He confirms that the EU has decided to take legal action against the United Kingdom. It will revive the infringement procedure first launched in 2021. If the UK does not respond within two months, the EU can refer it to the European Court of Justice. The EU is also launching two more infringement proceedings – accusing the United Kingdom of not complying with the provisions of the Protocol on border crossing controls and data exchange. Updated at 10.23 BST Sefsovic says the EU does not see this as an issue where there will be a political victory for one side. But he says the EU needs the UK to work with it. And that’s all. The press conference is over. I will post a summary soon. The European Commission has published a Q&A on what it is announcing today. He has also published two new papers on the proposed changes to the way the protocol works. Q: How far would the EU go in responding to the UK? Šefčovič says the EU argues that there are better ways to resolve these issues than through litigation. He says the EU is clear about its proposals. There are many opportunities to address this issue. He says the EU expects that the debate on the bill in parliament will take some time. But if the bill becomes law, the EU does not rule out anything. Šefčovič says he has not heard any constructive proposals from the UK since March last year.

“Let’s name it – this is illegal” – Šefčovič condemns the NI protocol bill

This is what Šefčovič said about the UK bill in his opening statement. Let there be no doubt: there is no legal or political justification for unilaterally changing an international agreement. Opening the door to unilateral change of an international agreement is also a violation of international law. Well, let’s say things by name: this is illegal… [The Northern Ireland bill] has created deep uncertainty and casts a shadow over our overall cooperation, all at a time when respect for international agreements has never been more important. That is why the Commission today decided to take legal action against the United Kingdom because it did not comply with important parts of the Ireland / Northern Ireland Protocol. Maroš čefčovič Photo: European Commission / European Commission Q: If this impasse continued, how far would you go? Would you hit the UK with tariffs or a suspension of the trade treaty? And why not reopen the treaty? Šefčovič begins with the second question. He says he spent four years negotiating the treaty. “These issues have been pondered for years.” That was the best solution, he says. It was agreed after “painstaking negotiations”. They signed it and it was ratified. He says they can do no better than meet the three priorities: peace. There are no hard borders on the island of Ireland and Northern Ireland has access to the single market. He says the EU is talking about very limited controls. He says the EU is willing to put “extra effort” and “extra imagination” into the talks. But it will not reopen the ratified treaty. Šefčovič says the fact that the EU is repeating legal action is indicative of the level of trust between London and Brussels. However, he says the EU wants its response to be “measured” and “proportionate”. But the EU is also showing what it can do to change the way the protocol works. Šefčovič says these plans are based on what the companies said they wanted when he met them in Northern Ireland. It offers a “common solution” that will provide clarity, he says. Potential investors in Northern Ireland want to know if they are producing for 5 million (Ireland), 50 million (UK) or 500 million (EU), he says. He says journalists should ask milk producers in Northern Ireland how they will produce one type of milk for the EU and another for the United Kingdom. “Let’s focus on practical things,” he says.

Šefčovič emphasizes that the EU is willing to change its plans to change the way the protocol works, saying that it is not “take it or let it offer”

Sefsovic says the EU has already offered to change the way the protocol works.

He says the United Kingdom should resume talks with the EU on changes to the protocol. No talks have taken place since February, he says. He says the EU proposals are not a “take it or leave it” offer. He continues: “It can evolve.”

Maroš Šefčovič is speaking now. He confirms that the EU has decided to take legal action against the United Kingdom. It will revive the infringement procedure first launched in 2021. If the UK does not respond within two months, the EU can refer it to the European Court of Justice. The EU is also launching two more infringement proceedings – accusing the United Kingdom of not complying with the provisions of the Protocol on border crossing controls and data exchange. Updated at 10.23 BST

EU plans carrot-and-stick approach to UK move to Northern Ireland

And here is a preview of my colleague Daniel Boffey’s story about Maroš Šefčovič’s announcement. He says the EU will follow a “carrot-and-stick” approach to Boris Johnson’s plan to unilaterally rewrite the post-Brexit arrangements for Northern Ireland, taking legal action against the United Kingdom, while offering new grounds for negotiation.

UK likely to challenge European Court ruling banning deportations to Rwanda

The United Kingdom is likely to challenge the European Court of Human Rights’ decision to stop deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda and is already preparing for the next flight, said Labor and Pensions Minister Thérèse Coffey. My colleague Rowena Mason has the story here. Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the European Commission responsible for the Brexit negotiations with the United Kingdom, is scheduled to give a press conference to announce the EU’s response to the publication of the Northern Ireland Protocol bill. There should be live streaming here.

Ministers downgrade government proposals to withdraw from European Convention on Human Rights

Boris Johnson yesterday suggested that if the courts continued to block Rwanda’s deportation policy, the government could withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights to ensure that it could use deportation as a means of dealing with asylum seekers. When asked if leaving the ECHR was an option, he replied: Will we need to change some laws to help us as we move forward? It may well be. And all of these options are under constant scrutiny. It was hard to say if Johnson a) made it as he went. b) float an idea that is nothing more than a choice, cause a stir and see what reaction it caused. or c) pitch rolling for a policy it intends to adopt in the future. (Maybe 70% b) and 30% c), but we do not know.) This morning two ministers tried to cancel the proposal. Pension Minister Guy Opperman told Times Radio: I do not believe [withdrawal from the EHCR] is our policy, nor would it be something I would support, the withdrawal from the ECHR. I think the situation is that, as I understand it, the UK courts have the upper hand in this matter, but as I understand it the decision was made last night by the ECHR, a decision was taken that not everything was heard by the UK courts under these conditions. And Thérèse Coffey, the secretary of labor and pensions, told Sky News: I think we have never put [withdrawal from the EHCR]As far as I know, in our manifesto, definitely the manifesto of 2019 … I do not know of any decision or hint even for this. The most important thing is to address this issue now. We will return to the ECtHR to challenge this initial decision. Use a similar language in Today. Opperman and Kofi voted and both remain. Although the European Court of Human Rights, which rules on the Convention, has nothing to do with the EU, the Tory MPs who are most opposed to it are generally Brexiters. It was not clear from the interviews whether Opperman or Coffey were self-employed or whether they reflected No. 10’s desire to back down from what the prime minister proposed yesterday. Maybe we feel better than what he says in PMQs. Updated at 09.42 BST

Priti Patel says preparations for Rwanda’s next flight for asylum seekers ‘start now’

Good morning. Late last night, the government abandoned its plan to send its first flight to Rwanda with seven asylum seekers, following a last-minute intervention by the European Court of Human Rights that meant the seven people still on the plane had received legal assistance. suspension. The government originally planned to have many more asylum seekers on the flight, but by yesterday their removal orders had already been suspended. Here’s our overnight story. And here is the intervention of the ECHR. Today we will have a reaction in the House of Commons – Priti Patel, the Minister of the Interior, is expected to make a statement to the Communities – and we are likely to hear a lot of outrage over government policy obstruction by the courts, especially foreign ones. But will Boris Johnson really be so unhappy about what happened? Bernard Donoughue tells the story of how, when working for Harold Wilson in the 1970s, Wilson used to complain often about a policy issue concerning the then EEC. Donoughue, thinking it was useful, left and found a solution. Reminds: I got our summary in the study. Wilson read it, looked at me sympathetically, handed the booklet back, and said sadly, “Bernard, you do not understand, I do not want the solution, I want the complaint.” There is a strong suspicion that Johnson simply wants the Complaint. While a solution to the problem of small boats crossing the English Channel may be desirable, you can also see why he may want to go to …