Thread by @GeorgePeretzQC

One point worth making, because I think there could be some confusion about this (the point is implicit in Jon’s article but not spelt out). It’s about what sort of vote there will be.

https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1333393706595061763

As Jon points out, there is no requirement for an “meaningful vote” (on the principle of the deal). That requirement only arose in the last Parliament because that Parliament insisted on one in relation to the Withdrawal Agreement (and wrote it into the EU Withdrawal Act).

The current Parliament has placed no such requirement on the current government. Funny, that.

The government could *offer* an indicative vote (eg a vote on a motion praising the govt’s achievement of a deal) but that’s politics, not law. (Eg it might do so to embarrass Labour or because its own MPs wanted one.)

So what vote will there be? The critical point is that whatever deal there is will be well nigh certain to require legislation: changes to domestic law which can only be done by Parliament.

That will require a Bill. A Bill that will have to be passed in the normal way in both Houses. But rushed through at huge speed (which can be done - see the Coronavirus Act 2020).

The key votes “on the deal” will therefore be the usual key votes on a Bill: Second and Third Reading.

If the Bill were to fail at either stage, the government couldn’t ratify the deal (because it wouldn’t be in a position to make the changes to UK law that the ratified deal would require): so the vote on the Bill is in effect a (or rather “the”) vote on the deal.

Note too that amending the Bill won’t be possible in any way that would change the deal. And any amendment that blocked a change to UK law required by the deal would in effect kill the deal (previous tweet).

You could add amendments calling on or requiring the govt to go off and negotiate further things on top of what has been agreed: they wouldn’t affect ratification. (They wouldn’t be passed by the HoC either, but that’s another matter.)

The Bill is anyway likely to be a short one, essentially annexing the deal and giving government power to modify the law as necessary to ratify it.

So the critical question for Labour - on each of 2nd and 3rd reading - will be “do you vote for the Bill or abstain or vote against?”

Footnote: Jon’s reference to the HoC passing a motion against ratification is a reference to CRAG: the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act. See a great summary of what that Act requires by @hhesterm here. constitution-unit.com/2019/03/14/par…

But TLDR

Key point to hold onto: CRAG doesn’t matter here (hence left to a footnote) because the deal will require an Act of Parliament anyway.