European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — New Clause 1 — Restriction of Ministers' Powers — 17 Jan 2018 at 16:30

The majority of MPs voted not to prevent ministers making regulations under acts other than the European Union (Withdrawal) Act to amend, repeal or modify European Union law retained as United Kingdom law following withdrawal from the union, other than in situations where the regulation is necessary to maintain or enhance rights and protections.

The majority of MPs voted against a proposed consultation procedure prior to acting to maintain or enhance rights and protections relating to employment, equality, health and safety, consumer rights and environmental standards and protection.

The majority of MPs also voted not to require a resolution of each House of Parliament before regulations can be made under acts other than the European Union (Withdrawal) Act to amend, repeal or modify European Union law retained as United Kingdom law following withdrawal from the union.

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

The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: Retaining Enhanced Protection and stated:

  • (1) A Minister may use regulations provided for by an Act of Parliament other than this Act to amend, repeal or modify retained EU law if, and only if, the use of the regulation is necessary to maintain or enhance rights and protections.
  • (2) The procedure in subsection (3) applies if a Minister of the Crown proposes to use regulations provided for by Acts of Parliament other than this Act to amend, repeal or modify retained EU law in the following areas—
  • (a) employment entitlement, rights and protection,
  • (b) equality entitlements, rights and protection,
  • (c) health and safety entitlement, rights and protection,
  • (d) consumer standards, or
  • (e) environmental standards and protection.
  • (3) A Minister of the Crown must—
  • (a) produce an explanatory document which must explain why using the regulation is necessary to maintain or enhance rights and protections,
  • (b) consult for a period of no less than 12 weeks after the publication of the explanatory document with—
  • (i) organisations, and persons who are likely to be affected by the proposals, including representative bodies;
  • (ii) the Law Commission, the Scottish Law Commission or the Northern Ireland Law Commission in such cases as the Minister considers appropriate; and
  • (iii) where the proposals relate to the functions of one or more statutory bodies, those bodies or persons appearing to the Minister to be representative of those bodies,
  • (c) give details of any representations received under the consultation provided including Ministerial responses.
  • (4) Any regulations to which this section applies may be made only if they have been approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament.”

It's not explicitly clear which regulations are being referred to in subsection (4), the only reasonable interpretation appears to be those defined in subsection (1).

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

  • This new clause would ensure that important EU-derived employment and other rights can be amended only by primary legislation, subordinate legislation made under this Act, or subordinate legislation which has been approved through an enhanced scrutiny procedure.

==

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
Con307 (+2 tell) 1097.8%
DUP10 00100.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 10100.0%
Lab0 253 (+2 tell)097.3%
LDem0 10083.3%
PC0 40100.0%
SNP0 350100.0%
Total:317 305097.5%

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
Kenneth ClarkeRushcliffeCon (front bench)aye

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