European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — Clause 9 — Powers of Ministers — Parliamentary Approval of Mandate for Negiotiations — Implementation of Withdrawal Agreement — 12 Jun 2018 at 16:15
The majority of MPs voted against making approval by Parliament of a mandate for negotiations about the United Kingdom’s future relationship with the European Union a precondition for ministers making regulations to implement the withdrawal agreement.
MPs were considering the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill[1].
The motion supported by the majority of MPs in this vote was:
- That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 20.
Amendment 20[2] stated:
- Page 7, line 7, after “to” insert—
- “(a) approval by Parliament of a mandate for negotiations about the United Kingdom’s future relationship with the EU; and
- (b) ”
Explanatory notes to the Lords amendment[3] stated:
- Lords Amendment 20 would make the use of the power to implement the withdrawal agreement contingent upon Parliamentary approval of a mandate for negotiations on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.
Clause 9(1) of the Bill[4], which the rejected amendment sought to impact, stated:
- (1) A Minister of the Crown may by regulations make such provision as the Minister considers appropriate for the purposes of implementing the withdrawal agreement if the Minister considers that such provision should be in force on or before exit day, subject to the prior enactment of a statute by Parliament approving the final terms of withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union.
==
- [1] Parliament's webpage on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
- [2] Page of Lords amendments sheet containing Lords amendment 20. Parliament.uk website, 16 May 2018
- [3] Page of explanatory notes to the Lords amendments covering amendment 20, Parliament.uk website, 22 May 2018
- [4] Clause 9 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill in the version of the Bill
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.
Party | Majority (Aye) | Minority (No) | Both | Turnout |
Con | 308 (+2 tell) | 2 | 0 | 98.7% |
DUP | 10 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% |
Green | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
Independent | 1 | 4 | 0 | 83.3% |
Lab | 2 | 248 (+2 tell) | 0 | 98.1% |
LDem | 0 | 11 | 0 | 91.7% |
PC | 0 | 4 | 0 | 100.0% |
SNP | 0 | 35 | 0 | 100.0% |
Total: | 321 | 305 | 0 | 98.3% |
Rebel Voters - sorted by name
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
Name | Constituency | Party | Vote |
Kenneth Clarke | Rushcliffe | whilst Con (front bench) | no |
Kate Hoey | Vauxhall | Lab (minister) | aye |
Anna Soubry | Broxtowe | whilst Con | no |
Graham Stringer | Blackley and Broughton | Lab (minister) | aye |