In this article for the Guardian, Schona Jolly is quite right to repeat what many legal experts have said - the meaning of the EU (Withdrawal) Bill is unclear in many respects, and it hands fairly unprecedented powers to the Government to modify legislation by Order.
But, in my view, Grieve's successful amendment 7 only affected the timing of the exercise of the powers granted by clause 9 (ie they cannot be used until Parliament has approved the new Withdrawal Bill), and not their extent. As such, it addresses a political concern about the implementation of a withdrawal agreement which has not been approved by Parliament, but not the 'legal' concern about the means by which it is to be implemented (ie by Order).
Moreover, the other 'sweeping powers' granted by the Bill have survived unscathed through the Committee stage, in particular, the powers in clause 7 to 'correct' deficient transposed EU legislation and UK primary and secondary legislation by order. The only significant commitment made by Government in this regard is the acceptance of a 'triage' scrutiny stage. Nor has the Government given ground on the non-transposition of the Charter. The job of making this Bill fit for purpose isn't done yet.
Read more analysis here: https://www.bdb-law.co.uk/blogs/great-repeal-bill/31-great-repeal-bill-rebel-rebel/
The government’s EU withdrawal bill is one of the most significant pieces of draft legislation in decades. Rushed into parliament without a draft text, it bears profound flaws. Such complex legislation, with such critical implications for our constitutional future, should not be decided by a hurried command from ministers. The precise wording of it matters because the implications affect us all, and the rule of law is threatened by uncertain laws. As the House of Lords constitutional committee said in September: “The executive powers conferred by the bill are unprecedented and extraordinary and raise fundamental constitutional questions about the separation of powers between parliament and government.” It was not particularly surprising, then, to see that the majority of the Tory rebels in Wednesday’s dramatic defeat of the government had legal backgrounds.