The decision by Secretary of State Hilary Benn not to apply the Stormont Brake is just the latest in a series of instances where the DUP has been left rueing the day it hitched itself to the eurosceptic bandwagon.
Many of the party’s woes date back to Brexit, as nothing better illustrates its absence of collective foresight and a failure to strategise.
The Stormont Brake was agreed as part of the Windsor Framework almost two years ago. That agreement between the British government and EU was designed to persuade the DUP to end its boycott of the institutions, yet it merely tinkered around the edges of the protocol.
The fact that the previous negotiation could not be reopened meant there was little room for manoeuvre, so effectively a mechanism was created that made it look like unionist concerns around trade barriers were being listened to.
The signatures of 30 MLAs from at least two different parties would ensure the British government considered the impact of new EU regulations and whether the rule changes would create greater divergence between the north and Britain.
One of the main considerations for applying the brake is whether the new regulations would have “significant impact specific to everyday life of communities in Northern Ireland in a way that is liable to persist”.
It can only be pulled in the “most exceptional circumstances and as a matter of last resort”.
The first effort to see the brake used since Stormont’s restoration almost a year ago related to changes to EU rules on packaging and labelling of chemicals.
Had the secretary of state chosen to apply the brake, it would have stalled the implementation of the new regulations, prompting a period of “intensive consultation” between the UK and EU, via the Joint Committee.
That process would have seen either the Assembly vote on the matter or the British government cite “exceptional circumstances” and ignore concerns.
A third option would have been not to adopt the regulations, creating all sorts of uncertainty for manufacturers and those who use the products.
In the end, Mr Benn decided the evidence didn’t merit applying the brake. He argued that as chemical labelling was already devolved – and had never previously raised as an issue – the impact of the proposed changes would be negligible.
The secretary of state also signaled his government’s desire to move closer to the EU in terms of regulation.
Given this outcome, one would suspect it will be some time before unionists seek to have the brake applied again - though don’t count on it.
Nationalists saw it as a stunt, while Jim Allister has long claimed that it was an ineffective mechanism – and now he’s been vindicated.
Like last year’s Safeguarding the Union ‘command paper’ that saw Jeffrey Donaldson lead his party back to Stormont, the brake mechanism has been exposed as a little more than a ruse which enabled a face-saving climbdown.
The DUP will undoubtedly make noises about the decision but privately hope that convergence with EU regulations is accelerated, helping the party avoid any further discomfiture, which exposes how far its influence has diminished in just a few short years.
