Theresa May can brea. By a large majority, Parliament has refrained from seizing control of future Brexit negotiations. David Davis, British negotiator and minister for Brexit, can now continue to negotiate freely with European Union. Parliament will ultimately vote on agreement with EU, but MEPs will not be able to dictate to government how it should proceed, should Parliament reject negotiated conditions for Brexit.
With 324 against 298 votes, House of Withdrawal rejected an amendment to Bill of law, introduced by upper chamber, to law, which is supposed to legally anchor Britain's withdrawal from EU. The House of Lords had many amendments, but for Parliament and government it was mainly application number 19. He would have prescribed procedure for case that Parliament would disprove Brexit negotiated by government with EU.
If amendment had been granted, it would have been a triumph for sovereignty of British Parliament. The application would have given members more power and influence over expiry of EU exit. In concrete terms, Theresa May should have given Parliament opportunity to sign off exit package by 30 November at latest – unlike government that wanted to. If Parliament had rejected package n government would not have been able to decide on its own. On contrary, as House of Lords proposed, Parliament's amendment could have asked government to re-negotiate with EU. They would have even been able to demand a second referendum and overturn Brexit.
The proposal had made hopes for many EU supporters to place Brexit supporters in ir limits. Former finance minister Kenneth Clarke feared that Parliament would have virtually no control over previous draft law. He was one of very few conservatives who voted against government with Anna Soubry.
But fear of many members was greater, and Parliament's veto would weaken government. They were worried that may would not be able to make ir threat come to United Kingdom in an emergency, even without an agreement from EU. May and Davis warned before vote that British's negotiating policy would be undermined. The EU can take advantage of this. The argument convinced enough conservatives. They rejected amendment of House of Lords. They strengned Theresa May.
The vote is also a success of hardliners who advocate a hard Brexit. They are minority in Parliament, but may have been dependent on ir support since parliamentary election. This leads to a grotesque situation: especially EU opponents in Tory party and in cabinet, which justify Brexit with argument of sovereignty of British people, set exclusion of Parliament from vote on Withdrawal bill by Brexit negotiations.Now continue as before
The disappointment among EU supporters was great. It was not until Tuesday morning that Phillip Lee, under Secretary of State in Ministry of Justice, resigned from public criticism of government's Brexit policy. "We should concede more to our Parliament than simply a pseudo-decision on a bad Brexit deal or no agreement at all," said Lee. "Both sides, neir EU nor United Kingdom, are currently coping with Brexit. We should wait before we step out. " What is now being negotiated is nothing half and nothing at all. Britain should negotiate a new type of EU membership with EU. However, this attitude is shared by only a few members. The majority in Parliament accepts Brexit to ensure that will of people is implemented – even if population has been barely or incorrectly informed before referendum.
The EU will now have to negotiate with British government, including Zerstrittenem cabinet, as before. On payments to EU, Customs Union and future immigration policy towards EU citizens. The wrangling and procrastination of deciding to a pragmatic, coherent negotiating position has led to considerable delays in negotiations. Ten days before EU Council summit in June, re is still no solution to problem with Irish border or question of membership of Customs Union. Points that should have been clarified for a long time.Date Of Update: 13 June 2018, 12:02