Following Monday’s vote, I wanted to clarify why I voted against the Lord’s proposed amendment to the Trade Bill, regarding countries accused of genocide.
Please do know I wholly appreciate the concerns of all constituents who wanted to see this amendment approved, but I want you all to know that my opposition to this amendment does not diminish my belief that we, as a Government, must continue to uphold the UK’s international and moral obligations.
The Government and I opposed this amendment on important constitutional grounds, as this amendment, as with the previous Lords amendments, would continue to blur the distinction between the role of Parliament and the courts. The amendment would allow a new Parliamentary committee, composed solely of former senior members of the judiciary, to make a preliminary determination on genocide. The Government has been consistently clear it is for competent courts, not committees, to make determinations of genocide.
I also do agree the creation of a Parliamentary Judicial Committee would essentially be a fundamental, constitutional reform. It would upset the balance of power in our constitutional system. The amendment the Government previously supported in the Commons avoided this. It required the Government to set out its position in writing a response to a report on genocide and gave a House of Commons committee the power to draft a motion for subsequent debate.
On this amendment, the Minister for Trade, Greg Hands MP, stated the following during the wide-ranging debate in the House of Commons:
"Giving such a power to an ad hoc parliamentary judicial committee would represent a fundamental constitutional reform, it would blur the distinction between courts and Parliament and upset the separation of powers and so the Government cannot support it."
The full link to the Hansard debate, which preceded the vote on Monday, can be read here: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2021-03-22/debates/BD70E5C2-9163-4FB8-9B9B-2D451586A01B/TradeBill?highlight=genocide#contribution-730D68B4-ABCE-4A8E-9690-536C2DD13529
I am proud the UK plays a leading international role in holding China to account for its violations, through leading joint statements at the UN, repeatedly underlining concerns to senior Chinese authorities and reviewing UK export controls applied to Xinjiang. I must also emphasise there are no current plans to begin negotiations on a free trade agreement with China.
I hope the above has explained why I felt I had to vote against this amendment, despite its unquestionably good intentions. I do take the issue of human rights abuse extremely seriously, and I’ve also shared my thoughts and reasoning on previous amendments, as well as on the outcome of Considerations by Members of Parliament, which can be found here.