Lords defeat Theresa May by removing Brexit exit date from legislation

Peers have dealt a fresh blow to Theresa May’s Brexit strategy by voting to remove the official exit date from her flagship EU legislation.

The government suffered two defeats on the EU (Withdrawal) Bill in the Lords - taking its tally to 12 losses - and it faced a further threat on Tuesday night as cross-party peers were due to push a vote to effectively keep Britain in the single market.

The government had initially proposed an amendment to legally fix the moment of departure at 11pm on 29 March 2019. This proposal faced intense criticism from the outset, with opponents inside and outside the Conservative Party labeling the move a desperate gimmick. Critics, including senior Conservative MPs and members of the Labour Party, argued that fixing the date in statute would restrict the government's negotiating flexibility and potentially increase the risk of the country leaving the bloc without a formal agreement.

The legislative tension reached a height during the initial scrutiny of the bill. Prominent Conservative backbenchers, some of whom had never previously rebelled against the party line, voiced concerns that the move could fetter the hands of ministers during delicate talks with Brussels. Despite initial insistence from Downing Street that the amendment remained a priority, other cabinet ministers later hinted at a potential retreat, suggesting that the government would listen to constructive suggestions during the parliamentary process.

Legislative and Political Context

The debate surrounding the exit date occurred amidst a broader backdrop of internal cabinet discord. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson publicly attacked the government's proposed customs partnership, describing the plan as crazy and arguing it would create a whole new web of bureaucracy. These comments prompted an intervention from other senior party figures, such as Bernard Jenkin, who predicted the Prime Minister would eventually be forced to abandon the customs proposal as unworkable.

The legislative process, which involves eight days of detailed scrutiny, has been further complicated by external skepticism. While the government sought to assure businesses that an implementation period could be secured, European Parliament officials have expressed concern over the progress of negotiations. Specifically, the European Parliament's Brexit co-ordinator, Guy Verhofstadt, challenged the government's proposals regarding the status of EU citizens currently in the UK. In correspondence, he highlighted concerns that the registration requirements proposed by the UK government could lead to a deterioration of the status of those individuals.

Further pressure on the administration has come from the corporate sector, with executives such as Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs publicly suggesting the necessity of a confirming vote on the final outcome of the negotiations. Such interventions have been met with hostility from Brexit supporters, who characterize the banking sector's concerns as a distraction from financial performance metrics.

What to Watch Next

• Legislative Progress: The EU (Withdrawal) Bill continues its path through Parliament. Further cross-party efforts are anticipated, including potential votes aimed at keeping the United Kingdom within the single market.
• Negotiation Milestones: Following the Lords' vote, the government must determine whether to attempt to reinstate the exit date or yield to the amendment, potentially affecting the timeline for moving into the next phase of talks with the EU.
• Internal Party Relations: The Prime Minister continues to navigate friction between cabinet members and backbenchers, with the government relying heavily on DUP votes to maintain a working majority during these critical votes.

As the debate persists, the broader international context also looms over the government's agenda. Senior political figures, including William Hague, have publicly cautioned against policy shifts that might erode trust with international partners, drawing parallels to debates concerning the Iran nuclear deal. For now, the administration faces the dual challenge of reconciling its domestic legislative agenda with the realities of its negotiating position in Brussels.