BREXIT has taken two and a half years, but now the finish line is in sight. But could the anti-government majority in the House of Lords really block Brexit?
RELATED ARTICLES
On December 12, the UK had their say in the so-called Brexit election whereby the Conservative Party walked away with a landmark majority.
In total, Mr Johnson’s party gained 48 seats, winning a total of 365 seats out of 650.
By comparison, Labour had their worst result since the 1935 general election.
While this outcome means the Brexit deal has quickly and easily progressed through the House of Commons where the Conservatives retain a large majority, the process could be far from easy for the House of Lords.
The House of Commons underwent a political earthquake in December.
But the House of Lords did not change at all to reflect the external political changes.
This means despite the Government majority in the Commons, there is a decided anti-majority in the House of Lords, as it was before December 12.
Now the bill has passed through the Commons it will move to the house of Lords for further scrutiny next week.
The bill covers “divorce” payments to the EU, citizens’ rights, customs arrangements for Northern Ireland and the planned 11-month transition period.
Reformation to the House of Lords is expected at some point.
Currently, if an elected Lords was already in place, it is worth noting that the 15-year tenure plan would still have left the Upper House completely out of sync with the Lower House.
The House of Lords is made up of the following party members:
- Conservative: 244 members
- Labour: 181 members
- Liberal Democrat: 94 members
- Crossbench: 186 members
- Non-affiliated: 48 members
- Bishops: 26 members
- Democratic Unionist Party: four members
- Green Party: two members
- Conservative Independent: one member
- Independent Social Democrat: one member
- Independent Ulster Unionist: one member
- Labour Independent: one member
- Lord Speaker: one member
- Plaid Cymru: one member
Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal has been dealt a severe blow after the House of Lords admitted having “serious concerns” about the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.
In the report from the House of Lords European Union Committee, they stated fears the UK/EU Joint Committee lacks transparency or any potential “democratic oversight”.
Speaking about the report, Lord Kinnoull, Chair of the House of Lords EU Committee, said: “The revised EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill has significantly weaker arrangements for transparency and democratic oversight.
“We are concerned that so much of the detail of the Withdrawal Agreement is being left to the UK/EU Joint Committee, a body that will not be subject to any parliamentary oversight and that may not even publish details of the decisions it reaches.
“The lack of any provision in the Bill for the UK Parliament to scrutinise the future relationship negotiations is set in harsh relief compared to the role the European Parliament will play.
“MEPs will be able to undertake detailed and transparent scrutiny of future EU/UK negotiations while parliamentarians in Westminster will be reduced to passive observers.
“This lack of symmetry runs counter to the spirit and letter of ministerial undertakings given to parliament previously.”
Conservative peer Lord Howell of Guildford wrote in The House Magazine that the House of Lords was out of sync with the “new technological age”.
He wrote: “It is said that the collective memory these days in Whitehall is weak or non-existent.
“My plea to today’s would-be reformers is to glance back at accounts of this past period, which have all been documented in detail.
“At least it might help them from falling again into some of the traps we encountered back then.”
He added: “In fact it [Lords reform] should have been undertaken 10 or 15 years ago when the digital age was already shifting the world order.
“Had we done so we might have grasped a lot earlier, and long before Trump, that the old special relationship of the past 70 years with the USA needed reshaping.
“We might have seen sooner that much closer attention to Asia was essential, where most of the growth in consumer markets is going to be, in which we have to succeed to survive.
“And we might have grasped quicker that all kinds of new networks have grown across the planet, not necessarily between governments but between professions, interests, young people, business and trade in services and knowledge products in which Britain should be seeking the closest possible involvement – not least with the Commonwealth, the biggest network of all in which we are fortunate to be (although barely deserve to be) members.
“A straight discourtesy to the Queen was to exclude any mention of the Commonwealth, of which she is the head and to which she has devoted most of her reign, in either this Gracious Speech or the one before in October.
“This may sound a minor omission, but it tells us clearly one thing – that the strategists and mandarins deep in Whitehall have simply not yet grasped the nature of Britain’s modern exceptionalism, new world role or potentialities in a shifting international order. Roll on the review. “
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1226776/brexit-news-house-of-lords-brexit-bill-withdrawal-agreement-lords-block-brexit-latest
