The government has failed to secure cross-party support for its flagship proposals on the Northern Ireland peace process.
Labour sources said the party would oppose the plans, which include a controversial amnesty for those accused of atrocities during the Troubles, at the second reading of the Bill on Tuesday.
The plans, unveiled in the Queen’s Speech, were designed to find a way to protect ex-soldiers who served in Northern Ireland from prosecution, without applying the same rules to former terrorists.
Instead, ministers announced that those only who cooperated with a new Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery, based on South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, would be offered an effective amnesty.
The government declared the plans would provide “the best route to give victims and their families the answers they have sought for years as well as giving our veterans the certainty they deserve”.
But they attracted criticism from victim groups and the largest Unionist party in Northern Ireland, the DUP, expressed its concerns.
Earlier this month a former Conservative minister told The Independent he did not think his party would “wear” the proposals when the ramifications were set out.
Labour sources said that the planned legislation had been poorly received in Northern Ireland.
Peter Kyle, the shadow Northern Ireland secretary, said: “This is not the right way forward.
“This is only going to deepen the trauma of individuals and communities in Northern Ireland.”
SDLP leader Colum Eastwood accused the government of abandoning “the concept of partnership when it comes to the sensitive politics of Northern Ireland”.
Last week, Northern Ireland’s commissioner for victims and survivors, Ian Jeffers, said the proposals were a "very bitter pill to swallow" for victims.
And over the weekend, Ireland Foreign Affairs minister said his government had "serious concerns" on over the plans.
Simon Coveney said: "On an initial reading we have serious concerns which include, but are not limited to, the powers of the Commission and Chief Commissioner, the status of the ‘reviews’ proposed in the Bill, and of course, fundamentally, compliance with Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and other international human rights obligations."
He said that he knew many families would be "upset" by the Bill.
The government hopes that parts of the Commission, which would be led by a senior judge, can be up and running within the next year.
The Commission will be modelled on that created in South Africa after the end of apartheid.
The Commission itself would be charged with deciding whether or not an individual had done enough to qualify for what would amount to an effective immunity from prosecution.
