Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B1111 - European Union (Notification of Withdrawl) Act 2017 Watch

    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    B1111 - European Union (Notification of Withdrawl) Act 2017, Quamquam123




    European Union (Notification of Withdrawl) Bill 2017
    An Act to confer power on the Prime Minister to notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom's intetion to withdraw from the EU.




    BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

    1: Power to notify withdrawl from the EU
    (1) The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom's intention to withdraw from the EU.
    (2) This section has effect despite any provision made by or under the European Communities Act 1972 or any other enactment.

    2: Extent, Commencement and Short Title
    (1) The provisions of this Act come into force immediately following Royal Assent.
    (2) This Act may be cited as the European Union (Notification of Withdrawl) Act 2017.


    Notes
    The British people have spoken and if we are to be a democratic country, we should respect their decision and trigger Article 50.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    No, this is very very lazy, it's a direct clone of the RL bill and totally unnecessary as we are already set to leave alongside the RL UK, as the author is well aware. On this basis, is there any reason why this was even approved adam9317?
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    No, this is very very lazy, it's a direct clone of the RL bill and totally unnecessary as we are already set to leave alongside the RL UK, as the author is well aware. On this basis, is there any reason why this was even approved adam9317?
    Due to the issue of triggering article 50 being a highly contested subject, and one warranting debate, I felt allowing this bill would facilitate debate on this issue, being one of the most important political decisions in a lifetime according to some!
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    No, this is very very lazy, it's a direct clone of the RL bill and totally unnecessary as we are already set to leave alongside the RL UK, as the author is well aware. On this basis, is there any reason why this was even approved adam9317?
    Agreed. There's no need for this, not sure why it was approved either.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    If we're going to overturn the will of the TSR people (as expressed in the referendum held) in the interest of mirroring RL for simplicity's sake, then let Canon run its course here.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adam9317)
    Due to the issue of triggering article 50 being a highly contested subject, and one warranting debate, I felt allowing this bill would facilitate debate on this issue, being one of the most important political decisions in a lifetime according to some!
    And the aforementioned amendment didn't do the same thing because?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I think this is fine, it raises interesting political questions about whether the RL Bill should pass unamended.

    No, this Bill is an abrogation of democracy. Parliament must have a say on the terms of negotiation and a vote on exit.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Nope. The government shouldn't have a blank check
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Nope. The government shouldn't have a blank check
    They wouldn't have a blank check, they would have a "blank cheque"

    It also doesn't dictate whether the cheque is blank or not, merely that the cheque can be written
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Needless, completely needless.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tengentoppa)
    Needless, completely needless.
    So far the debate generated has been thrilling, more about whether it should have been accepted rather than the content.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Nay for the reasons Jammy mentioned.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adam9317)
    Due to the issue of triggering article 50 being a highly contested subject, and one warranting debate, I felt allowing this bill would facilitate debate on this issue, being one of the most important political decisions in a lifetime according to some!
    If the debate on this bill produced a different result to real life, the previous bills, and amendments passed in the MHoC to tie the MHoC with real life would become void. There would be a situation where the MHoC needs to negotiate its own fictional exit which would be difficult to manage, or the MHoC follows real life which negates the impact of this bill, making this bill pointless.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Anybody fancy seconding the submission of the "Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act 1918, makes this one look long and with the blatant threat to women's right from Trump according to Liberals this is clearly the perfect time to restate our dedication to women's rights!
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    If the debate on this bill produced a different result to real life, the previous bills, and amendments passed in the MHoC to tie the MHoC with real life would become void. There would be a situation where the MHoC needs to negotiate its own fictional exit which would be difficult to manage, or the MHoC follows real life which negates the impact of this bill, making this bill pointless.
    The amendments shouldn't become void as they have amended the GD/Constitution, and everything else in the MHoC operates within those insofar as the Speaker interprets and enforces them.

    What it potentially means is that this bill is completely toothless, and were it to fail the principle that we leave the EU when the RL UK does remains in place.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    The amendments shouldn't become void as they have amended the GD/Constitution, and everything else in the MHoC operates within those insofar as the Speaker interprets and enforces them.

    What it potentially means is that this bill is completely toothless, and were it to fail the principle that we leave the EU when the RL UK does remains in place.
    Void was likely not the right word, but there are two outcomes if this bill passes; the amendments become pointless because members decide they should be ignored, or this bill becomes worthless because what this bill is against will happen anyway. This bill is a waste of Parliamentary time that should not have been accepted for debate but this bill is a nice way to boost activity, all MPs should start submitting identical bills to real life to appear more valuable.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Void was likely not the right word, but there are two outcomes if this bill passes; the amendments become pointless because members decide they should be ignored, or this bill becomes worthless because what this bill is against will happen anyway. This bill is a waste of Parliamentary time that should not have been accepted for debate but this bill is a nice way to boost activity, all MPs should start submitting identical bills to real life to appear more valuable.
    A few points in response to this:
    – Members don't decide whether amendments should be ignored, that's up to the Speaker.
    – I presume you are referring to the situation were this bill to fail, not pass. If it passes then we do not diverge from RL, given we can safely presume it will be passing in RL.
    – I remain unconvinced that anyone cares that much about levels of output or boosting their statistics.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Quamquam123 This is a good opportunity for me to point out that that's not how you spell withdrawal

    In any case, aye, can't do any harm to have it codified here.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    A few points in response to this:
    – Members don't decide whether amendments should be ignored, that's up to the Speaker.
    – I presume you are referring to the situation were this bill to fail, not pass. If it passes then we do not diverge from RL, given we can safely presume it will be passing in RL.
    – I remain unconvinced that anyone cares that much about levels of output or boosting their statistics.
    Knowing this bill passing will be pointless because the bill is reaffirming real life, and knowing if this bill fails it will be pointless because what this bill would stop will still go ahead, I would be surprised if you see this bill as a valuable submission worthy of debate.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    If the debate on this bill produced a different result to real life, the previous bills, and amendments passed in the MHoC to tie the MHoC with real life would become void. There would be a situation where the MHoC needs to negotiate its own fictional exit which would be difficult to manage, or the MHoC follows real life which negates the impact of this bill, making this bill pointless.
    This isn't true. The Bill can't affect MHoC's legislative competence; the GD would override this Bill. This is more a theoretical discussion of the terms of the Bill.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 30, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.