Should MPs reject each of the 15 House of Lords amendments to the Brexit bill today?
David Campbell Bannerman, MEP and board member of Leave Means Leave, says YES.
The job of the House of Lords is to amend and improve, not to wreck, sabotage, or unconstitutionally reverse the decision of the British people, nor to undermine the government’s entire policy position right in the midst of delicate and difficult negotiations that could us billions if got wrong.
On the specific amendments, the European Economic Area model does not suit the UK economy (which is far wider and more complex than Norway’s), and surrenders control of our market and borders.
Trying to wrest control of negotiations through a “meaningful vote” is unconstitutional and disgraceful behaviour by this unelected chamber.
The customs union vote means we cannot help our poor (who currently pay far higher prices, such as 60 per cent tariffs on Chinese shoes or 104 per cent on sugar), or the poor in developed nations (who are prevented from selling more into our market on fair terms).
This vote is a chance for elected MPs to take back control from the unelected Lords.
Alison McGovern, Labour MP for Wirral South and former shadow city minister, says NO.
The House of Lords defeated the government an embarrassing 15 times to amend the EU (Withdrawal) Bill – and each defeat was a defence of British jobs, rights, and parliamentary sovereignty.
Where Conservative MPs were happy to let government ministers sign away our future, the Lords voted that parliament should debate and vote on the final deal.
Where Jacob Rees-Mogg wants the UK to crash out on WTO terms, and lose yet more jobs, the Lords voted to keep us in the European Economic Area.
Where David Davis would rather a hard border in Ireland and a return to the instability of the past, the Lords voted to stay in the customs union and to keep our border open.
There is no good reason to reject the Lords’ amendments: they protect our country’s economy, our rights, and our borders. Crucially, they bring power back into parliament, rather than leave negotiations to the hapless Prime Minister and shambolic cabinet, who lost an election on precisely this plan.