Turning away from the committee for a moment, Home Office claims that the destruction of Windrush-era landing cards in 2010 had no impact on the rights of those individuals to stay in the UK have been dramatically undermined by the evidence of two new whistleblowers, my colleague Amelia Gentleman reports.
Q: What is the scope for substantive amendments to the withdrawal agreement and implementation (WAI) bill?
Suella Braverman (until recently Fernandes - she has just go married), another Brexit minister giving evidence alongside Baker, says it would be surprising if parliament wanted to pass amendments that went against what was agreed in the resolution.
Baker says Lords on its own would not be able to block Brexit withdrawal deal
Lord Judge, a crossbencher, asks what would happen if the Commons approves the withdrawal agreement but the Lords rejects it.
Baker says the government expects the Lords to follow the will of the elected House.
Q: But what happens if it does not?
Baker says the government expects to put forward an agreement both Houses will support.
He says he would be interested to know what the Lords think should happen in those circumstances.
Q: But what would happen?
There would be a flurry of conversations, he says.
But he says, under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act, the treaty would still be ratified if the Commons approved it, but the Lords does not.
Baker says House of Lords on its own would not be able to block Brexit withdrawal deal.
Steve Baker, the Brexit minister, opens. He says it is not possible to say when the “meaningful vote” will happen, but the government wants it to happen as soon as possible after the withdrawal agreement is agreed, which should be in October.
The Lords constitution committee hearing is starting now.
According to the committee, here are some of the questions they want to address.
Is the ‘meaningful vote’ a choice between accepting the withdrawal agreement in full or leaving the European Union without a deal?
How does the government envisage parliament’s scrutiny of the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration on the framework of the future relationship?
How long do you expect parliamentarians and committees will have to examine the agreement and the political declaration before the ‘meaningful vote’ is held?
The government has indicated that the motion will cover both the withdrawal agreement and political declaration on the framework of the future relationship. Will it be possible for parliament to approve one and not the other? What consequences would that have?
Will the government publish a full analysis of the impact of the withdrawal agreement as part of the explanatory materials accompanying the withdrawal agreement and implementation bill?
Will the withdrawal agreement and implementation bill need legislative consent from the devolved legislatures?
nal Brexit ministers face questioning by peers over 'meaningful vote'
Good morning. And sorry for the the late start. I was held up for various domestic reasons.
As my colleague Jessica Elgot reports, Amber Rudd, the home secretary, is facing further pressure over the treatment of Windrush-era migrants, with Labour now effectively calling for her resignation. (That’s what “consider her position” means - Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, is not saying Rudd should consider her position and decide to stay.)
This is bound to come up at PMQs. Otherwise it is almost wall-to-wall Brexit, with peers voting on the EU withdrawal bill this afternoon and this evening, and a potentially interesting committee hearing about to start.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: Penny Mordaunt, the international development secretary, and the Microsoft founder Bill Gates speak at a malaria summit in London.
2pm: Michael Gove, the environment secretary, gives evidence to the Commons environmental audit committee about his 25-year environment plan.
2.30pm: Prof Alan Manning, chair of the migration advisory committee, gives evidence to the Commons home affairs committee about the impact of EU nationals on the labour market.
As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I will post a summary at the end of the day.
You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.
If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
I try to monitor the comments BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.
Comments (…)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion