British Politics

I'm not objecting to the Treaty, I'm objecting to the wide powers given to ministers to enact new legislation in the Bill.

 

Be specific, which ones?

You do know the Bill went through the rigors of Parliament quite a while ago don't you?

 

Treaties are agreements between countries. Are you saying that if we agreed a treaty with North Korea or China they should include how the countries arrive at decisions?

 

Clause 29 and Clause 31

 

No of course not. I'm saying that the Legislation before our Parliament is unprecedented in how it enacts the Treaty into UK Law and that this is unnecessary.

 

Okay, I've got them open. Can you elaborate specifically what your issue is, and perhaps include the comments raised during the lengthy discussions that were held in Parliament as the Act was going through the process?

 

Treaties are made by the executive and automatically become law under UK constitutional practice. Did you see any bills brought before parliament for all the trade deals we have recently signed?

 

The Bill was only published in draft form this week so there has been no discussion at all before today. So you must have misunderstood.
Clause 29 basically incorporates the Treaty into UK Law in an unprecedented way. Clause 31 gives ridiculously wide powers to Ministers.

 

Yes I know. I am trying to discuss the Legislation, NOT the Treaty. I don't understand why it needs such wide powers to enact a simple trade treaty.

 

Which act or piece of legislation are you referring to?

 

The Bill that Parliament is voting on today. The European Union Future Relationship Bill

 

That's the one where subsections one and 2 of clause 29 mentions checks and balances that are in place?

260.This clause provides that domestic law is to have effect with the modifications that are required for implementation of the TCA and the Security of Classified Information Agreement. It only applies to provisions of the Agreements which are not implemented by another mechanism and is designed to ensure that all aspects of the Agreements are implemented to the extent necessary to comply with international obligations. 261.Subsection (1) provides that existing domestic law is to be read with such modifications necessary to comply with the Agreements. 262.Subsection (2) limits the use of the glossing mechanism in subsection (1), so that any equivalent or other provision in or under this Bill or in or under any other Act used for the purposes of implementing the Agreements has precedence. Subsection (1) cannot limit any power to give effect to such an obligation.

 

So you are not complaining when a treaty is NOT discussed by parliament but when it is voted on by parliament you complain?

 

Clause 31.

272.Subsection (4) places a series of restrictions on the power. The power cannot be used to: impose or increase taxation; make retrospective provision; create a relevant criminal offence; amend or repeal key devolution legislation (with limited exceptions) or amend, repeal or revoke the Human Rights Act 1998 and any legislation made under that Act. 273.Subsection (5) provides for an exception to the restriction on making retrospective provision, by stating that this restriction does not apply if a regulation is made under this power in connection with the replacement and/or modification of any references to the Agreements, where this happens after a final legal revision. 274.The scrutiny procedures, and restrictions for devolved authorities, for this power are set out in Schedule 5.

 

Doesn't look 'unfettered' to me, and there are several other pieces of legislation that include clauses to enable rapid action under certain conditions, the Covid Regs being one example, so it's not unprecedented either.

 

I'm liking this Nige

Carry on pls

 

If he is happy then all is good

 

Clause 29 is completely unprecedented. Act usually have exact amendments to previous legislation.
In Clause 31, I've never seen an ability to make regulations extend to allowing the Act enabling the regulations to be amended. They could make a regulation deleting the exceptions in the Act for example so there are no checks and balances.

 

Other than the ones quoted in the Act.

 

I'm complaining about wide powers being forced through in a single day because the Government has left Parliament with no alternative.