Ejerforeningen Æblehaven

Withdrawal Agreement Bill Debate

Peers have endorsed Boris Johnson`s Brexit law, but not before making changes to the legislation. If, as Hon says, all these rules and agreements are indeed pushed by industry, what can be gained by getting rid of the EU? The Conservatives say the government is taking back control, but they think the industry is fuelling all of that regulation. If I look at section 37 of the Act, which was the subject of comments and amendments attempted when it was passed, it is clear that the issues related to the resettlement of vulnerable children are the most in the minds of many Members of this House. But it is essential that we recognize the strength of the government and The Uk`s position in ensuring the safety and well-being of refugee children in practice. Border policy is and has always been a national competence, not a competence of the European Union. It is quite right that the opportunity to debate these issues in depth will arise when an immigration law is introduced in Parliament. But those of us who are closer to the severe end of refugee resettlement will welcome the rejection of the amendments to Term 37, and I will briefly explain why. For this government, democratic control is apparently only an inconvenience, so MPs must be denied a say in our key post-Brexit trade relations. So let`s be very clear: this is an executive takeover.

Faced with all the rhetoric about the withdrawal of control, this withdrawal agreement ironically gives MEPs less say in our trade with the EU than MEPs in Brussels, who will have a guaranteed vote on trade agreements and the vision of the pre-negotiating mandate. I`ll take Hon`s point. We had quite a debate on sovereignty, during which my Hon. Friend Thangam Debbonaire made some very intelligent observations, but hon. Gentleman must acknowledge my underlying point: the decision of the general election is not a bulldoze mandate for all the peoples of the United Kingdom by a given version of Brexit at all costs, and the coming months must be approached with sensitivity and caution if we are to stay together. Trade agreements may not always be news that makes headlines, but they are far from being an arid subject on tariffs and taxes. They are now having a profound impact on our efforts to address the climate crisis, as well as on our food standards, workers` rights and vital neatonic public services. Our future relations with the EU should be able to be examined and approved by this Parliament. We should be able to avoid setting a dangerous precedent that denies Members not only control this agreement, but also future post-Brexit trade agreements, such as the one to be concluded with the United States. It is significant that, as we heard yesterday, the Prime Minister`s old EU withdrawal agreement contained urgent provisions for parliamentary oversight.