header-logo header-logo

Brexit: is MPs taking control a good or a bad thing?

02 May 2019 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7838 / Categories: Features , Brexit , EU , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Michael Zander considers the extremely controversial EU (Withdrawal) (No 5) Bill

  • Many argued that MPs taking control of the legislative process set a dangerous precedent; but is it what the exceptional circumstances of Brexit demanded?

The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2019, which started as the European Union (Withdrawal) (No 5) Bill, will surely figure in the next edition of Erskine May: Parliamentary Practice . The Bill was rushed through all its parliamentary stages. Though very unusual, that has happened before. But what was unprecedented was to have a Private Members Bill running to a timetable set by backbenchers that reached the statute book despite the opposition of the government.

No such thing has ever occurred in the more than 100 years since 1902 when the House of Commons Standing Order giving precedence to government business was first established. The House of Lords Constitution Committee’s 2009 report on fast-track legislation did not even mention the possibility that it might be the work of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll