UK Bill Name (Assuming a specific bill name is provided) - Clause 4

Proposes an amendment that requires parliamentary approval for the implementation of any provisions from this Act, ensuring democratic processes are maintained in matters concerning customs and movement of goods.

Ms Winterton presented several amendments designed to ensure that any changes to the Northern Ireland Protocol are subject to rigorous legal and parliamentary scrutiny. She highlighted the importance of maintaining the Good Friday Agreement, preserving environmental protections, and ensuring full consultation with relevant stakeholders before exercising powers under the Act.

Mr Cash requested clarification on certain tests or criteria being referred to in Ms Winterton's speech, focusing specifically on reputational aspects of the proposed amendments.

While not explicitly stating opposition, Layla Moran is interjected upon by Sammy Wilson who challenges her on the necessity of invoking Henry VIII powers. Moran's silence suggests a cautious approach towards supporting such measures.

Bill Cash supports the invocation of delegated powers due to the existential threat posed by continuous legislative actions that undermine Northern Ireland's place within the Union. He emphasises the democratic deficit caused by a constant influx of legislation from various sources.

Robin Millar raises concerns about the existential threat posed to the Union and seeks clarification on the gravity of invoking Henry VIII powers. He questions when such measures become necessary in light of failed negotiations.

Andrew Murrison supports the necessity argument, questioning why another hurdle is needed to resolve issues that threaten the Good Friday agreement. He implies urgency due to lack of progress in negotiations.

Jesse Norman seeks clarification on whether the current situation has triggered a necessity for invoking Henry VIII powers, emphasising the democratic deficit in Northern Ireland.

Jim Shannon agrees with the concerns raised by other DUP members about the misuse of Northern Ireland as a bargaining chip between the UK and EU. He highlights specific examples like vaccine delays, tariffs, and regulatory issues.

Stella Creasy argues against expanding the precedent of delegated powers to other forms of legislation, emphasising the importance of upholding the primacy of this Chamber in legislative matters.

Eastwood questions Donaldson's interpretation of consent within the Good Friday Agreement, suggesting that it is not an elastic principle and should apply to Brexit as well.

Cox argues for triggering article 16, but questions whether changing the entire basis of the treaty is necessary or justified given recent societal impacts.

Robinson agrees with Donaldson that now is the time to provide a solution, emphasising that previous objections and reasons not to act have left Northern Ireland without a resolution.

Wilson agrees with Donaldson on Brexit being about the UK's relationship with Europe, not within it. He also argues that article 16 is insufficient and a long-term legislative change is necessary.

Farry suggests that the one-sided approach taken by the Government could erode support for the Union in Northern Ireland, whereas finding a workable solution around the protocol might provide a softer landing.

Neill calls for an objective test to support the necessity of the Bill's provisions and suggests that before the Bill completes its passage, more evidence should be provided.

Cash agrees with Donaldson on the democratic deficit in Northern Ireland due to subjugation to EU laws post-Brexit and argues that this is self-evident.

Questions whether the Government can provide certainty with their proposed legislation and argues that the protocol is not the source of chaos but rather Brexit. She also emphasises the importance of Northern Ireland's input in decision-making processes.

Defends the necessity of the Bill to address practical problems caused by the Northern Ireland protocol, such as trade disruption and increased costs. He highlights that the Bill aims to maintain a soft border while safeguarding both UK integrity and EU single market principles.

Argues for urgency in addressing issues caused by the Northern Ireland protocol, suggesting that if there is a need to act urgently, it is likely many months before the Bill can pass through Parliament. He also clarifies provisions within the consent mechanism.

Called for the Minister to conclude his speech as many Members wish to speak and time is limited. Requested that he focuses on essential points.

Asked how it is right for voters in Northern Ireland to be subjugated to laws that are passed behind closed doors without a transcript. Implies the Bill undermines democracy in Northern Ireland.

Asked if slagging off the Government is going to solve the problem and urged support for clauses that will fix it.

Requested an intervention but did not make a substantive argument.

Said the Bill will not give voice to people in Northern Ireland or their representatives, putting all control in Westminster hands.

Asked if the shadow Secretary of State accepts that laws made in Europe cannot be debated and changed locally under threat of sanctions from the ECJ, implying democratic deficit.

Agreed with her colleague's point about the illogicality of one-sided adherence to agreements and potential future issues from parties seeking special treatment.

Asked how negotiation can permit Northern Ireland voters a say in the laws made for them, suggesting doubts about the Bill's ability to address democratic concerns.

He argued that the bill would not produce a durable solution as it cannot impose a political solution on Northern Ireland unilaterally. He raised concerns about necessity being a legal basis for permanent solutions and emphasised the need for agreement between parties involved.

No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.

She called for brevity in speeches to allow more MPs to speak.

Asked why this Government has failed where others have succeeded, highlighting successful negotiations between New Zealand and Turkey with the EU.

Thomson highlights the need for negotiation rather than a bill that could break international law. He suggests the bill undermines trust and risks worsening trade situations across the UK.

Cash argues that treaties can be reviewed when they are in the sovereign national interest, citing previous examples. He states the bill will mitigate damage and amend the protocol sensibly without ripping it up.

Amendments aim to protect the Good Friday agreement, ensure environmental protection, economic interests of Northern Ireland, and guard against potential breaches of international law by providing a mechanism for consultation with human rights groups and businesses before powers are exercised.

The Bill is unwise, misguided, and counterproductive. It breaches international law, undermines trust between the UK and EU, and risks damaging Britain's reputation for upholding international legal standards.

Ms Stella Creasy argues that Brexit is fundamentally the root of the issues, not just the Northern Ireland Protocol. She criticises the Government's approach as ineffective and potentially harmful, suggesting that their methods are like using a blowtorch to remove a bad tattoo or throwing white wine on red wine stains, which only exacerbates problems. She highlights specific risks such as trade wars with Europe, legal disputes in international courts, and negative impacts on businesses and constituents. Ms Creasy also raises concerns about the Bill’s adherence to international law, citing reports by the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law and Hansard Society that suggest it breaches these laws.

The Bill is unwise and damaging to the UK's relationship with the EU. Clause 15 allows Ministers to amend an Act of Parliament through delegated legislation, which should be a matter for Parliament. The Government has refused to use article 16 of the protocol, despite its purpose being to resolve disagreements in the protocol's operation.

Lockhart opposes amendments that seek to restrict the Bill unless it is approved by the Northern Ireland Assembly, arguing they are majoritarian and could harm community relations. She warns that such measures would undermine progress towards restoring a functioning Executive at Stormont.

Shannon supports the Bill, stating it is necessary for Northern Ireland to be treated equally as part of the UK. He highlights local business concerns about tariffs and bureaucracy imposed by the current protocol.

Neill proposes an amendment that requires Ministers to set out a legal justification for altering the effect of the Northern Ireland Protocol in domestic law, but does not press it forward tonight.

Farry moves to remove the designation of Article 5(1) to (4) and Annex 2 of the Northern Ireland Protocol relating to movement of goods and customs, as excluded provision.

Proposes amendments to make regulations objective and necessary rather than subjective. Introduces new clauses for stricter procedures on tax or customs matters, aiming to enhance parliamentary scrutiny post-Brexit.

Intervenes to support the need for a veterinary agreement, arguing that past standards in agrifood and farming have been consistent between the UK and EU, which could help rebuild trust.

Agrees with the need for an EU-UK veterinary agreement, suggesting it addresses Northern Ireland's concerns by ensuring parliamentary approval applies to the whole UK.

Supports the Government's approach to implementing red and green lanes for goods destined for Northern Ireland. Argues that the EU needs to accept a porous border with reduced checks as Northern Ireland has a foot in both UK and EU markets. Urges the Government to provide more details on how these processes will work to build trust and facilitate negotiations with the EU.

Critiques the unilateral nature of the Bill, arguing it strips power from Parliament and undermines ongoing negotiations. Suggests that green and red lanes can only work if there is data sharing and trust-building with the EU, which unilateral domestic legislation cannot achieve. Calls for further negotiation rather than unilateral action.

Proposes amendments to prevent Henry VIII powers from being used for tax or customs matters and introduces a super-affirmative procedure. Emphasises the importance of parliamentary oversight over executive actions to address concerns about the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill's transfer of power from Parliament to Ministers.

The DUP opposes an amendment by Stephen Farry that would reinforce the Northern Ireland Protocol. Sammy Wilson argues that the protocol causes a democratic deficit, as it subjects Northern Ireland to EU laws without allowing local politicians to amend or veto them. He contends that Farry’s amendment undermines accountability and fails to address issues like the divergence in regulations between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Wilson also criticises the lack of progress in negotiations with the EU for mutual veterinary agreements and highlights practical examples, such as a truckload of vegetarian pizzas being sent back due to minor documentation errors.

Campbell interjects to support Sammy Wilson’s argument that the protocol is incorrectly portrayed as facilitating two-way trading access between Northern Ireland and both the UK and EU markets. He asserts that such trade should be facilitated by Northern Ireland's membership in the United Kingdom and its geographic position on the island of Ireland, rather than relying on the protocol.

Shannon supports the amendment, expressing concern over the Northern Ireland protocol and its impact on agriculture, fishing, and businesses. He cites specific examples such as Lakeland Dairies and the Anglo-North Irish Fish Producers Organisation, highlighting job losses and economic hardship due to increased costs and red tape. Shannon also raises political concerns regarding Unionist sentiments and international delegations' attitudes towards Northern Ireland.

The clause aims to remove unnecessary customs processes for goods that remain within the UK, enabling a more streamlined and proportionate regime. It defines 'qualifying movements' which will be allowed in the green lane without full customs checks.

Asked how the Government would identify businesses sending goods to Northern Ireland destined for both NI and ROI, questioning practical implementation of the green lane system proposed by the clause.