Logo

Logo

Triumph and discord

Indubitable for now is the victory of the fundamentals of Brexit, indeed a triumph for Theresa May who has promptly…

Triumph and discord

(PHOTO: Getty Images)

Indubitable for now is the victory of the fundamentals of Brexit, indeed a triumph for Theresa May who has promptly greeted Monday’s late night outcome as a “historic decision to back the will of the people”.

With the affirmative vote in the House of Commons, the EU Withdrawal Bill ~ marked by “certainty and clarity”, to quote the British Prime Minister ~ has passed its first parliamentary test by 326 votes to 290, admittedly a none-too-convincing margin.

Nonetheless, a major constitutional hurdle has thus been crossed, though the legislation will now be advanced for further scrutiny by MPs, concordant with constitutional certitudes. The British Prime Minister’s euphoria is not exactly misplaced, however. The bill is intended to relegate the European Communities Act (1972) to the footnotes of history. That legislation, it bears recall, had inducted the UK into what was then the European Economic Community.

Advertisement

The new Bill seeks to convert all existing EU laws into “UK law”, indeed to ensure that there are no loopholes in the final legislation on Brexit day, scheduled for March 2019. Its economic import is, therefore, critical in terms of Britain’s dealings with Europe.

And yet the outcome has almost predictably caused a flutter in the UK’s political roost. May was able to avert a revolt on the issue within her own Conservative party during the post-midnight vote. A striking feature of the vote is that no fewer than seven Labour MPs deviated from the party line (aka Jeremy Corbyn’s whip) and lent their support to the Bill.

Given the roller-coaster course of Brexit ever since the referendum in June 2016, it was only to be expected that responses would be sharply divided ~ from the heady optimism of May to the stout condemnation on the other side of the fence.

The general refrain being that the Bill will give ministers the power to effect changes to laws without consulting MPs. If such misgivings are confirmed in due course of time, it will run counter to the tenets of parliamentary procedure and thus result in a further setback for Brexit. The fact of the matter must be accepted despite the legislative vindication of the will of the people, specifically that there is as yet no parliamentary unanimity on Brexit.

As the Bill is forwarded to the panel of MPs, May will have to countenance such carping critics as Kier Starmer, the Opposition’s shadow Brexit secretary, who has binned the legislation as an “affront to parliamentary democracy and a naked power-grab by government ministers”.

Of a piece with the criticism is the LibDem comment that Monday has been a “dark day for the mother of Parliaments”. The legislature, indeed the embodiment of the people’s will, has seldom been so divided in British constitutional history.

Advertisement