who would have thought that the EU single market was so delicate that it could not withstand the import into Northern Ireland of a bookmark? How preposterous and ridiculous is it that we have got to that point? I suspect that the Minister, in trying to excuse and wave this away, will tell us that we have the wonderful advantage of dual market access. What a fraud and con. Dual market access has amounted to nothing for Northern Ireland. We were told that dual market access would make Northern Ireland the Singapore of the west. Strange then, that in all the years of the Windsor framework there has not been a single incidence of foreign direct investment because of dual market access. That is for one very good reason. If a manufacturer coming to Northern Ireland is told it is wonderful that they can sell to GB and to the EU, they should ask where they are to get their raw materials. If they are told they should get their raw materials from Great Britain, they would have to pass through an international customs border. They might have to pay duties and do all the paperwork. Suddenly, the attraction of setting up in Northern Ireland as foreign direct investment disappears very fast. Any perceived advantage of dual market access is cancelled out by the Irish sea border itself. Many the Minister will tell us that the Government will do an SPS deal, which will solve many of these problems. Will it? The SPS deal is not a United Kingdom-EU deal; it is a GB-EU deal, leaving Northern Ireland utterly, totally, irreversibly under EU rules pertaining to everything of the nature of SPS. The SPS-GB deal means that, in addition to Northern Ireland being disenfranchised by being allowed to make the laws that flow under SPS, the whole United Kingdom is to be disenfranchised and Great Britain is to join us, unable to make laws about her own SPS arrangements. It is no silver bullet whatsoever. We might be told, as we are often foolishly told, “Oh, but it’s about protecting the Belfast agreement.” It has absolutely nothing to do with the Belfast agreement. Indeed, if it had anything to do with it, it is in this context: the Belfast agreement created a scenario where cross-community consent was supposed to be the barometer for everything, yet when it came to the Windsor framework being imposed on and extended to Northern Ireland, the one thing in the Belfast agreement that was liquidated was cross-community consent. That was taken out so that the protocol could be extended, knowing that it did not and would not have cross-community consent. The Windsor framework makes a nonsense of the Belfast agreement argument by trashing the very core of it—namely, by removing cross-community consent. I come back to where I started. If we are a United Kingdom, why oh why are we denying to my part of the United Kingdom and that of my colleagues the most fundamental tenet of being a United Kingdom—namely, unfettered trade between and within all parts of the United Kingdom? It does not have to be like this. We could deal with the border issues with the EU through mutual enforcement—in other words, something relatively simple. It is a hallmark of international trade that if you are making goods for a foreign country, you make them to their standards and vice versa. That is the essence of mutual enforcement, with criminal sanction so that there is liability if that is not done. That is what protects each other’s markets. We do not need all this paraphernalia of the Windsor framework. Indeed, if it had anything but the political purpose that lies behind it, we would not have all this paraphernalia. We are in the appalling situation where local businesses, particularly those that depend on GB-Northern Ireland trade, have no help from the Government and are having to set up their own Intertrade UK business association to try to highlight these issues. I am grateful for the work they have done and the statistics they have provided; thankfully, at least they are trying to look after our interests, in sharp contrast to this Government.
The Minister for Science, Innovation and Investment (Chris McDonald)Labour
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Dame Siobhain. I congratulate the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) on securing this important debate—its importance was reflected in the urgency and tone of his remarks. I thank him for his comments, particularly those on the importance of the Union, with which I agree. That is why I would like to start by very much refuting the hon. and learned Member’s assertion that it is the policy of this Government to enable Northern Ireland to step out of the United Kingdom. I am sure that he does not fully mean that, although he is clearly very concerned about these issues of trade. I acknowledge those concerns, but the situation is more complex than his remarks have perhaps allowed for. Clearly, if there were a simple solution to this that would deliver all the benefits he has described for Northern Ireland, the Government would want to move to that solution, but it is more complex than that. Through my remarks, I will try to address the many points that he and other colleagues have raised, and I will perhaps be able to elaborate on some of that complexity. First, I will address the hon. and learned Member’s point about unfettered access. The Government remain fully committed to unfettered access for qualifying Northern Ireland goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain. I also want to be clear about the importance of the UK internal market and Northern Ireland’s place in that market. The Office for the Internal Market highlights the importance of the internal market and of the sales to the rest of the United Kingdom, equivalent to around a quarter of Northern Ireland’s economic output in 2021. In 2024, which is the last year for which we have published data, Great Britain accounted for 52% of Northern Ireland’s trade in goods, and that figure is broadly the same as it was in 2018, indicating the robustness of Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom internal market.
Shops in Newtownards that have always bought their goods from a certain company across the water have been unable to do so because of the bureaucracy. By not being able to trade with that company directly, they are not able to offer the prices they once did. Nurseries and those that buy plants and seeds have also been restricted in what they do. DIY stores have been restricted by the bureaucracy and their ability to be competitive has been reduced. Has the Minister given any thought to that? I write to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland regularly about these matters, although not to the Minister in particular, but has the Minister had a chance to understand the issues and problems that my businesses in Strangford are feeling?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that. He raises concerns around bureaucracy and paperwork, essentially, for small businesses, and the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim mentioned our own House of Commons gift shop as well for low value items. I very much want to come on to this point in my speech, so I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising it. I will start by talking about the general performance of Northern Ireland trade with the rest of the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland’s goods exports within the UK and with the European Union have been strong. In fact, Northern Ireland’s exports to the European Union have outperformed the rest of the United Kingdom, increasing since 2019, whereas in the rest of the United Kingdom, exports have decreased in that period. It is therefore important to note that Northern Ireland does benefit from being a fundamental part of the UK internal market and having unique access to the EU single market. Of course, I do recognise—and the point was made by the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim—that this experience varies across sectors, companies and individual constituents, which is why this debate is so valuable. I will go on to talk more about that. I understand the challenges around this, but public authorities have a statutory requirement to have special regard for Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom internal market under section 46 of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020. That guidance gives real statutory power to ensure that policymakers within the United Kingdom actively consider Northern Ireland’s place in the internal market when they are implementing the Windsor framework or making policy involving the movement of goods in the United Kingdom. Where that is the case, the statutory guidance ensures that those policymakers must have special regard for Northern Ireland’s place in the UK internal market. Most importantly, one part of having special regard means the need to facilitate the free flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, with the aim of streamlining trade between the two, and maintaining and strengthening the integrity and smooth operation of our internal market. The guidance ensures that policymakers must give that special regard considerable importance and weight above other factors in policymaking. That represents how this Government have implemented a key commitment in the “Safeguarding the Union” Command Paper published under the previous Government to ensure that proper process is in place to always consider both Northern Ireland’s place in the UK internal market and the flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Members have spoken in detail about the Windsor framework and the challenges it brings. I would like to stress that the Government are wholly committed to the Windsor framework. The framework supports the peace and prosperity brought by the Good Friday agreement, one of the proudest achievements of our last Labour Government, and it plays a vital role in ensuring the smooth flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but of course I recognise the concerns raised by hon. Members. It is clear that the Windsor framework is delivering benefits and smoothing the flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I have already noted how the Northern Ireland-Great Britain supply of goods has been maintained through the implementation of the framework. Over 15,000 traders are now signed up to the UK internal market scheme, and more than 1,100 operators are registered for the Northern Ireland retail movement scheme and the Northern Ireland plant health label. Northern Ireland traders are benefiting from these facilitations, and businesses are choosing to invest in the dual market access that Northern Ireland uniquely offers. The hon. and learned Member for North Antrim is concerned about the level of investment and believes that businesses will not wish to invest in Northern Ireland for that reason. On my recent visit to Northern Ireland, however, I saw significant investment from Boeing, Airbus, Navantia and many other businesses. It is clear that this is not a uniform experience across all businesses, but it has been possible for Northern Ireland to attract significant inward investment.
Although the Minister paints a picture of firms signing up and supply still coming through, does he accept that the FSB has indicated that in retail, plant nurseries and firms that use steel, 32% of small businesses in those sectors in GB are no longer supplying to Northern Ireland? He cannot ignore the problem of suppliers stopping supplying from GB and businesses in Northern Ireland not being able to get the supplies that they were previously able to get.
Far from trying to ignore issues, I am trying to explain that it is quite a complex situation. I have already acknowledged that there are concerns in particular sectors and with particular companies, but as I have said, I think it is important to take a more balanced approach. Overall, in my view and the Government’s view, and according to the economic numbers that I have presented, the Windsor framework is in fact having a net positive effect on the economy in Northern Ireland. For example, the company Evri has invested in Northern Ireland being home to the new EU gateway. In Lisburn, PRM Group, which is a major chilled and frozen food distributor, has said that this influenced its investment decision, as well as the growth of its business. Businesses in other sectors, from medical devices to advanced manufacturing and consumer goods, have made a similar call. I recognise that if businesses and consumers are to benefit from the Windsor framework, they must have access to clear advice and guidance. In our response to Lord Murphy’s review, the Government committed to strengthen our offer, and we are taking action in that regard. We are building on the comprehensive support available through the free trader support service beyond 2026, and work is under way to progress the £16.6 million regulatory support service, which will provide clear and targeted support to help businesses to trade across the UK and EU markets and to benefit from Northern Ireland’s unique dual market access. I am personally grateful to businesses and civic stakeholders for their engagement on this project as we design and build the new service.
The Minister will know, because I dealt with it at some length, about the issue of diversion of trade, which is illustrated by the fact that there has been a 75% fall in the tonnage of goods supplied by GB-registered vehicles into Northern Ireland. Does he accept that there is diversion of trade? If he does, when will the Government activate article 16 of the Windsor framework, which is supposed to be a protection against it?
The hon. and learned Member did indeed raise the issue of diversion of trade and I was just about to address it directly. He gave some figures, but there is a more complex picture and perhaps I can just illustrate some of it. Great Britain and Northern Ireland trade remains robust, with over £17 billion in goods moving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain in 2024. The independent monitoring panel confirmed that the internal market guarantee—that 80% of Great Britain-Northern Ireland freight moves as “not at risk” goods—was met in 2025, and the latest figures confirm that 96% of goods moved under freight did so within the internal market system. We expect the panel’s next report shortly.
Is the Minister not concerned that 32% of businesses across the UK will not trade with Northern Ireland? Furthermore, does he agree that that is unfair on consumers in Northern Ireland, who cannot get goods from the rest of the United Kingdom?
Hopefully, the hon. Gentleman heard me outline some of the measures that the British Government are taking to enable businesses in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland to trade freely with one another. As we are in the dying seconds of this debate, I hope that Members will not mind if I do not take any more interventions, because I want to confirm some final statistics that I think are important. Sales from Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK reached £10.9 billion in 2024, and that figure was up by 0.8% on 2023. The UK internal market is expanding, not shrinking. As I have set out in detail, the importance of the Union and the many ways in which this Government are committed to maintaining and smoothing the flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland run through all the points that we are making about how we interact with the Windsor framework. To conclude, I thank the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim for raising these points. Hopefully, he has heard from me that the Government are committed to the internal market, and that we are committed to the Union and the economic prosperity of Northern Ireland. Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).
Source: UK Parliament Hansard API. Debate ID: 5408110.