A cross-party committee of MPs, including arch-Brexiter Michael Gove, is rightly insisting that parliament is involved at the beginning, middle and end of the Brexit process. The central thrust of its proposals is that parliament and the public must be fully involved in Britain’s most important peacetime negotiations.
The House of Commons Exiting the EU Committee’s report ought to carry weight with Theresa May – not only because of its good sense but also because it is backed by a broad spectrum of political opinion. Prominent Tory Leave campaigners such as Gove and Dominic Raab have signed up to the report; so have Remain campaigners as well as MPs from six other parties, including politicians from Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.
The committee wants the government to produce a White Paper setting out its Brexit plan no later than mid-February. Given that Theresa May is determined to trigger Article 50 by end-March, publishing a plan any later than this would mean parliament and the people wouldn’t have time to debate it properly before the she kicks off the Brexit process.
So far, the government has merely said it won’t spell out what it is trying to achieve in January – though the premier will give what is being billed as a big speech on Brexit next Tuesday. It is vital to pin her down to a mid-February deadline for producing a proper plan.
The government has also promised to hold some debates before triggering Article 50. But it hasn’t told MPs when these debates will take place, meaning they could have little time to prepare for them. The committee is right to ask May for a timetable for these debates.
The MPs are also calling for a sufficiently detailed plan, in the form of a White Paper – something the Brexit secretary David Davis urged before he joined the government. And they want the government to publish its economic assessments of different options for trade with the EU post-Brexit, so long as this doesn’t compromise its negotiating hand.
Once May triggers Article 50, the MPs want her to keep our parliament fully informed about the progress of the negotiations – at least as well informed as the European Parliament. It wants access to key documents sufficiently soon for its views to be taken into account.
Although the committee accepts that no part of the UK has a veto over the ultimate deal, it is also calling on the prime minister to take into account the views of the UK’s devolved governments and England’s regions. This is crucial given that Scottish nationalists might use a botched Brexit as an excuse to break up the UK; and that the restoration of a hard border in Ireland could damage the fragile peace process in Northern Ireland.
Ticking time-clock
Finally, the MPs are insisting that parliament has sufficient time to consider and vote on any final Brexit deal. So far May has vacillated on this, refusing to give such a commitment when she appeared in front of a parliamentary committee before Christmas.
If she reaches a deal with the EU, MPs already have the power to veto it. But this is not good enough – not least because the relevant treaty may come to parliament so late in the day that MPs have no choice but to wave it through even if it is extremely bad. After all, once Article 50 is triggered, a two-year time clock starts ticking – and if there’s no agreement, we could fall off a cliff.
May’s instinct is to play her cards close to her chest, discussing key matters with a small coterie of advisers. She initially didn’t want to produce a plan before triggering Article 50. It was only after MPs pressed her that she gave ground.
The premier is also still insisting that she and she alone has the right to invoke Article 50. Hence, the need to launch a high court action to force her to put legislation before parliament. After May lost that case, she appealed to the Supreme Court. A judgment is expected next week.
Want more InFacts?
Click here to get the newsletter
The early skirmishes over what Brexit means would have been less prickly if the prime minister had accepted up front that the key choices need to be aired publicly, not decided behind closed doors. What happens on Brexit will affect all our lives. Our representatives must therefore be kept fully in the loop throughout the process. Transparency and parliamentary scrutiny are vital components of a healthy democracy.
May should understand this and accept the Brexit committee’s proposals without further quibbling.
InFacts is supporting a grassroots campaign, #WhatsThePlan, calling for the government to produce a detailed plan quickly. You can sign the petition here.
So why leave ? Don’t we have enough to worry about in the world today ? Trump, Russia, Syria, IS, China not forgetting that old perennial – North Korea.
Don’t bother with article 50, postpone Brexit for a decade. Who knows, by then, all the EU may want to leave.
“A cross-party committee of MPs… is rightly insisting that parliament is involved at the beginning, middle and end of the Brexit process.”
This surely puts the cart before the horse.
Parliament’s role should, more correctly, begin with weighing-up the public’s response to the recent opinion-poll & the general conduct of both ‘campaigns’ during the advisory exercise.
We are a Parliamentary Democracy or we are not – there is no half-way house.
What a totally absurd position the UK government is in. It has decided to implement Brexit without having the slightest idea of what the consequences will be for the country. What sort of government is this? And is it not significative that the present government is only supported by 36.9% of the electorate which is also approximately the same percentage of the electorate who voted for Brexit? So just how democratic is the UK?
A really good report on an important development. Well done. I take issue with the slant you give the Scottish dimension however. Speaking as an English person living in Scotland, we do not see the Scottish Government trying to use Brexit as a means to hold InfyRef2. Quite the opposite for the simple reason that Nicola Sturgeon does not believe it can be won yet. Her Government has at least published a plan which aims to meet the needs of the 62% who voted, and according to latest YouGov poll, continue to believe that the UK is stronger and more prosperous in the EU. Would it be helpful for you to speak to us at European Movement in Scotland to get a more nuanced understanding of how Brexit is playing out in this part of the UK? We would be delighted to work with you on that. Regards and thank you for your excellent briefings. Vanessa Glynn, Chair, European Movement in Scotland
Very encouraging development.
May should soon stop digging. Her three brexiteers are not going to produce a way forward which will both provide a better future for the UK than remaining in the EU and be acceptable to our 27 partners.
She should remember her candid advice to the Goldman Sachs bankers, just before the vote, that we should not try to return to the past” but lead in Europe”.
Given the present state of Europe and the world – not to mention our record balance of payments deficit and mortifying productivity – she should show herself a smart stateswoman and propose an EU conference on substantial EU reform, the UK’s long held objective. Never has the time been more propitious. The need for reform is recognised across the membership and by the Commission.
The German parliament has agreed legislation excluding all immigrants, including those from within the EU, from welfare benefits for 4 years. Francois Fillon, most likely next president of France, what a quota system for immigrants.
On a practical note, having signed in support of the Green paper etc I closed the newsletter to check the email addresses of five friends but on re-opening found the opportunity to send these to you had disappeared. I hope this weakness can be remedied. We need to maximize support – and get more subscribers!
The whole farce is still more about preventing the Tory Party from splitting asunder than it is about what is best for the nation. If May had any positive ideas about Britain’s future she would state in no uncertain terms that the referendum was a farce and the narrow win was gained by fraud. She should admit it is advisory and state clearly that we remain alongside our European friends and neighbours.