European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — New Clause 64 — UK-Wide Frameworks — 4 Dec 2017 at 23:45

John Baron MP, Basildon and Billericay voted against replacing European frameworks with UK ones apparently intended to co-ordinate the activity of the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The majority of MPs voted in favour of replacing European frameworks with UK ones, the intent apparently being to co-ordinate the activity of the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

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

The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: Creation of UK-wide frameworks and stated:

  • (1) The Secretary of State must lay before each House of Parliament proposals for replacing European frameworks with UK ones.
  • (2) UK-wide frameworks shall be proposed if and only if they are necessary to—
  • (a) enable the functioning of the UK internal market;
  • (b) ensure compliance with international obligations;
  • (a) ensure the UK can negotiate, enter into and implement new trade agreements and international treaties;
  • (b) enable the management of common resources;
  • (c) administer and provide access to justice in cases with a cross-border element;
  • (d) safeguard the security of the UK.
  • (3) Ministers of the Crown shall only create UK-wide frameworks if they have consulted with, and secured the agreement of, the affected devolved administrations.”

The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following explanatory statement:

  • This new clause would establish new procedures for the creation of UK-wide frameworks for retained EU law.

During the debate the MP who proposed the rejected new clause, Jenny Chapman (Labour, Darlington) said:

  • "We are talking about a framework, within which the devolved Administrations currently make decisions, that is held now at the EU level.
  • "The presumption should be that powers remain devolved as is the case now, and that UK frameworks are created to co-ordinate policy in some areas through negotiation with the devolved Administrations. "

==

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
Con303 (+2 tell) 0096.2%
DUP10 00100.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 10100.0%
Lab0 240 (+2 tell)092.4%
LDem0 10083.3%
PC0 40100.0%
Total:313 256094.4%

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