header-logo header-logo

08 January 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7869 / Categories: Features , Brexit
printer mail-detail

The EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill (No 2)

13679
With a new Government sworn in, Michael Zander provides an update on what has changed from the No 1 Bill
  • With a Government overall majority of 80, the opposition decided not to put their amendments to the vote. However, there is every prospect that the Government will suffer defeats in the Lords next week.

The House of Lords Constitution Committee said of Boris Johnson’s first European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill, ‘The Bill is of the highest constitutional significance’. (See169 NLJ 7865, p10). The Commons gave the Bill its Second Reading on 20 October by 329 to 299, but it then rejected, by 322 to 308, the Government’s very tight programme motion—which led to the Bill being pulled, Parliament being dissolved and the December General Election.

Boris Johnson’s second EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill was introduced on 19 December and received its Secord Reading the next day – this time by 358 to 234. The basically unchanged programme motion allows only two days, 7 and 8 January, for the Commons Committee (of the whole House) stage; one day, 9

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll