A leading conservative rebel has tried to force Boris Johnson to seek permission from parliament before using his powers in the Northern Ireland Protocol bill.
Sir Bob Neal, chairman of the Justice Committee, on Tuesday tabled an amendment that would require “parliamentary approval for the entry into force of any provisions” of legislation that would unilaterally sever Brexit agreements for Northern Ireland at the risk of a trade war with the EU.
Neil’s proposal would effectively introduce “meaningful voting” for lawmakers before Johnson could use his powers in the bill, which has sparked controversy over allegations that it violates international law.
Nicki da Costa, a former съвет10 legislative adviser, suggested that this would mean that “meaningful voting is back” – a reference to Theresa May’s need for parliament to vote in favor of her Brexit agreement before it can be approved.
Dozens of Tories, including May, abstained from voting on Johnson’s legislation at second reading, but it is unclear how much they would support Neil’s attempt to secure parliamentary approval in the next stage of the House of Commons legislation.
Neil’s amendment may also not be enough to satisfy Labor, whose shadow foreign minister, David Lamy, said the bill was illegal and would damage the UK’s international reputation as a guardian of the law.
Now the legislation is moving to a more detailed discussion at the stage of the committees in the Chamber of Municipalities, which is an opportunity for MPs to amend the proposed bill before the summer holidays.
He will then move to the House of Lords, where there are significant concerns about the bill.
A vote in the House of Lords is not expected until October, but leading colleagues have warned that even if Neil’s amendment is passed, it is unlikely to be enough to satisfy critics concerned that the law would violate international law.
Peter Hain, a Labor colleague and former secretary of Northern Ireland, said: “It will not come close to meeting the needs that are likely to be required of cross-bench lords. I don’t think it comes close to the question.
“There is the whole issue of international law and its violation, which has raised judges – former judges of the Supreme Court and others. The whole legislation is a Tory-based whistle rather than a serious approach to negotiations. “
However, a Labor source in the House of Lords warned that it was uncertain that there were enough Labor, Liberal Democrats, Crossroads and Tory rebels to block the law as Johnson appointed more allies to the upper house in recent years.
Sign up for First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every weekday morning at 7am BST.
The bill’s second reading on Monday was the first opportunity for lawmakers to vote on proposals that Foreign Minister Liz Truss said were “legal and necessary”.
Johnson predicted earlier Monday that the laws could pass “fairly quickly” and enter the statutes by the end of the year. But if the lords make changes or try to block the bill altogether, it could be another year before the legislation enters the statute. This is because the government will have to implement the Parliament Act, which imposes a bill without the permission of the lords after one year.
Add Comment