Labour grandee accuses party of ‘guerrilla’ tactics over Brexit Bill
The Bill that delivers the referendum result is far from perfect, but it was the only one in front of us
A LABOUR grandee has accused his colleagues and Tory rebels of engaging in “guerrilla warfare” for attempting to block the Brexit Bill.
Frank Field is proposing a new bill to help the Government get on with leaving the EU. He said that MPS who tabled amendments to change the legislation were betraying their constituents.
Writing in The Daily Telegraph, the former minister said Labour was “in turmoil” over the EU after seven MPS defied Jeremy Corbyn’s demand to block the Brexit Bill on Monday night, including veteran left-winger Dennis Skinner who was branded a “scab” by Mr Corbyn’s supporters. After the narrow win Theresa May is facing a rebellion, as MPS, including her own, attempt to tie her hands by demanding a series of votes on the final Brexit deal and a fixed timetable for transition.
Swathes of Tories supported the Prime Minister in a crunch vote on the EU Withdrawal Bill but only on the basis that significant changes will be made at a later stage. They rushed to table amendments demanding ministerial powers be watered down and MPS be given the right to veto a final Brexit deal.
Labour members added to the 157 suggested changes with a demand to stay in the single market and customs union for a fixed term after March 2019, and a call for more time to debate. One senior Labour remainer said a number of the measures would win cross-party support, adding that the Tory demand for a final vote could allow the House of Commons to overturn Brexit and force a second referendum.
While a Conservative Remain supporter added: “There is no way the party is going to be railroaded on this, we all want to get on with it, but it has to be right.”
Both sides have vowed to join forces to block aspects of the Bill they are unhappy with.
Mr Field writes: “The Bill is huge, and therefore gives a massive opportunity to those who say they accept the referendum decision but whose aim is to mess it up big time.
“The bill that I propose will allow the Government to get on with the business of negotiating properly and stymie the guerrilla warfare campaign against implementing the wish of the British people to leave Europe.”
The raft of changes proposed by Tories including former ministers Kenneth Clarke, Dominic Grieve, Nicky Morgan and Anna Soubry serves notice on Mrs May that she faces a rough ride in the remaining stages of the Bill’s passage through Parliament in October.
One of the most potentially damaging amendments, tabled by Dominic Grieve, calls for MPS to be given the power to sign off the final Brexit deal.
It has the support of another eight Tories MPS and if passed could allow politicians to vote down the agreement, which Labour sources believe could lead to a motion of no confidence and a second EU referendum or even another election.
‘The Bill is huge, so gives a massive opportunity to those whose aim is to mess up the referendum decision’
In the early hours of Tuesday morning the House of Commons voted to implement the referendum result. The referendum was to stay in, or to leave the EU. A majority of the country voted to leave.
Against the wishes of my party – Labour – I voted for the Bill we had before us, which was to implement the referendum result. I did so because I have long believed that we should leave the EU. I did so because the majority of my constituents voted in the referendum to leave the EU. I did so also because a majority of the country voted to leave the EU.
Labour tried to make the Bill about the so-called Henry VIII clauses. It isn’t. That said, there is a real issue here of a possible power grab by the Government. All of our natural sentiments are right in being suspicious as to what the Government is up to. But this was not a good enough reason to be voting against the entire Bill. The whole House will come back to discuss the Bill in detail. It is at this stage that the Henry VIII clauses should be dealt with. Either they should be struck out or they should be modified. I favour the latter.
I do so because the last four decades of EU membership have led to a volume of legislation and regulation which would fill the House of Commons chamber to overflowing. The idea that each Member of Parliament could conduct detailed scrutiny of each sheet of this legislation is absurd. We will need some new method as MPS in dealing with all of this EU legislation which was rightly incorporated into our law in the Bill. I shall be very active at the Bill’s next stage.
In the long years of campaigning for leaving the EU I had assumed, as did most others, that there would be a short Bill implementing a referendum result. I will be introducing that short Bill as the House of Commons gets down to the detailed work called the committee stage. My amendments grouped together give us a new short Brexit Bill.
Clause 1 will affirm the date we leave. Clause 2 will incorporate all the laws and regulations that we are currently governed by from Europe. Clause 3 will set up the mechanism by which we review over time which laws and regulations we wish to keep, which ones we wish to amend and which ones we wish to scrap. Clause 4 will ensure that we can negotiate our new position with the EU in a manner which is not timed by this arbitrary cut-off date of March 2019.
Labour is in turmoil over the EU. The vast majority of Labour MPS voted to trigger Article 50 and they did so, not because they believed in leaving Europe (the vast majority don’t), but because they felt compelled to do so given the referendum result in their seat. Many of my Labour colleagues will continue honestly to respect their constituents’ views as the committee stage of the Bill goes through the House. But the Bill is huge, and therefore gives a massive opportunity to those who say they accept the referendum decision but whose aim is to mess it up big time.
Hence my short Bill which achieves the aim of the EU (Withdrawal) Bill but will deny the wreckers the chance of going about their work while claiming they are trying to improve things, as we plod our way through a whole number of clauses. The bill that I propose will allow the Government to get on with the business of negotiating properly and stymie the guerrilla warfare campaign against implementing the wish of the British people to leave Europe.
My constituency voted almost as did the country: 52-48 per cent. A close call. That is why I have drafted Clause 4– the seeking of a safe harbour. Many of my constituents are apprehensive about Brexit. Should or should we not remain in the single market and the customs union, and if so for how long? If not that option, what other options remain open to us?
Clause 4 of my Bill gives us the opportunity to have a full debate on these issues and properly meets the concerns of the minority of my constituents and of the country’s voters about leaving the EU. But that is for the future. By contrast the vote in the early hours of Tuesday morning was to implement the referendum result. Now we have to get down to the actually work of building a cornerstone for a successful Brexit.
Frank Field is MP for Birkenhead