#Brexit: ‘What is a ‘meaningful’ vote?'

The House of Lords introduced two clauses to the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill, the House of Commons library have recently published an analysis on what these clauses on the rights of EU/EEA nationals and holding a ‘meaningful vote’ at the end of the negotiation period will mean.

Similar amendments had previously been voted down in the Commons, who now have the option of agreeing or disagreeing with each Lords amendment, or amending or proposing alternatives to it, when the bill returns to the House of Commons on 13 March.

EU/EEA citizens in the UK

The Lords’ amendment would guarantee the residence rights of EU and EEA citizens presently in the UK within three months of the triggering of Article 50. In the debate peers described this as a moral obligation to reassure and protect the millions of EU/EEA citizens and their family members who came to Britain legally believing they could build careers and lives here. Many of those who opposed the amendment denounced talk of ‘bargaining chips’, and argued that the best way to protect both EU/EEA citizens in the UK and British nationals elsewhere in Europe was not to delay passage of the Bill and to allow negotiations to commence with this issue first on the agenda.

What was said during the referendum campaign?

Both the Vote Leave and Leave.EU campaigns claimed the status of EU/EEA citizens lawfully resident in the UK would be unaffected as a result of Brexit.

In the months since the referendum ministers have reiterated that the Government wants to protect EU/EEA citizens’ status. In her Lancaster House speech of 17 January 2017 Theresa May blamed other European leaders, for the UK’s reticence on this issue.

What is the ‘meaningful vote’ debate about?

The report says that now that Parliament has agreed in principle to the government triggering Brexit, and the government has also agreed that there should be a vote on a proposed withdrawal agreement before it is signed, the debate boils down to three main questions:

Should the Government’s commitment to a vote be enshrined in legislation?

What are the implications of Parliament voting against a withdrawal agreement?

Should Parliament also have a vote if the Government decided to leave the EU without a withdrawal agreement?

These raise a wide range of issues, including parliamentary sovereignty, the negotiation of treaties and compliance with the referendum result.

Revocability is key

Underlying the whole debate is the unanswered question of whether a withdrawal notification can be suspended or revoked. No court has ruled on this and though Donald Tusk, President of the European Council has already indicated that the decision would be revocable – however this assurance may be a political rather than a legal one.

What if the European Parliament rejects the withdrawal agreement?

The European Parliament (EP) will not be involved in the withdrawal negotiations themselves, but under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) its consent is needed before the Council can conclude a withdrawal agreement. The EP would like greater involvement and says it might reject the final withdrawal agreement if EU leaders do not agree to this.

If the EP rejects the agreement, and if there is no possibility of continuing negotiations, the UK might have to leave without a withdrawal agreement.

Should Parliament have to approve leaving the EU without an agreement?

The government suggests this would not be a ‘meaningful vote’. But the Lords’ new clause specifies that Parliament must approve a decision by the prime minister to leave the EU without an agreement, because of the implication on rights.

Full report

Share this article: