WEBVTT - May Loses Brexit Challenge in Parliament (Audio)

0:00:00.040 --> 0:00:02.520
<v Speaker 1>British Prime Minister Theresa May has set a date of

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:05.200
<v Speaker 1>March thirty one for beginning of country's withdrawal from the

0:00:05.240 --> 0:00:08.959
<v Speaker 1>European Union. But our government suffered its first legislative defeat

0:00:09.000 --> 0:00:11.480
<v Speaker 1>on the bill authorizing the Prime Minister to begin the

0:00:11.480 --> 0:00:14.080
<v Speaker 1>Brexit process when the House of Lords voted to add

0:00:14.080 --> 0:00:17.239
<v Speaker 1>an amendment to the bill over May's objection. The amendment

0:00:17.239 --> 0:00:19.479
<v Speaker 1>would protect the right of EU nationals to stay in

0:00:19.520 --> 0:00:22.720
<v Speaker 1>Britain even after Britain leaves the EU. It will now

0:00:22.760 --> 0:00:24.520
<v Speaker 1>be sent to the House of Commons, which is set

0:00:24.560 --> 0:00:26.880
<v Speaker 1>to debate the Brexit Bill on March thirteenth and fourteen,

0:00:27.320 --> 0:00:29.800
<v Speaker 1>but May is sticking to a timetable even as the

0:00:29.840 --> 0:00:32.600
<v Speaker 1>House of Lords may be planning to consider other amendments.

0:00:32.960 --> 0:00:35.839
<v Speaker 1>Here to talk with us about these parliamentary maneuverings over Brexit,

0:00:35.880 --> 0:00:39.040
<v Speaker 1>our Professor Steve Peers of the University of Essex Law

0:00:39.080 --> 0:00:43.199
<v Speaker 1>School and Professor Catherine Bernard of the University of Cambridge

0:00:43.200 --> 0:00:47.920
<v Speaker 1>Faculty of Law. Catherine, what is the significance of the

0:00:48.520 --> 0:00:52.800
<v Speaker 1>vote by the House of Lords on this bill. It's

0:00:52.800 --> 0:00:57.880
<v Speaker 1>significant because there was an important judgment of our Supreme

0:00:57.920 --> 0:01:03.200
<v Speaker 1>Court in January saying that they're needed to be an

0:01:03.240 --> 0:01:08.160
<v Speaker 1>Act of Parliament two trigger the Article fifty process, that's

0:01:08.160 --> 0:01:10.600
<v Speaker 1>the process that will take the UK out of the

0:01:10.640 --> 0:01:15.000
<v Speaker 1>European Union. And the bill went through the House of

0:01:15.000 --> 0:01:18.280
<v Speaker 1>Commons very easily. There was a number of amendments proposed

0:01:18.280 --> 0:01:20.959
<v Speaker 1>that they all rejected and now the House of Lords

0:01:21.000 --> 0:01:24.160
<v Speaker 1>are scrutinizing it and Dave raised concerns about number of

0:01:24.160 --> 0:01:27.080
<v Speaker 1>issues that particularly about protecting the rights of EU nationals

0:01:27.080 --> 0:01:29.840
<v Speaker 1>who already here. And actually there's quite a lot of

0:01:29.840 --> 0:01:34.640
<v Speaker 1>cross party support for giving right to EU nationals, but

0:01:34.760 --> 0:01:37.600
<v Speaker 1>the question is how and when, and the big question

0:01:37.680 --> 0:01:40.839
<v Speaker 1>is should it be done in advance of Article fifty

0:01:40.880 --> 0:01:44.240
<v Speaker 1>being triggered or should it be part of the Brexit

0:01:44.280 --> 0:01:48.240
<v Speaker 1>negotiations because trees are May says we don't want to

0:01:48.440 --> 0:01:53.400
<v Speaker 1>give entitlements to EU nationals in the United Kingdom now

0:01:53.560 --> 0:01:55.920
<v Speaker 1>because we want to secure the position of British nationals

0:01:55.960 --> 0:01:59.520
<v Speaker 1>living in the EU. And this has led to complaints

0:01:59.560 --> 0:02:02.400
<v Speaker 1>that the nationals in the UK are being used as

0:02:02.440 --> 0:02:05.760
<v Speaker 1>bargaining chips and they say this is not fair. Stephen.

0:02:06.080 --> 0:02:09.520
<v Speaker 1>The House of Commons will be debating the amended bill,

0:02:10.000 --> 0:02:14.519
<v Speaker 1>where May's Conservative Party has a slender majority. Is the

0:02:14.600 --> 0:02:19.440
<v Speaker 1>vote likely to go along party lines? Well, it did

0:02:19.600 --> 0:02:22.560
<v Speaker 1>when the House of Commons first looked at this bill.

0:02:22.639 --> 0:02:27.200
<v Speaker 1>There are only a few Conservative MPs who switched and

0:02:27.280 --> 0:02:29.079
<v Speaker 1>voted with the opposition, and they are actually one or

0:02:29.120 --> 0:02:32.920
<v Speaker 1>two Labor MPs who switched and voted with the Conservatives.

0:02:32.960 --> 0:02:35.040
<v Speaker 1>And then when people like Chen fame from Northern Irelands

0:02:35.080 --> 0:02:39.880
<v Speaker 1>who don't take their seats, So unless about ten Conservatives

0:02:39.960 --> 0:02:44.200
<v Speaker 1>switch or something like that, that because they'll have auster

0:02:44.320 --> 0:02:47.080
<v Speaker 1>unions on their side, So ten fifteen Conservatives would have

0:02:47.120 --> 0:02:50.200
<v Speaker 1>to switch in order to defeat the government and that

0:02:50.320 --> 0:02:56.000
<v Speaker 1>maybe um probably a politically unrealistic but we'll see, Catherine,

0:02:56.000 --> 0:02:58.760
<v Speaker 1>what happens if let's say that the House of Commons

0:02:59.280 --> 0:03:02.280
<v Speaker 1>votes against the amendment, that the parties stay where they

0:03:02.320 --> 0:03:05.360
<v Speaker 1>are and they vote against the amendment, will what happens

0:03:05.400 --> 0:03:07.760
<v Speaker 1>to the to the Brexit process? How does may proceed

0:03:07.840 --> 0:03:11.920
<v Speaker 1>from there? Yeah? So it's what happens is what called

0:03:12.000 --> 0:03:17.280
<v Speaker 1>ping pong legislative ping pong, and literally the bill will

0:03:17.480 --> 0:03:20.480
<v Speaker 1>ping pong between the lords and the Commons. But it's

0:03:20.480 --> 0:03:24.080
<v Speaker 1>thought likely that ultimately the lord's will cave in because

0:03:24.120 --> 0:03:29.720
<v Speaker 1>the lords are not democratically elected unlike the Commons, and

0:03:29.840 --> 0:03:32.320
<v Speaker 1>so there is a risk of something of a constitutional

0:03:32.400 --> 0:03:35.840
<v Speaker 1>crisis if the Lords persist. On the other hand, they

0:03:35.880 --> 0:03:38.040
<v Speaker 1>have put sent out a strong message, and it's a

0:03:38.120 --> 0:03:43.240
<v Speaker 1>rather strong moral message that the lives of somewhere between

0:03:43.280 --> 0:03:46.320
<v Speaker 1>three and four million EU nationals who are currently living

0:03:46.360 --> 0:03:50.200
<v Speaker 1>in the UK are being affected by these decisions, and

0:03:50.640 --> 0:03:54.440
<v Speaker 1>their families are in a state of considered uncertainty as

0:03:54.480 --> 0:04:00.560
<v Speaker 1>to what will happen, what the future holds for them. Here, Stephen,

0:04:00.600 --> 0:04:05.520
<v Speaker 1>just a thirty seconds here, Why is Maso insistent on

0:04:05.680 --> 0:04:10.480
<v Speaker 1>keeping to her timetable. Well, she's made a political promise

0:04:10.560 --> 0:04:13.880
<v Speaker 1>to her party and to others who support leaving the

0:04:13.920 --> 0:04:16.560
<v Speaker 1>European Union, and I think you'd be moither a bouncing

0:04:16.640 --> 0:04:18.440
<v Speaker 1>to go back on it now. They also want to

0:04:18.520 --> 0:04:21.480
<v Speaker 1>leave before the next European Parliament elections may have two

0:04:21.520 --> 0:04:24.279
<v Speaker 1>thousand and nineteen. Unless they get going soon, there's a

0:04:24.320 --> 0:04:28.280
<v Speaker 1>two year negotiation windows, so that would be kind of awkward.

0:04:28.320 --> 0:04:31.159
<v Speaker 1>They'd went up against that deadline if they don't start

0:04:31.160 --> 0:04:34.480
<v Speaker 1>the process soon. Britain Supreme Court ruled that the country's

0:04:34.520 --> 0:04:36.880
<v Speaker 1>exit from the European Union needs to be approved by

0:04:36.960 --> 0:04:40.280
<v Speaker 1>Parliament and Prime Minister Theresa May has asked Parliament to

0:04:40.320 --> 0:04:42.760
<v Speaker 1>pass a law that does not impose any conditions on

0:04:42.800 --> 0:04:46.120
<v Speaker 1>her negotiating Britain's exit from the EU. But the House

0:04:46.120 --> 0:04:48.279
<v Speaker 1>of Lords is past an amendment protecting the right of

0:04:48.320 --> 0:04:51.279
<v Speaker 1>non British EU nationals to stay in Britain after Brexit

0:04:51.360 --> 0:04:54.160
<v Speaker 1>takes place. We're talking about what this amendment means from

0:04:54.200 --> 0:04:57.800
<v Speaker 1>as Brexit strategy with Professor Steve Peers of the University

0:04:57.800 --> 0:05:01.320
<v Speaker 1>of Essex Law School and Professor Professor Katherine Bernard of

0:05:01.400 --> 0:05:06.200
<v Speaker 1>the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law. Steve, the House

0:05:06.200 --> 0:05:08.040
<v Speaker 1>of Lords has passed this one amendment which is now

0:05:08.040 --> 0:05:10.760
<v Speaker 1>going to go to the House of Commons. They've also

0:05:11.000 --> 0:05:14.520
<v Speaker 1>there's also been reports that they're considering other amendments to

0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:18.760
<v Speaker 1>the law. What are they thinking about, Well, I don't

0:05:18.760 --> 0:05:21.320
<v Speaker 1>know how many are still left to consider, but I

0:05:21.360 --> 0:05:25.320
<v Speaker 1>think the big one that is apparently quite likely to

0:05:25.360 --> 0:05:28.039
<v Speaker 1>pass is another amendment which would say there has to

0:05:28.080 --> 0:05:31.359
<v Speaker 1>be a vote of Parliament on the final Brexit deal

0:05:31.520 --> 0:05:34.640
<v Speaker 1>at the end of the whole process. But then that

0:05:34.800 --> 0:05:37.960
<v Speaker 1>raises some awkward questions because of what a parliament said. No,

0:05:39.360 --> 0:05:41.280
<v Speaker 1>we have a two year deadline to finish all this

0:05:41.640 --> 0:05:43.600
<v Speaker 1>up and you can extend the deadline, but the EU

0:05:43.680 --> 0:05:46.560
<v Speaker 1>has to agree and they might not. So does the

0:05:46.600 --> 0:05:49.440
<v Speaker 1>government fellow power to go back and negotiate, or do

0:05:49.520 --> 0:05:52.320
<v Speaker 1>we hold another referendum or something and not leave after all,

0:05:52.360 --> 0:05:54.800
<v Speaker 1>depending on the results of the referendum, or do we

0:05:54.839 --> 0:05:57.760
<v Speaker 1>just leave the EU without a trade deal, because the

0:05:57.800 --> 0:06:01.200
<v Speaker 1>one the government done, if they even are successful negotiating,

0:06:01.200 --> 0:06:04.680
<v Speaker 1>giving good enough according to Parliament, So that would be

0:06:05.440 --> 0:06:07.360
<v Speaker 1>quite a big one. I think if that one goes

0:06:07.440 --> 0:06:11.520
<v Speaker 1>to it went potentially and even the bigger complications for

0:06:11.600 --> 0:06:14.400
<v Speaker 1>the government at the end of the process than the

0:06:14.400 --> 0:06:18.680
<v Speaker 1>one on EU citizens. Katherine, as we said, May is

0:06:18.720 --> 0:06:23.200
<v Speaker 1>insistent on keeping to her timetable, but if Commons rejects

0:06:23.240 --> 0:06:25.839
<v Speaker 1>the changes, then it goes back to the House of

0:06:25.960 --> 0:06:29.559
<v Speaker 1>Lords what you called ping ponging. Won't that eat away

0:06:29.560 --> 0:06:34.120
<v Speaker 1>at her timetable? Yes, it might slow it up a bit,

0:06:34.760 --> 0:06:38.480
<v Speaker 1>but it thought likely she still will trigger by the

0:06:38.680 --> 0:06:42.120
<v Speaker 1>end of March because of the reason that Steve gave earlier,

0:06:42.200 --> 0:06:45.360
<v Speaker 1>namely that there's got to be a two negotiating process

0:06:45.360 --> 0:06:47.960
<v Speaker 1>which takes us to nineteen and it needs to be

0:06:48.000 --> 0:06:53.280
<v Speaker 1>done before the European Parliament elections because there are nearly

0:06:53.320 --> 0:06:57.279
<v Speaker 1>a hundred British m EPs members of the European Parliament

0:06:57.440 --> 0:07:00.160
<v Speaker 1>in Strasbourg and they have got to be removed. So

0:07:00.279 --> 0:07:02.640
<v Speaker 1>I think in practice it's very like to be triggered

0:07:02.640 --> 0:07:05.279
<v Speaker 1>in March. There was rumor that he was going to

0:07:05.279 --> 0:07:08.160
<v Speaker 1>trigger on the ninth of March, when there's a European

0:07:08.200 --> 0:07:14.120
<v Speaker 1>Council meeting in Brussels, but the latest developments suggest that

0:07:14.120 --> 0:07:16.680
<v Speaker 1>that's probably not going to happen, so it may be

0:07:16.760 --> 0:07:19.440
<v Speaker 1>delayed a week, maybe a couple of weeks, but also

0:07:19.560 --> 0:07:21.680
<v Speaker 1>that that time gives a bit of breathing space to

0:07:21.720 --> 0:07:25.160
<v Speaker 1>the civil service, because the civil service they're working hard

0:07:25.280 --> 0:07:28.560
<v Speaker 1>trying to work out what is going to be the

0:07:28.680 --> 0:07:32.280
<v Speaker 1>UK's position in respect of the negotiations over the Article

0:07:32.320 --> 0:07:37.560
<v Speaker 1>fifty divorce agreement. Steve, is there any chance that the

0:07:37.600 --> 0:07:41.360
<v Speaker 1>Prime Minister might actually give in to what the House

0:07:41.400 --> 0:07:45.280
<v Speaker 1>of Lords wants to do with this amendment? I think

0:07:45.360 --> 0:07:47.560
<v Speaker 1>that's unlikely. I mean, she sort of put a lot

0:07:47.560 --> 0:07:50.720
<v Speaker 1>of political capital on not giving in. I mean she

0:07:50.760 --> 0:07:53.200
<v Speaker 1>could easily doing but I think you know, usually in

0:07:53.240 --> 0:07:55.080
<v Speaker 1>these sorts of cases of the House of Lord wants

0:07:55.080 --> 0:07:57.760
<v Speaker 1>to amend something, there's discussion between the two sides and

0:07:57.760 --> 0:08:01.120
<v Speaker 1>there's some kind of compromise, but she's put a lot

0:08:01.160 --> 0:08:04.800
<v Speaker 1>of political capital not getting in and what the government

0:08:04.960 --> 0:08:08.840
<v Speaker 1>can do it may sound a bit on too American listeners,

0:08:09.120 --> 0:08:11.840
<v Speaker 1>is that if it really comes down to a crunch,

0:08:12.320 --> 0:08:15.120
<v Speaker 1>it can appoint extra sort of emergency members of the

0:08:15.160 --> 0:08:18.080
<v Speaker 1>House of Lords. I might It's a bit like in

0:08:18.080 --> 0:08:19.960
<v Speaker 1>America's is if if the president had a power to

0:08:20.040 --> 0:08:22.720
<v Speaker 1>point additional senators to get things through, and that obviously

0:08:22.720 --> 0:08:24.960
<v Speaker 1>would have simplified life for a lot of American presidents

0:08:24.960 --> 0:08:27.360
<v Speaker 1>in the past. Um, but probably you can't do that.

0:08:27.400 --> 0:08:29.400
<v Speaker 1>But in Britain, in theory, you can do that, and

0:08:29.440 --> 0:08:32.679
<v Speaker 1>no one's ever done that. The threat is usually enough

0:08:33.200 --> 0:08:36.439
<v Speaker 1>to make the House of Lords complying, so become a

0:08:36.480 --> 0:08:38.000
<v Speaker 1>card just to polish the House of Lords or take

0:08:38.000 --> 0:08:40.000
<v Speaker 1>away its powers that some people would like. What it

0:08:40.040 --> 0:08:43.480
<v Speaker 1>can do is threatened, realistically threatened to have these extra

0:08:43.520 --> 0:08:46.320
<v Speaker 1>lords in place, and that if it came to it

0:08:46.400 --> 0:08:49.160
<v Speaker 1>might be what pushes the House of Lords back down.

0:08:50.000 --> 0:08:54.880
<v Speaker 1>So it's for Americans, Catherine explain the position of the

0:08:54.920 --> 0:08:57.400
<v Speaker 1>House of Lords as opposed to the House of Commons,

0:08:57.400 --> 0:08:59.720
<v Speaker 1>because from what you're saying, it doesn't sound like they

0:08:59.760 --> 0:09:05.760
<v Speaker 1>have of real power. Well, they do have powers to

0:09:05.840 --> 0:09:10.000
<v Speaker 1>extent that they can hold up a bill um and

0:09:10.080 --> 0:09:13.680
<v Speaker 1>stuff it becoming law, but they can only hold it

0:09:13.760 --> 0:09:17.640
<v Speaker 1>up for one year, so it um. But their their

0:09:17.640 --> 0:09:20.520
<v Speaker 1>power is important. And I think what we would also

0:09:20.679 --> 0:09:23.320
<v Speaker 1>say is that, of course they don't have the legitimacy

0:09:23.320 --> 0:09:26.719
<v Speaker 1>of the Commons because they're not democratically elected. They are

0:09:26.800 --> 0:09:32.880
<v Speaker 1>there largely through nomination um, their mix of political nominees

0:09:32.960 --> 0:09:37.280
<v Speaker 1>but also senior mens the church, any members of academia,

0:09:37.720 --> 0:09:40.280
<v Speaker 1>and they have a range of experience, and they tend

0:09:40.360 --> 0:09:44.200
<v Speaker 1>to scrutinize legislation quite closely um. And so they have

0:09:44.520 --> 0:09:48.040
<v Speaker 1>a legitimacy through with from an experience, but not from

0:09:48.120 --> 0:09:51.600
<v Speaker 1>the ballot box. And so therefore the laws are very

0:09:51.679 --> 0:09:56.679
<v Speaker 1>usually very careful about directly contradicting the power of the Commons,

0:09:56.760 --> 0:10:00.960
<v Speaker 1>and ultimately the Commons will will prevail, for the rule

0:10:01.000 --> 0:10:04.200
<v Speaker 1>of the House of Commons will prevail. Steve, do you

0:10:04.240 --> 0:10:07.000
<v Speaker 1>think what do you think the most likely outcome is here,

0:10:07.080 --> 0:10:08.800
<v Speaker 1>given what the House of Lords has done and has

0:10:09.160 --> 0:10:12.040
<v Speaker 1>might do on the other amendment they're considering, just in

0:10:12.080 --> 0:10:15.679
<v Speaker 1>about thirty seconds, Well, what I think the government will

0:10:15.720 --> 0:10:17.840
<v Speaker 1>do is it won't want amendment to the bill, but

0:10:17.960 --> 0:10:21.200
<v Speaker 1>it will make some kind of concessions in terms of

0:10:21.240 --> 0:10:23.440
<v Speaker 1>promises as to what it will do in the future,

0:10:23.800 --> 0:10:27.400
<v Speaker 1>and it's already made a few promises. We don't very strong.

0:10:27.640 --> 0:10:29.400
<v Speaker 1>I think it'll just strengthen them a little bit and

0:10:29.440 --> 0:10:30.920
<v Speaker 1>that will probably be enough for the House of Holt

0:10:31.000 --> 0:10:33.680
<v Speaker 1>to say, okay, we'll we'll be good amendments and go

0:10:33.679 --> 0:10:37.280
<v Speaker 1>along with it. Our thanks to Professor Steve Pearce of

0:10:37.320 --> 0:10:40.520
<v Speaker 1>the University of Essex School of Law and Professor Katherine

0:10:40.520 --> 0:10:43.160
<v Speaker 1>Bernard of the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law for

0:10:43.240 --> 0:10:45.760
<v Speaker 1>being with us here today on Bloomberg Law