Keir Starmer's stance on the Reform Act

[lucydogz]

In the news today, Keir Starmer says that Labour will hold up the Reform Act, which (I think) means that much EU legislation would be rubber stamped and passed into our legislation.
As you can probably gather, I'm happy to be corrected on this, but isn't this really bad.
Don't remainers want to keep EU legislation and this is a way of doing that?
Isn't the Act a good way of disposing of the small stuff so that negotiators can concentrate on the major issues?
Isn't it inappropriate for a party that voted for Article 50 to try and fuck up the brexit process this way (which it will do)?
They way I see it, Starmer is trying to build up a political reputation for himself. He knows that Corbyn and McDonnell's indifference to the Referendum is a blot on the Labour Party. He doesn't care that this will damage negotiations.
I'm aware that I might not be right and I'm sure others will disagree with me, but that's the feeling I have.

^would have no problem

I'm not so sure about that squishy.

Whether remoaner, remainer, dreamoaners or Anna Soubry this is last chance saloon for the bitter and twisted.

Strangely I don't think there is a majority for... Anything. Might sound strange to say but it isn't entirely binary.

Brexiteers probably make up the largest individual grouping but likely only 30% of the commons. Next would be the single marketeers and customs union types, but then you have the eea fanatics and other niches. And the noisy second referendum and outright remainers of course.

Hence around five or six individual groupings, none of whom agree with each other on anything.

Any compromise you can think of doesn't really result in an identifiable majority. Certainly not one you could hang your hat on as hard line brexiteers would probably vote against anything watered down etc.

This could of course mean the bill might pass unamended, though I don't find that likely.

Also Jeremy Corbyn wielding the whip is nothing less than amusing as he never obeyed it himself.

The Bill was published today and one labour mp was really very angry that the plebs got to see it before he did.

Hence Labour have been passionately opposing something that they haven't actually seen yet since the general election. They need to get their ducks in a row, and are probably relying on the summer recess to study it and come up with something.

I doubt any of this will be lost on the tories and I don't think anyone expected the second reading to be tomorrow / today.

If you are feeling there might be some shenanigans in the works then I broadly agree, I'm thinking that something somewhere has to be knobbled.

The remainer Tories might object on first reading, but I'd suggest few would go against the whip on the second.

The problem of letting Labour anywhere near legislation, is that they appear to ‘get off’ fiddling with the stuff, and see if more productive than spending that time encouraging a country to ‘make’ things.

The UK Tolleys Tax guide is 16,220 pages long, having DOUBLED in size from 1997 to 2011.

And laws, with over 3,000 during their time in office, I believe that was more new laws under 13-years of Labour, than cumulatively from every past government over the 20th century.

“Blair's 'frenzied law making' : a new offence for every day spent in office”

”The 3,000-plus offences have been driven on to the statute book by an administration that has faced repeated charges of meddling in the everyday lives of citizens, from restricting freedom of speech to planning to issue identity cards to all adults.”

Yes Thea,

The one thing the Bill has in its favour is Jeremy Corbyns naked ambition.

If voted down, which would mean all the workers rights and environmental protections gone, the government would almost certainly fall.

Which will sharpen the minds of the wetter tories.

I'm sure the moon howlers will tell you this is a tory plot to remove such protections. Or rather to turn the clock back to the early 1970s in many ways. Which if you believe that tories vote themselves out of power is credible.

Haven't read the whole thread, but I sincerely hope Starmer resists this bill in its current form. It appears to be profoundly illiberal, in the sense that is an outright bid by the executive to seize power from parliament.

The irony of this, coming from people who have been banging in about "parliamentary sovereignty" for the last 18 months ... bunch of hypocrites.

Btw, the notes to the bill also contains an outright threat to EU citizens. I thought I couldn't get any more disgusted with this government, but it turns out I was wrong.

"If voted down, which would mean all the workers rights and environmental protections gone, the government would almost certainly fall."

Why do you think that? If voted down, they'll have to go back and revise it until it is acceptable to the majority of MPs. Doesn't mean it will never be passed.

If you don't have any issues with this bill as drafted, suggest you read this.

publiclawforeveryone.com/2017/07/14/the-eu-withdrawal-bill-initial-thoughts/amp/

(A look at the constitutional and public law issues by an expert in the field).

Long but worthwhile and accessible for non-lawyers. I'm betting the Tory cheerleaders can't/won't bother to read and discuss something this detailed, but you are welcome to prove me wrong.

Mistigri

The bringing back here EU laws etc via this Repeal Bill was voted on in parliament with a large majority, yes or no?

The main point of this legislation is to get them on our statute books.

With 'the clock ticking' on Brexit, surely the responsible thing to do is comply with that first bill

Starmer with the Labour and SNP First Ministers are caling on the government to introduce a presumption that powers returning to the UK from Brussels should go automatically to the devolved nations instead of to Westminster - now outside the politicking of trying to bring the government down, surely that should be a Westminster debate for another time - rather than try to load those issues, into what should be as near as possible, a 'rubber stamp' of their laws into ours with minor amendments.

If you could bullet point that report I'm sure the Brexiteers would appreciate it, as there have been countless reports that America via TTIP (whose terms were never published) was going to take over the NHS because how profitable it is - which clearly wasn't worth the rain forest felled they were printed on.

mistigri can you tell me what the , the notes to the bill also contains an outright threat to EU citizens. is please?

mistigri - thanks for the link to that analysis. As you say, it is commendably clear.

I don't think that anyone - including the government! - claim that the bill is perfect. The key question for me is scrutiny: who will look at what the executive does with the powers that the bill confers? What is the role of Parliament in scrutinising how the bill operates (and is this feasible, given that the country has plenty of other business to continue as well as Brexit)?

thea if you seriously think that some random on a website is going to "bullet point" a serious document for people too lazy/ too uneducated to read it themselves you are off your rocker.

Why can't they just read it themselves?! Genuine question. It's technical but written clearly with a lay audience in mind. My teenagers would be able to cope with material at this level; are you suggesting that brexiters don't have the reading comprehension standard of a 14 year old?

lucy this is a verbatim quote from the explanatory notes to the bill; the emphasis is mine.

^... without a correction, the UK’s law would still include recognition of the EU citizens’ rights. The power to deal with deficiencies can therefore modify, limit or remove the rights which domestic law presently grants to EU nationals"

""are you suggesting that brexiters don't have the reading comprehension standard of a 14 year old"

Nope, just me, I'm thick, so you are telling the board that moves by the Labour etc to automatically devolve powers from the EU to the likes of Scotland, when the SNP would have gladly sold their soul to have the bureaucrats in Brussels rule over them with the same 'powers' Westminster will be getting back - is not some concerted action from the recent delegation to Brussels, to bring the government down???

I'm not telling anyone anything of the sort, thea. Could you please point to any post I have made about Labour devolving powers to the SNP? And if you can't, then a correction would be in order.

I have made no party political comments on this thread and am not a Labour supporter. If I expect Starmer not to support this bill, it is because he is a lawyer not because he is a Labour MP.

I'm not a lawyer, so I defer to those with legal expertise (especially those with knowledge of constitutional law, as in the link I posted); the vast majority of serious legal commenters see major issues with this bill, and Labour and the other parties should not support it without some pretty major amendments.

As far as I can see, which is admittedly not very far, it's extremely convenient for the gov't to play the running out of time card therefore any opposition to their plans is childish and irresponsibly uncooperative and use it as a cover for massive, undemocratic changes to all sorts of things.

This is ironic, given the utter irresponsibility of gambling with the EU referendum, especially when there seems to have been zero contingency plans for a vote to leave.

That link is interesting Misti. The opening comments on whether the Act is required at all gives the most food for thought. If the vote to trigger Art 50 is indeed sufficient to allow the Government to conduct the full negotiation to withdraw thus rendering the ECA superseded and irrelevant then the Repeal Bill could be viewed as limiting the unfettered powers of the Executive voluntarily to give more Parliamentary scrutiny. In that context, Keir's posturing looks at best pointless and at worst in danger of frustrating the safeguards the Bill seeks to create imho.

Plenty of wiggle room for Remain minded Tories to make a noise before falling neatly into line and so politically helpful for the Government. OTOH very little in the way of tangible political wins for the PLP to go for again imho.

Mistigri

Re your ” I'm not telling anyone anything of the sort, thea. Could you please point to any post I have made about Labour devolving powers to the SNP? And if you can't, then a correction would be in order.”

I was asking your opinion as I couldn’t believe that you were being that naïve in ignoring an obvious Labour political move., not quoting you.

Clearly any faith you had in any Starmer’s legal eagle impartiality, is misplaced, as I already read that he was being a tricksy b’stard in the Guardian, so knew the answer to my own question – does that make me similar?

Brexit: Labour threatens to defeat Theresa May over 'great repeal bill'”

“Starmer demanded that the government spell out how rights being brought into UK law will be enforced. And after consulting with Welsh first minister Carwyn Jones and Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale, he called on the government to introduce a presumption that powers returning to the UK from Brussels should go automatically to the devolved nations instead of to Westminster.”

“Challenged over whether Labour was seeking to block Brexit, Starmer said: “nobody is seeking to frustrate the process; we are determined to ensure that the right approach is taken; and this is all about protecting the rights of citizens in Britain.” Yeah right

"This is ironic, given the utter irresponsibility of gambling with the EU referendum, especially when there seems to have been zero contingency plans for a vote to leave."

Surely that's how Referendums roll in the UK?

Scotland wouldn't have had a currency, a bond market, an interest rate curve or much else soon after their referendum result, at least the UK had the basic MEANS to leave if the vote went against the government position.

Why would we ask to remove EU citizens rights?

We could, just as we could nuke the North pole for no apparent reason.

Isn't going to happen, just hysterical nonsense.

"Why would we ask to remove EU citizens rights?"

Have you read DD & TM's first effort on this?

Rhetorical question, obviously, if you had, you wouldn't have made such a stupid statement.

There was no plan for a vote to leave because I presume it was assumed the vote would go the other way.

The bill was published yesterday cardinal.

It is the first version and even labour haven't seen it before as we know from a Welsh Labour MPs outraged reaction to the plebs seeing it an hour before him...

I'm talking about this document Spin, which should have been obvious to anyone...

Why would we ask to remove EU citizens rights?"

Person who spent the referendum insisting that EU citizens had nothing to worry about thinks is just fine that the govt uses the repeal bill to openly threaten to remove rights from EU citizens.