Trade Bill — 9 Jan 2018 at 18:50

“this House recognises that on leaving the European Union, whether or not the UK concludes a new long-term customs union with the EU, it will need effective legislation to implement agreements with partner countries corresponding to international trade agreements of the European Union in place before the UK’s exit, to implement procurement obligations arising from the UK becoming a member of the Government Procurement Agreement in its own right, to establish a Trade Remedies Authority to deliver the new UK trade remedies framework, and to establish powers for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to collect and disclose data on exporters, but declines to give a Second Reading to the Trade Bill because it fails to set out proper procedures for Parliamentary consultation, scrutiny, debate and approval of future international trade agreements, fails to protect the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty in the implementation of those trade agreements previously negotiated by the European Union and in respect of changes to existing government procurement regulations arising from the UK’s or other countries’ accession to the Government Procurement Agreement, fails to establish sufficient scrutiny procedures to replace those that have pertained while the UK has been a member of the European Union, fails to guarantee that European Union standards and rights will be protected in future trade agreements, and fails to render the Trade Remedies Authority answerable to Parliament or representative of the full range of stakeholders.”
“The Bill will put in place the essential and necessary legislative framework to allow the UK to operate its own independent trade policy upon exit from the European Union.”
“to build a future trade policy for the UK once we leave the EU.”
“a great trading nation once again”.
“Proposals, accompanying explanatory material, emails related to the substance of the working group, and other information, exchanged in the context of the working group, are provided and will be held in confidence unless otherwise jointly decided.”
“In an editorial (13 November) you claim that the trade bill is ‘effectively granting ministers the power to write law behind parliament’s back’ with ‘Henry VIII powers’. This claim is repeated in a column by George Monbiot (18 November). This is untrue. The powers in the bill will only allow for amendment of secondary legislation covering existing trade agreements, and secondary legislation is still subject to parliamentary oversight.”
“The Bill contains 6 individual provisions containing delegated powers. Two of these, clauses 2(1) and 7(3), include a Henry VIII power.”
“It is recognised that Parliament will want considerable assurances from the Government that this power will not be used beyond what is necessary to ensure a seamless transition of the agreements in scope.”
“The Department considers that this power is appropriate for the negative procedure.”
“Take consultation responses into account when taking policy forward…Do not ask questions about issues on which you already have a final view.”
“We are concerned by the extensive scope of delegated ministerial powers under the Act, mirroring concerns previously identified in relation to the use of Henry VIII powers in the context of the European. Union (Withdrawal) Bill. It is not clear why the Government considers such wide powers to be necessary.”
“central to good law-making.”
“Under clause 2(2) an international trade agreement means a ‘free trade agreement’, however ‘free trade agreement’ is not itself defined.”
“refers to ‘an international agreement that mainly relates to trade, other than a free trade agreement’. However, ‘mainly’ does not grant sufficient certainty in terms of interpretation.”
“We would urge further consideration of how trade negotiations will be handled where they intersect with the powers of the Scottish Parliament and other devolved legislative authorities where any proposed trade agreement will affect an area of devolved competence.”
“Widespread concern over regulation, movement of goods, access to talent and research and development and the negative impact this uncertainty is causing is set to intensify.”
“no Brexit is preferable to no deal.”
“Britain has turned down countries wishing to strike free-trade deals after Brexit because the government does not have the capacity to negotiate them”.
“We are concerned that clause 7(1) grants a very wide discretion to HMRC to require information. The scope of this provision should be more clearly defined to give greater certainty as to the extent of information and the anticipated frequency and method of data collection.”
“The plans are the latest attempt by ministers to undermine democracy and bypass parliamentary scrutiny of the Brexit process, after the EU (Withdrawal) Bill and Data Protection Bill contained similar ‘Henry VIII’ powers.”
“B-R-E-X-I-T
Fed up with Brexit, me three,
Trading relations headed down the ‘swanee’
If it doesn’t fit on the side of a bus,
Then let’s not say it, don’t make a fuss
Phase one was a floundering mess
The Prime Minister said she did her best
The Irish border was the sticking point, and the DUP
Cross-border trade we’re told it’s possible, it’s about wording, you see
A fudge not a dodge
Or has the right hon. Lady for Maidenhead, really lost the thread?
The Brexit spool unravels
Our economy headed south and what about travel?
Blue passports we’re told
Ah, perfect, imported they’ll be, that’s me, I’m sold
Choose Brexit, choose a new queue,
At the airport, we’ll be going through
It’s for the next generation of children I fear
Erasmus, international trade, travel will be lost, I shed a tear.
LGBT rights, workers’ rights, equal pay,
All important things, the EU has paved the way,
On the night of the referendum, and then the next day
Promises made were dead straightaway
How will history judge, our politicians of today
All of us here, not well, I’d say
Not all of us want to be facing this mess,
In Scotland we voted to stay in, we think it’s for the best
So let’s get together and stop this guddle,
For the sake of our future, we need out of this Brexit muddle.”
“necessary legislative framework to allow the UK to operate its own independent trade policy”
“will depend as much on whether the party at the other end is prepared themselves or will seek to have some agreement that will allow common content. Until we have that detailed discussion on the replication, neither we nor they will be 100% sure of exactly how you will define what is as close as possible to what we have had with the EU.”
“immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure”,
“Setting the negotiating mandate…Scrutinising negotiations… Approving or objecting to ratification…Passing implementing legislation”.
“the new UK‐third country agreements that are implemented through”
“will be legally distinct from the EU…agreements on which they are based. It may…be necessary to substantively amend the text of the previous…agreements”.
“a considerably greater degree of democratic involvement in treaty negotiations”
“seeks to minimise Parliament’s role”.
“It is too difficult to hire and fire, and too expensive to take on new employees”-
“an agreement that is or was notifiable under”
“of GATT, or…GATS.”

The House divided:

Ayes 281, Noes 313.

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 231 (+2 tell)088.9%
LDem0 11091.7%
PC0 40100.0%
SNP0 33094.3%
Total:313 281093.1%

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