PEERS were warned against disrespecting the EU referendum result, as they debated the Government’s Brexit Bill late into the night.
Theresa May attended the Lords for the opening statements of the debate and used her right as a Privy Counsellor to sit on the steps of the Queen’s throne at the top of the chamber.
It’s highly unusual for the Prime Minister to be quite so close to the Lords when they’re debating. The last premier to sit there was John Major in 1990, and before that it was Clement Attlee in 1947.
If it was intended to intimidate, it likely worked. There seems to be little chance of the Lords blocking the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill that will give May the right to trigger Article 50, the formal process for leaving the EU.
Some Eurosceptic MPs have threatened to abolish the Lords if the House frustrates Brexit.
Tory Lords leader Baroness Evans said the Government had a “strong mandate” from the people to trigger Article 50.
She warned: “This Bill is not the place to try to shape the terms of our exit, restrict the Government’s hand before in enters into complex negotiations or attempt to re-run the referendum.”
Unlike the Commons, the Government does not have a majority in the Lords. But, as in the lower chamber, Labour will not stand in the way of the Bill being passed.
Labour’s leader in the Lords, Baroness Smith, said: “We will not block, wreck or sabotage the legis- lation before us. But I have also said neither shall we provide the Government with a blank cheque.
“We will seek improvements, we’ll encourage ministers to make reasonable changes and possibly, just possibly, we may ask our colleagues in the Commons to reconsider on specific issues.
“That is not delaying the process, it is part of the process.”
Former Tory chancellor Lord Lawson was jeered when he said opposing the Bill would be inappropriate: “In the unprecedented circumstances in which we find ourselves, I have to say that were the House to entertain any of the amendments, it would have embarked on an ill-advised, improper and fundamentally unconstitutional manoeuvre.”
LibDem peer Lord Newby said: “There is no significant body of opinion in this House which is seeking to oppose the passage of this Bill. There’s a world of difference between blocking the Bill and seeking to amend it.
“Brexit is the most important single issue which has faced the country for decades. For many of us, the approach being adopted by the Government is little short of disastrous.To sit on our hands in these circumstances is both unthinkable and unconscionable.”
Former secretary of state for Scotland Lord Forsyth said: “The Bill before us has been passed unamended and overwhelmingly by the elected House of Commons.
“The judgment of the Supreme Court required the Government to obtain parliamentary authority for the notification of the UK’s with- drawal from the EU under Article 50.
“That is all this Bill is about.
Nothing more, nothing less. It will achieve that policy objective. It is closely drawn, it is narrow in scope and it is our duty to pass it quickly and without opposition.”
Forsyth also attacked the SNP, telling peers: “Like the Liberals, it seems, the parties which are most enthusiastic about holding referendums are the ones which refuse to accept the results.”
Forsyth said the million who voted for Brexit in Scotland were an “inconvenient truth” to the party.
The SNP have no Lords, opting not to take seats on principle.
The Lords will continue to debate the Brexit Bill today.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel