AG百家乐在线官网

Tory peer warns of 'insurrectionary forces' if referendum result not accepted

Former chancellor Lord Lawson says there is a danger of an "ugly situation" developing amid a "rift" with voters.

Former chancellor Lord Lawson
Image: The veteran Tory was speaking in a Lords debate on whether to rush through a bill designed to avoid a no-deal Brexit
Why you can trust Sky News

A pro-Brexit Conservative peer has warned that "undesirable insurrectionary forces" will be unleashed if parliament does not accept the result of the 2016 EU referendum.

Lord Lawson, who was chancellor from 1983 to 1989 under Margaret Thatcher, said there was a danger of an "ugly situation" developing amid a "rift" with voters.

The veteran Tory politician was speaking in the House of Lords as the upper chamber debated whether to rush through a bill designed to avoid a no-deal Brexit next week.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

MPs rule out no-deal Brexit and extension by just one vote

Spearheaded by Labour's Yvette Cooper and Tory former minister Sir Oliver Letwin, the legislation cleared the Commons in a single day.

Ministers have warned that the bill, which passed by just one vote, could create the risk of an "accidental" no-deal departure because it gives MPs a vote on any extension Theresa May gets from the EU.

Peers were preparing for a possible all-night sitting, amid efforts to slow the legislation's progress.

But after seven hours of debate, Chief Whip Lord Taylor of Holbeach revealed that an agreement had been reached with Labour on how to deal with the bill.

More on Brexit

Peers debated and passed its second reading, with the remaining stages being dealt with on Monday.

Lord Lawson urged the Lords to act as a "brake" on the actions of the lower chamber, which he accused of breaching the conventions of Britain's unwritten constitution.

He said: "This is the most appalling day.

"I have served in parliament for 45 years and there has never been an instance of constitutional vandalism of a scale that we are witnessing at the present time."

Lord Lawson said the UK was now "paying the price" for its lack of a codified constitution and he criticised supporters of the tactics being used, who argued that the issue was so important "that it is necessary and right to tear up the constitution".

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Bank of England governor warns of no-deal Brexit risks

He said: "The reverse is the case.

"The more important the issue, the more important it is that the constitution and the conventions it consists of are respected."

The peer added: "I am deeply concerned at the rift between parliament and the people.

"It's refusal to accept the people's judgement on the referendum.

"I think that there is a real danger that undesirable, but very often understandable insurrectionary forces will feel they cannot trust the British parliament, they cannot trust the British constitution and a very ugly situation could well arise."

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Corbyn says May meeting was 'useful' but 'inconclusive'

Another veteran Tory, Lord Howard of Lympne, said the argument being used for rushing through the legislation was "the pretence which tyrants have used down the ages".

The peer, who was Conservative leader from 2003 to 2005 and was succeeded by David Cameron, said: "In a set of circumstances where a country has an unwritten constitution, the safeguards of our liberties lie with our conventions, our precedents and our procedures.

"An unwritten constitution only works of the institutions of government respect those conventions, those procedures and those precedents.

"Under an unwritten constitution the House of Commons has very great power, but the House of Commons should exercise that power with constraint, with circumspection, with respect for those conventions, those procedures and those precedents."

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Bercow uses casting vote after Commons tie

He said backers of breaching those conventions argued it was necessary "because we are in a state of national crisis".

But Lord Howard shot back: "That is the pretence which tyrants have used down the ages for abrogating the safeguards which have existed in those countries to safeguard the liberties of citizens.

"Surely if your lordships' house has any role and responsibility it is to put a brake on the breach of those conventions, those precedents and those procedures which has undoubtedly taken place in the House of Commons.

"Be under no illusion what has happened in the House of Commons will set a precedent."