LAST UPDATE | 13 Jul 2022
UK MPS HAVE voted against several proposed amendments to the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill following an extensive debate in the House of Commons today.
The Bill began its committee stage of the debate in the House of Commons today, which allows MPs to vote on amendments to it.
It proposes giving UK ministers the power to change almost every aspect of the post-Brexit deal and effectively scraps customs checks between Northern Ireland and Britain.
It also proposes creating green and red channels for traders to differentiate between goods that remain within Northern Ireland and those destined for onward transportation across the border into the EU.
The European Union has strongly condemned the Bill and has warned that it could take further action against Britain if it enacts the legislation.
The SDLP, Alliance, Labour and the Liberal Democrats had proposed a number of amendments to alter the Bill, but none of them were successful during the debate.
MPs voted 313 to 231 to reject a Liberal Democrat amendment which sought to require British ministers to set out the legal justification for altering the effect of the Northern Ireland Protocol in domestic law.
They also voted 308 to 230 to reject an SDLP amendment which had sought to protect the part of the Northern Ireland Protocol linked to democratic consent.
Labour’s clause 10, which had sought to prevent ministers from deviating from the Northern Ireland Protocol unless it had been agreed by both the UK and EU, or the UK had followed the procedure for unilateral action, was also rejected by 300 votes to 229.
Debating the Bill earlier today, Conservative Justice Committee chairman Bob Neill said the UK Government must allow MPs to consider any basis for changing Northern Ireland’s post-Brexit trade arrangements, ministers have been told
Neill said the Bill was “exceptional” and not in a “good way”, with the Government considering the “very grave and profound step” of withdrawing from the protocol unilaterally.
Reputational consequences
“The point of these amendments is to say that… if the Government or any government were to take that step it should do so upon the most compelling grounds so that the factual basis for their actions meet the legal test,” he said.
“The reputational consequences, politically, internationally and legally are very significant and therefore it should only be done when that is thoroughly tested and set before this House to be tested.”
If need be, it is not unreasonable it seems to me for the Government to come back to the House, make its case in relation to the specific items where it seeks to disapply an international treaty, if it has got a good enough case the House will support it and they can then get on with it.
Neill also said that a change of prime minister may help to ease tensions between the EU and UK.
On Boris Johnson’s resignation, he said: “I very much hope that one consequence of what has happened is it may be easier to rebuild and repair relationships and trust and that could then lead to a negotiated change which would mean this legislation wasn’t ever necessary.”
“If the Bill is to be taken forward it seems to me that we have to have proper safeguards to ensure proper parliamentary and democratic oversight of the way that it is taken into force.”
Intervening, Labour MP Stella Creasy said that so-called “Henry VIII” powers in the Bill could “set a precedent” for giving ministers more delegated power in future laws, stressing the need to “uphold the primacy” of the Commons.
Henry VIII powers are clauses in a bill that enable ministers to amend or repeal provisions in an Act of Parliament using secondary legislation.
Neill replied that all governments use Henry VIII powers, adding: “But the reality is there are ‘Henry VIII powers’, and ‘Henry VIII powers’, and this is Henry VIII, the six wives, Cardinal Wolsey and Thomas Cromwell all thrown in together pretty much, as far as I can see.”
“We all know that governments come and go and once you set a precedent that gives very sweeping powers to a government you may happen to agree with, there may and indeed inevitably there will be, as night follows day, be a day when a government which we do not agree with comes in and uses those powers in a way which we might wish to object to.”
Conservative former minister Jesse Norman said the Bill is a “contravention of our constitution” and that it is “not the answer”.
“It has been properly pointed out that the doctrine of necessity does not apply in anything like the way the Government described. I am not a lawyer myself, but even I can see it when the minister at the despatch concedes that immediacy is not at stake, and not implied by the conception of urgency that he wishes to deploy, or that the Government wishes to deploy,” he said.
“In breaching international law for the reasons the former attorney general has set out, the Bill breaks the general principle that promises must be kept.
Stormont executive
Commenting on whether the legislation will lead to the restoration of devolved government in Northern Ireland, DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson told the Commons: “I believe this legislation, if enacted, will help us to achieve that objective.
“I’m absolutely convinced of that and my party has stated clearly that if this Bill becomes law, we believe that provides the basis for restoring the political institutions in Northern Ireland, including the executive, and I’ve already committed to leave this place and to return to Stormont as the deputy first minister as part of that executive.
“Therefore I have a personal commitment to the restoration of the political institutions, as does my party.”
Tory MP Bill Cash said: “The fact is in Northern Ireland, the people, the voters are being subjugated to the laws of the European Union in a manner which is inconsistent with our leaving the European Union.”
Donaldson said there is a “risk to the union” in relation to how the Protocol is being applied in Northern Ireland.
“Both the High Court and the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland have stated that the Protocol subjugates Article Six of the Act of Union itself, and that article confers on Northern Ireland citizens the right to trade freely within their own country,” he said.
“It states that there shall be no barrier to trade between the constituent parts of the United Kingdom and no one could reasonably argue that the protocol doesn’t put in place barriers to trade. It most certainly does.”
He said the Protocol has had an economic impact in Northern Ireland, and said there is also “the potential for that to lead to societal problems”.
Leader of the SDLP Colum Eastwood asked Donaldson if he accepted that “very clearly written” into the Good Friday Agreement is the principle of consent.
“It basically means that no matter how much I want it, we can’t change the constitutional position of Northern Ireland until the people of Northern Ireland and the people of the Republic of Ireland vote for it,” he said.
Donaldson replied that there is a difference of view “as to how you interpret what is required in terms of consent”.
A second day of debate is due to take place on Monday 18 July, with plans to conclude committee stage of the Bill on Tuesday July 19.
With reporting from the Press Association
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say