European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — Decline Second Reading — 11 Sep 2017 at 23:37

Oliver Letwin MP, West Dorset voted to end the supremacy of EU law in UK law; to convert EU law into domestic law on the UK's exit from the European Union and to give ministers the power to correct deficiencies in retained EU law.

The majority of MPs voted to end the supremacy of European Union law in United Kingdom law and convert EU law into domestic law on the UK's exit from the European Union.

The majority of MPs were also voting to give ministers the power to introduce regulations to prevent, remedy or mitigate: (a) any failure of retained EU law to operate effectively, or (b) any other deficiency in retained EU law, arising from the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU.

MPs were considering the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill[1]

The motion under debate was:

  • That the Bill be now read a Second time.

The amendment rejected in this vote was:

  • to leave out from ‘That’ to the end of the Question and add
  • ‘That this House
  • respects the EU referendum result and recognises that the UK will leave the EU,
  • believes that insisting on proper scrutiny of this Bill and its proposed powers is the responsibility of this sovereign Parliament,
  • recognises the need for considered and effective legislation to preserve EU-derived rights, protections and regulations in UK law as the UK leaves the EU but
  • declines to give a Second Reading to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill because the Bill fails to protect and reassert the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty by handing sweeping powers to Government Ministers allowing them to bypass Parliament on key decisions, without any meaningful or guaranteed Parliamentary scrutiny, fails to include a presumption of devolution which would allow effective transfer of devolved competencies coming back from the EU to the devolved administrations and makes unnecessary and unjustified alterations to the devolution settlements, fails to provide certainty that rights and protections will be enforced as effectively in the future as they are at present, risks weakening human rights protections by failing to transpose the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights into UK law, provides no mechanism for ensuring that the UK does not lag behind the EU in workplace protections and environmental standards in the future and prevents the UK implementing strong transitional arrangements on the same basic terms we currently enjoy, including remaining within a customs union and within the Single Market.’.

==

Debate in Parliament |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con309 (+2 tell) 0098.1%
DUP9 0090.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 10100.0%
Lab0 244 (+2 tell)093.9%
LDem0 120100.0%
PC0 40100.0%
SNP0 34097.1%
Total:318 296096.3%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive