Government Brexit date is less a Red Herring, more a Dead
Cat
I have a prediction about the government amendment to EU Withdrawal
Bill, fixing the time the UK leaves the EU as “before, after or at 11pm on 29th
March 2019”. It will be withdrawn by government on the
evening it is debated, having served its purpose of putting up a massive target for
Remain-leaning MPs and newspapers to get hugely upset about, and for Leave-leaning
MPs to say “look at that, don’t look at this other stuff”.
It’s the biggest dead cat strategy employed by the Brexit brigade
since the days of the Referendum.
As we know, the EU Withdrawal bill gives the government
rights to massively trample over Parliament in the name of Parliamentary
Sovereignty. Ministers, with a little help from a Gerrymandered Select
Committee makeup, can do almost whatever they like.
Naturally for such a hugely important bill, many amendments have been put forward, to protect EU citizens (including us), to protect the
environment, animal welfare, and most importantly, to protect our country from
predatory use of the bill itself. But by far the biggest attention-grabber has
been the amendment to Clause 14 (The Time We Will Leave Amendment).
The Withdrawal Bill has generated 191 pages of amendments containing 378 changes and
75 new clauses. Parliament has allocated eight 8-hour sessions of debate time for
these amendments – that’s a little under 9 minutes of debate per change, not
counting the time to actually vote on them. In practice this is managed by a
process whereby the Speaker’s office and representatives from both sides group
amendments into related packages, to stop us debating changes until way past March
2019.
Despite this cripplingly tight deadline to sort out the
amendments, hours of debate time on the first day were wasted on Frank Field’s
daft amendment for the actual time we leave the EU to be set using GMT rather
than EU time. This amendment was eventually withdrawn after doing its job of
occupying enough Parliamentary energy.
Three days of the eight allocated have now passed with zero
amendments being accepted. Every amendment has been voted down. And some of
them are very important.
One amendment recently defeated was to include EU rulesabout animal sentience into UK law – this defeat means that the official government
line post-Brexit is essentially that animals can feel no pain, and don’t care
how badly you treat them.
Two more crucial amendments were overturned in more recent
debates – Challenges to Validity of Retained EU Law, which sounds dull but defeat
means the UK can mess with employment rights after Brexit and those affected
can’t go to the ECJ – and most astounding the Charter of Fundamental Rights,
which are a package of human rights which UK citizens obviously currently benefit from.
These three amendments collectively mean we probably won’t
be able to export meat to the EU as we won’t abide by their animal welfare
standards, that any EU national still crazy enough to wish to work here after
Brexit wouldn’t have the same employment rights, and that UK citizens could lose fundamental human rights (this last
amendment wasn’t defeated but withdrawn after government promised "assurances”, which supposedly is good enough).
Another Labour amendment suggested we may want to stay in
zero-tariff trading arrangements with the EU – meaning we could essentially stay
in the Single Market / Customs Union. This was heavily defeated, with the
astounding spectacle of Labour shadow cabinet members walking through the Lobby
alongside David Davis, and Labour’s Barry Gardiner suggesting it was “illiterate”
and illogical, without suggesting a more literate or logical alternative that
could allow the UK to retain the huge benefits of the Single Market. Some of us
remember when leaving the Single Market / Customs Union was described as a “disastrous
hard Brexit” by Labour benches, and also remember how Theresa May went to the
country to give her a mandate for a Hard Brexit – and lost her majority because
of it. Now it’s a policy that Labour defends, making Theresa’s trip to the
Ballot Box even more of a waste of time.
Hundreds of amendments are being defeated, with
Remain-leaning Tories being advised to “choose your battles” in favour of defeating
the Exit Date amendment, which is meaningless for two reasons. Firstly, a legal time limit already exists on when we leave the EU – exactly 2
years after we triggered Article 50 (i.e. on 29th March 2019) and short of withdrawing Article 50 there’s nothing we can do about it. That date cannot be changed by us unilaterally, only by agreement with the rest
of the EU it. We can legally withdraw Article 50 unilaterally, as one of the
authors who drafted it points out, but not fiddle with the date.
Secondly, the
Henry VIII powers given to ministers in the Bill “where necessary to aid the
process of withdrawal” allows them to alter the bill itself so any clause can
essentially be changed or ditched. Ministers could push the date in either
direction at will. These powers are in clauses yet to be debated, and the Lords is likely to kick up a huge fuss about them, but as it
stands we must trust David Davis and Boris Johnson not to abuse their powers. As if they would...
Government has introduced a Big Scary meaningless
amendment as a distraction from the real changes that should be made. Expect
them to drop it on the day it’s debated, with great fanfare about “defeat on a crucial aspect of Brexit” by both sides, when the damage has
already been done.
Comments
Post a Comment