← Back to Westminster Hall Debates

Rule of Law

07 October 2020

Lead MP

Neale Hanvey

Responding Minister

Michael Ellis

Tags

Northern IrelandScotlandBrexit
Word Count: 4134
Other Contributors: 0

At a Glance

Neale Hanvey raised concerns about rule of law in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key Requests to Government:

The speaker asks the Government to clarify why it is justified to depart from the Sewel convention without providing constitutional grounds for doing so. He also requests that the Attorney General explain her support for legislation that might breach international law or treaty obligations, emphasizing the need for consistency and adherence to international agreements.

How the Debate Unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:

Lead Contributor

Opened the debate
The speaker is concerned about the erosion of trust in the UK Government due to repeated incidents involving breaches of the rule of law and international agreements. He mentions specific examples such as the Prime Minister's refusal to apologize for racist language, the Health Secretary's obfuscation during the pandemic, and the undermining of devolution through legislation like the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill. These actions, according to him, undermine the UK's reputation internationally and its credibility in upholding promises made.

Government Response

Michael Ellis
Government Response
It is a pleasure to be the Minister at Westminster Hall, and I thank Neale Hanvey for raising this issue. The rule of law demands equality before the law and access to independent and impartial justice. My remarks focus on the specific provisions of the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill, which the Government claims acts in full accordance with UK law. The Bill has comfortably passed Third Reading in the House of Commons by 340 votes to 256. There will be no change to the powers that devolved Administrations already have as a result of it; most returning Brussels powers will go straight to Holyrood, Stormont or Cardiff Bay. I note that this House has debated clauses 44, 45 and 47 of the Bill in relation to the UK's international law obligations. The Government sees these clauses as necessary for providing a safety net to protect the Union from unintended consequences arising from Joint Committee negotiations. This does not change the principle that we remain obliged to discharge our treaty obligations in good faith; however, parliamentary sovereignty means it is constitutional for Parliament to enact legislation even if provisions within that legislation would affect UK's treaty obligations once commenced. The Government has prepared for such eventualities as outlined in section 38 of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020.
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy

About Westminster Hall Debates

Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.