[ad_1]
Image copyright
fake images
The government’s plans to amend a controversial bill that nullifies sections of the Brexit divorce deal have been rejected by former Conservative leader Lord Howard.
The pair said the compromise between No. 10 and Tory MPs “is not enough” for him to endorse it in the House of Lords.
The proposed changes would give the Commons a voice before the powers could be used to violate international law.
MPs will vote on them next week, before the bill goes to the Lords.
Boris Johnson reached an agreement with Conservative MPs on Wednesday, in a move to prevent a possible rebellion by his defenders over the Internal Market Law.
On Wednesday Lord Keen, Scotland’s Attorney General, became the second senior government legal official to step down over the bill.
The government has now published an amendment to the bill, which would prevent ministers from activating the new powers it gives them to override the Brexit divorce deal until MPs have voted to pass it first.
The change is similar to those proposed by senior Conservative MP Sir Bob Neill, who will now withdraw an amendment he had planned on the issue.
The ministers have also tabled amendments to the bill that would put a time limit on any attempt to challenge the legality of controversial sections through judicial review.
‘Matter of principle’
But Lord Howard, who was a Conservative leader between 2003 and 2005, told the BBC: “The government is still calling on Parliament to violate international law.”
He added that even with the changes proposed by the government, the chances of the bill being passed by the House of Lords currently “are not great.”
When asked if the matter could lead to a confrontation between the Commons and the Lords on the issue, he said: “I think it can go further.”
“I don’t know what my colleagues will do, but as far as I’m concerned, this is a matter of principle,” added the pair backing Brexit.
Media playback is not supported by your device
The government’s changes to the bill were welcomed by senior Conservative MP Sir Roger Gale, who had threatened to vote against it if no changes were made.
In a tweet on Thursday, he wrote: “At least Parliament will now have a chance to vote again if the government proposes to change the withdrawal agreement.”
But Labor leader Sir Keir Starmer said his party did not support the government’s bill, adding that its powers to violate international law were “incorrect”.
“The latest amendment trick does not eliminate the problem, it just changes the problem,” he told reporters in Scotland.
Johnson has argued that the new powers in the bill are only required as a “legal safety net” in case ongoing talks with the EU on detailed agreements for the Irish border break down.
In a policy document released Thursday, the government said the powers would only be activated if the EU undermined the “fundamental purpose” of these negotiations.
He listed examples of what he said would constitute such behavior, even if the EU insisted on export declarations for goods shipped to Britain from Northern Ireland.
He also promised that if he decided to use powers to annul the Brexit divorce deal, he would at the same time start formal dispute settlement talks with the EU.
Defending the bill on Wednesday, the prime minister said he believed the EU might not be negotiating with the UK in good faith during talks on a post-Brexit trade deal.
September Ultimatum
Informal talks on a trade deal continue in Brussels this week, ahead of another round of full-scale negotiations later this month.
However, the EU has reacted angrily to the bill, threatening legal action and possible suspension of trade talks if measures nullifying the withdrawal agreement are not withdrawn.
When asked to comment on the government’s planned changes to the legislation, the European Commission said it would not comment on “internal discussions” between British ministers and parliamentarians.
However, chief spokesman Eric Mamer said an EU request for the UK to withdraw sections of the bill before the end of September “has not changed.”
On Johnson’s claim that the EU had not been negotiating in good faith, he said that the agreements the EU had reached with countries around the world showed that the bloc had a “pretty splendid record” in this area.
It added that the EU’s top Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier had shown that he could negotiate in good faith, including on “politically sensitive issues”, during talks to finalize the UK’s withdrawal agreement, which came into effect in February. .
What is the Internal Market Law?
The bill sets out rules for the functioning of the UK’s internal market (trade between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) after the end of the Brexit transition period in January.
It proposes:
- No further checks will be carried out on goods moving from Northern Ireland to the rest of Great Britain
- Give UK ministers powers to modify or “waive” rules related to the movement of goods which will come into effect from 1 January if the UK and the EU cannot reach an alternative agreement through a business agreement
- Powers to override previously agreed obligations on state aid: government support to businesses.
The bill explicitly states that these powers must apply even if they are incompatible with international law.
Ministers say the legislation is necessary to avoid “damaging” tariffs on goods traveling from the rest of the UK to Northern Ireland if negotiations with the EU on a free trade deal fail.
