Moreover, their lordships and the prospect is lurking that the mass ranks of Conservative dissidents, Crossbench`s super-lawyers and opposition parties will try to amend the key section of the law and send it back to the House of Commons for a game of parliamentary ping-pong. Friday`s vote took place at the second reading of the bill, where MPs are voting on whether they are prepared in principle to ask for a bill beforehand. Changes can be made later. According to the current timetable, this amendment and the whole question of how the bill deals with Northern Ireland should be debated on Monday 21 September, but the votes should take place at the end of the committee phase the following day. On the 13. In November 2017, Brexit Minister David Davis announced his intention to pass a new bill to enshrine the Withdrawal Agreement, if any, in national law through primary law. In another interrogation in the House of Commons, Davis clarified that if MPs decided not to pass the bill, the UK would remain on track to leave the EU on March 29, 2019 without a deal, following the invocation of Section 50 in March 2017, following the passage of the European Union (Notice of Withdrawal) Act 2017.  Some MEPs, those who do not like ESA could abstain in the hope of being able to amend it in committee and report, then take their final decision at third reading. On 22 January 2020, the Bill was passed by the House of Lords without further amendments. The next day, she received the royal zusächse.   The bill can therefore be amended by its critics (and there are Brexiteers who want to tighten it, as well as those – including, but not limited to, Remainers – who want to water it down).
In total, there will be five days in the House of Commons, debate at second reading on Monday and four more days for the committee and the next stages of debate ending september 22. The bill was first submitted to Parliament on 21 October 2019, but expired on 6 November with the dissolution of Parliament in preparation for the December 2019 parliamentary elections. He told lawmakers that the bill “will not protect or strengthen our rights or support our manufacturing industry or vital trade relationships. […] I consider the government`s removal of protection in this bill for unaccompanied refugee claimants to be an absolute disgrace. The main agreement will be the second reading of the UK Single Market Act (see above). – As I write, there is an amendment signed by the smaller parties, the SNP, the Lib Dems, the SDLP, Plaid, the Greens and the Alliance to reject the bill at second reading – but no Labour MP has signed. The agenda is dominated by the UK`s Single Market Act, with a debate at second reading and two days of committee stage in the House of Commons (and two more the following week), as well as a storm storm over the bill in the Lords. If the Lords rewrite the bill and send it back to the House of Commons, ministers could see another test of their normally comfortable majority – and remember, even if they win, there will be a price to pay in a guilty conscience, wounded egos and twisted arms described by The Independent as the government that “prays” to the Conservative rebels. The bill, as originally conceived, would have allowed MPs to review each agreement “line by line” and make changes.
 Conservative MP Steve Baker, who wrote for the Times, claimed that the new bill “gives an appropriate position in UK law to any deal we reach with the EU” and that it is consistent with the referendum result by “giving more control over how we govern the British Parliament”.  But there will be strong resistance to this. A tight timetable is controversial due to the constitutional importance of the WAB, given the role that the Withdrawal Agreement provides for the European Court of Justice and the number of delegated powers it is likely to give to ministers to enact areas such as the Protocol on Northern Ireland. .