Does Boris Johnson want to be less constrained by parliament or not?
There are contradictions in the approach to the #WithdrawalAgreement Bill up for debate today
Johnson's majority of 80 means he can drop some constraints in the original #WAB. But he's also added new ones. 1/5
There are contradictions in the approach to the #WithdrawalAgreement Bill up for debate today
Johnson's majority of 80 means he can drop some constraints in the original #WAB. But he's also added new ones. 1/5
As many have noted, eg. the excellent @woodstockjag below, prior requirements for parliamentary approval at the next stage of Brexit have been removed.
Gone are words requiring MPs to approve the negotiating objectives, or an extension to transition. 2/5
Gone are words requiring MPs to approve the negotiating objectives, or an extension to transition. 2/5
https://twitter.com/woodstockjag/status/1207674569366085637?s=19
Full details are set out nicely in the @instituteforgov explainer by @ThimontJack and colleagues below. 3/5
instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/wit…
instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/wit…
But what's odd is that, while government could have simply removed parliament's control over extending transition, it's instead added the much-hyped clause preventing any extension.
Which limits government, not parliament. 4/5
Which limits government, not parliament. 4/5
While the government could have maximised flexibility, it hasn't.
New clause 33 is a handy signalling device that Johnson means to stick to his election pledges. But if he changes his mind he'll need to return to parliament with a new bill.
He may come to regret that later. 5/5
New clause 33 is a handy signalling device that Johnson means to stick to his election pledges. But if he changes his mind he'll need to return to parliament with a new bill.
He may come to regret that later. 5/5
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
