Liberal Democrat MPs have tabled amendments to the Article 50 Bill demanding a people’s vote is held on the final Brexit deal, that the government must commit to securing Britain’s membership of the Single Market and that EU nationals living in the UK are guaranteed the right to remain.
The first requires a referendum on the final deal, the alternative being to remain a member of the EU. This is the “reality v reality” referendum, as opposed to the “reality v fantasy” that we had. It doesn’t address the question of whether Article 50 is unilaterally revokable – if it turns out not to be, the EU would have to agree to our remaining members.
NC 131
Referendum on the proposed new agreement with the EU
(1) A referendum is to be held on whether the United Kingdom should approve the United Kingdom and Gibraltar exit package proposed by HM Government at conclusion of the negotiations triggered by Article 50(2) for withdrawal from the European Union or remain a member of the European Union.
(2) The Secretary of State must, by regulations, appoint the day on which the referendum is to be held.
(3) The question that is to appear on the ballot papers is— “Do you support the Government’s proposed new agreement between the United Kingdom and Gibraltar and the European Union or Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?”
(4) The Secretary of State may make regulations by statutory instrument on the conduct of the referendum.
The second demands the government adopt a policy of seeking to remain in the Single Market. We’ve yet to hear from those who want us to diverge from Single Market rules and erect non-tariff barriers to trade, exactly which rules they want divergence from and how the new barriers to trade would do any good. With nothing to be achieved by erecting trade barriers, we should keep them down.
NC 133
Single Market
This Act does not come into force until the Prime Minister has certified that it is the policy of Her Majesty’s Government that on leaving the European Union the United Kingdom should as soon as possible accede to the European Economic Area Agreement as a non-EU party.
The third demands that EU citizens currently lawfully resident in the UK keep their right to remain in the UK.
NC 136
Right of EU nationals to remain
Effect of notification of withdrawal Nothing in this Act shall affect the continuation of those rights of residence enjoyed by EU citizens lawfully resident in the United Kingdom and UK citizens lawfully resident in the EU on 23 June 2016 after the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.
There is a pdf of all the tabled amendments here. Will parliament assert itself successfully, now that control has been taken back?
Nick Clegg commented
We must ensure that at the end of the negotiating process, the British people get to choose whether they want to stay in the EU or accept the government’s deal.
Someone will say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to this deal: the question is will it be Theresa May or the public?
Our priority is to ensure the people get the final say.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Reform under water
The Joy of Six 1532
Angie Harris
Andrew Tampion
Caron Lindsay
Neil Hickman
expats
21 Comments
So the proposed amendment would make it in the EU’s interest to offer the UK the most ludicrously bad deal, in order to force the voters to choose the ‘remain in the EU’ option. Don’t think that one has been quite thought through, to say the least.
Will be interesting to see how the Lib Dems vote tomorrow especially the ones who represent Brexit areas ? There can be no hiding behind abstentions.
“if it turns out not to be, the EU would have to agree to our remaining members”
And if the EU puts conditions on that, should we have a third referendum to choose between the terms for remaining in the EU and exiting on World Trade Organisation terms (having already rejected the negotiated Brexit settlement)?
And if the EU puts conditions on that, should we have a third referendum to choose between the terms for remaining in the EU and exiting on World Trade Organisation terms (having already rejected the negotiated Brexit settlement)?
If the EU announces what the conditions are then we could just have the one referendum, between ‘accept the deal’ and ‘remain in the EU under the new conditions’.
If that were the case, are there any conditions the Lib Dems would not accept, to stay in the EU? If the condition to staying in the EU were that Britain adopts the Euro (which I think is perfectly plausible as the kind of condition the EU might attach), would the Lib Dems still campaign for a ‘Remain’ vote, or in that case would they choose to stay?
“The question that is to appear on the ballot papers is—
“Do you support the Government’s proposed new agreement between the United Kingdom and Gibraltar and the European Union or Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?””
I thought the ‘leave’ or ‘remain’ question was bad. (especially the use of the word ‘remain’ This is seriously worse. But I am sure it can be worked on.
@Mark Seaman:
“So the proposed amendment would make it in the EU’s interest to offer the UK the most ludicrously bad deal”
This really is a statement of extreme silliness though you are not the fist to put it forward. These negotiations would not be about one side or other trying to better the other. They would be about working very hard together to reduce the extent of the inevitable damage to both parties who want to continue to maximise trade with each other.
PHIL THOMAS 31st Jan ’17 – 2:05pm……Will be interesting to see how the Lib Dems vote tomorrow especially the ones who represent Brexit areas ? There can be no hiding behind abstentions….
Sarah Olney made great play of how she was elected by a ‘Remain’ vote and would represent the wishes of her constituents…How will that play for those MPs in ‘Brexit’ areas?
Mrs May has said no deal is better than a bad deal, surely she won’t mind a referendum on whether the deal she gets is a bad one ?
@Mark Seaman
If every other country in the EU is entitled to vote on the final deal and any one of them can veto it and force us into a Brexit on WTO terms, why should the UK be barred from voting again. Look what Wallonia did over CETA until they were bought off; another UK vote would be a warning that if they didn’t offer us fair terms we would not leave. It is in both sides’ interests that the terms on which we leave the EU are fair.
another UK vote would be a warning that if they didn’t offer us fair terms we would not leave
But they want us to not leave, so how is that a threat?
Expats……………Tom Brake is an example. Sutton voted Brexit. He’s been ducking and diving for months. Will now be on the record how he votes ?
@PHIL THOMAS
“Expats……………Tom Brake is an example. Sutton voted Brexit. He’s been ducking and diving for months. Will now be on the record how he votes ?”
Assuming your ungrammatical last sentence means what I think it means, the answer is “Yes, of course”.
There’s a publication called Hansard which records such things. You should try googling it.
Will be interesting to see how the Lib Dems vote tomorrow especially the ones who represent Brexit areas ? There can be no hiding behind abstentions.
I would hope that many more MP’s vote against the current Brexit bill, as effectively it is their last chance to get anything meaningful out of the government over their post-Brexit strategy for the nation. As pointed in another LDV article (https://www.libdemvoice.org/guy-verhofstadt-talks-brexit-and-beyond-53138.html ) “Europe does things the wrong way round”, which given the state of Brexit, clearly also refers to the UK!
So by refusing to grant the government permission to invoke article 50, they begin to force the government to do things in the right order, namely properly debate what a post-Brexit UK economy might look like and what the government is going to do to facilitate a favourable outcome. This isn’t rocket science, it is just good business practise (just ask any pharma CEO what they do when one of their key product lines heads towards patent expiry). As until the government can demonstrate they have a real handle on what a post-Brexit UK economy will look like, there is no point in doing anything about formally commencing Brexit.
Note the above is different to the governments proposed whitepaper (that may be published on Thursday) that is wholly concerned with the formal Brexit process, namely: how it intends to approach negotiations with the EU’s other 27 member states, policy positions on membership of the single market and customs union, and the kind of post-Brexit deal they hope to have with the EU.
Because there can be no hiding behind the excuse: “we were only doing what the people wanted…”
Tony Dawson – Actually I think the wording there is deliberate. One of the (better) criticisms of the idea of a referendum on the exit deal is that it would be a back door second LEAVE/REMAIN referendum. That wording closes down that charge, there is no back door. The proposal is an explicit LEAVE/REMAIN second referendum.
What you think about that is another matter.
Personally I still remain concerned that this will lead straight to referendum 3, 4 and so on.
How can you sit on the fence on this important issue ? Mr Mulholland & Lamb have already refused to follow the Party line and said they will abstain. When are they going to have the whip withdrawn ?
Mark Seaman: At some point, a choice will be made between accepting a deal negotiated with the EU, or not doing so. Theresa May says it will be Parliament who make that choice. It could equally be done by referendum or indeed General election.
May says that “not doing so” will mean Leaving with nil agreement. Now that really does deserve to be described, borrowing your words, as making it “in the EU’s interest to offer the UK the most ludicrously bad deal”. Leaving with no trading agreements with any other nation would actually, I am not exaggerating, risk mass starvation in Britain. If that were the only other option, then the EU would have us over a barrel, and would inevitably be tempted to take advantage.
So, May has simply got it all wrong. May, and Messrs Davis, Johnson and Fox, will simply have to embrace Remain as a fallback option. If they don’t, we will have chucked away all our cards, and left ourselves wide open to an awful ultimatum from the EU side.
The far more sensible choice – whether it is made by referendum or by Parliament – is between accepting a deal, or agreeing for the immediate future to Remain. To “Remain” in such circumstances would leave all our options open. That would include the option which Leavers would advocate, namely to trigger A50 a second time, and tell the EU side that if they didn’t improve their offer this time, they could look forward to perpetual grief and uncertainty!
I have checked the comments of Norman Lamb and Greg Mulholland on this issue. I was sorry to learn from local press reports they intend to abstain.
Given we are a small party of nine members who struggle to be taken seriously, I am deeply disappointed they don’t see their duty to back the Party Leader – even more so for Norman Lamb as runner up in the leadership election.
The consequences of their abstention will be immensely damaging and the party will get nowhere if they fail to exercise collective responsibility on an agreed position.
Well, , both of them support the referendum policy. And they cannot be accused of populism since Leeds NW voted strongly Remain.. we are still going to be the only party on the EU side of the divide and I must admit I have had some misgivings over voting against article 50 in the final vote…
@David Allen
Over the years I have watched and enjoyed your comments immensely on LDV, you have always in the past been well reasoned and articulate.
I have to ask you though, are you seriously suggesting that if we left the EU, with no trade agreement in place, there will be mass starvation in Britain?
“Leaving with no trading agreements with any other nation would actually, I am not exaggerating, risk mass starvation in Britain”
I heard some spurious claims during the referendum campaign, but that one is way out there.
” That would include the option which Leavers would advocate, namely to trigger A50 a second time, and tell the EU side that if they didn’t improve their offer this time, they could look forward to perpetual grief and uncertainty!”
No I don’t think leavers would advocate that at all, we made our choice on June 23rd to leave the EU, that’s what the majority voted then and it is what the majority supports now. Leavers and even, I dare say, a majority of remainers will not accept this brexit being fudged by hardcore remainers and making us all repeat the process over and over again until people get fed up with voting and remainers win the day. After all that seems to be the tactic in every country who has any vote on the EU, keep repeating the vote until enough people get sick of voting that pro EU stance comes out on top.
The Leavers’ obsession with the EU deliberately giving the UK a bad deal in order to influence a subsequent British referendum is so wide of the mark. The problem isn’t the EU negotiators – it is that any deal will require unanimity from all other EU states, including several where a referendum is likely to be triggered. Why should say the Dutch people get a referendum on the final Brexit deal, but not the British?
The Leavers’ obsession with the EU deliberately giving the UK a bad deal in order to influence a subsequent British referendum is so wide of the mark.
Agree, the Leavers’ obession has also blinded them to the deal May wants, namely the worst deal, namely: Leave the EU (political union), leave the EEA (“single market”), trade under WTO capped tariffs… What is subject to debate is whether we regain complete control over the waters round our coastline (up to the 200 mile limit defined by international law), somehow I expect May et al in their haste will once again sacrifice the fishing industry…