MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Theresa May suffered major defeats on Brexit in the House of Lords
EU Withdrawal Bill amendment, passed by 348 votes to 225, forces government to report to Parliament by Oct. 31 on steps regarding the customs union. 
May also suffered a costly rebellion from 24 Conservative MPs who broke party ranks and voted to support the amendment. 
They included former cabinet ministers Lord Heseltine, Lord Willetts and Lord Patten, who are staunchly pro-EU. 
“Mrs. May must now listen to the growing chorus of voices who are urging her to drop her red line on a customs union and rethink her approach,” Keir Starmer said Prime Minister Theresa May suffered two major defeats on Wednesday after a majority of the upper House of Parliament adopted an amendment supporting continued membership in the EU customs union after Brexit. The amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill, which passed by 348 votes to 225, forces the government to report to Parliament by Oct. 31 on what steps it has taken to remain in the customs union.
May also suffered a costly rebellion from 24 Conservative MPs who broke party ranks and voted to support the amendment. They included former cabinet ministers Lord Heseltine, Lord Willetts and Lord Patten, who are staunchly pro-EU.
“The passing of this cross-party amendment is an important step forward. Theresa May must now listen to the growing chorus of voices who are urging her to drop her red line on a customs union and rethink her approach,” Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, told the Guardian news site.
“Looking further afield is well worth doing, but it will be very hard not to see a fall in overall exports if our trade with the EU is made more complicated, and it will be much more complicated if we leave the customs union. We must try to limit the damage of our nearest, because closest, market,” Starmer added.
May had previously said that the UK will not remain in the customs union once Brexit takes effect. The bill will now pass back to the House of Commons, where there is growing support for efforts to force May to reverse her position on the customs union.
“We are disappointed that parliament has voted for this amendment. The fundamental purpose of this bill is to prepare our statute book for exit day. It is not about the terms of our exit. This amendment does not commit the UK to remaining in a customs union with the EU. It requires us to make a statement in parliament explaining the steps we’ve taken,” a spokesperson from the Department for Exiting the European Union told the Guardian.
A separate amendment to guarantee that existing protections in areas including employment and consumer standards cannot be changed except through primary legislation also passed.
The EU withdrawal bill is aimed at transferring EU law into UK law ahead of Brexit. It also grants the government sweeping powers to change it.
UK and EU officials also met this week to discuss the UK’s future trading relationship with the EU. The trade talks began a little more than a year after May triggered Article 50, the clause that begins the process of exiting the EU.
Top Comments
Disclaimer & comment rules-
-
-
Read all commentsThe question is why is this piece appearing in Mercopenguin, a British government propaganda organ supposedly devoted to America, South America and the “South Atlantic”?
Apr 20th, 2018 - 02:48 am +1Beginning of the end for the Lords gravy train? ”Playing with fire…
Apr 19th, 2018 - 10:14 am -1As of this moment, there is an online petition on the UK Parliament website demanding a referendum on abolition of the House of Lords. The petition is open for signature for another three months. So far, nearly 39,000 people have signed it. It is an interesting petition because, if one opens the page and simply watches, one can watch the number of signatories increasing by leaps and bounds. It seems that ordinary people do not appreciate noting that “unelected and unaccountable individuals hold a disproportionate amount of influence and power which can be used to frustrate the elected representatives of the people”.
Apr 19th, 2018 - 05:37 pm -1It's a trifle unfortunate because the House of Lords as previously constituted, with hereditary peers, performed a very useful function. It reviewed proposed legislation, considered ramifications and made suggestions. The turning point came when the House was “reorganised” with an overwhelming number of appointed political “life peers”. Presumably because our monarch let it be known that she was not prepared to countenance political “proper” peerages. Rather than abolish the House, I would prefer to see the political “life peers” abolished. In truth, they are attempting to become the “power” in Parliament and they must be stopped. Let it be said that the worst thing that the United Kingdom could do would be to institute an elected second chamber. As can be seen, WE still hold the upper hand BECAUSE the peers are unelected. If they become elected they will assume that the people support their power aspirations. It is clear that they care nothing for the expressed wishes of the people. The hubris of thinking that they know best!
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!