30 March 2017

The Great Repeal Bill White Paper, released today by the Government, contains very few surprises – but Joe Owen says the devil will be in detail.

As we’ve said elsewhere, the Great Repeal Bill is like a ‘Great Cut and Paste Bill’, converting EU law into UK law.

There is a significant amount of EU law that will not function on the UK statute books, with references to EU institutions that we will no longer be part of after Brexit. The Great Repeal Bill will give government powers to ‘correct’ these laws through secondary legislation, to ensure they function; it is here where the contention begins. Opposition have warned of ‘sweeping legislative powers’.

We’ve said delegated powers, such as Henry-VIII clauses, should be time-limited and used sparingly. The White Paper confirms they ‘will not continue in perpetuity’ and there will be an opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny of any substantive changes.  

European Court of Justice

The White Paper also acknowledges legal questions around the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the role of the devolved legislatures. But here the White Paper does not provide all the answers.

The Government's intention is that the case law of the ECJ will have no role in the interpretation of new laws passed by Parliament after Brexit. This was expected. Theresa May has made no secret of her desire to end ECJ jurisdiction in the UK.

However, the White Paper does say pre-Brexit ECJ case law will have a status similar to that of UK Supreme Court judgements at the moment – binding except in exceptional cases, where the present Supreme Court can overrule a past Supreme Court decision.

The big question is the status of post-Brexit ECJ judgements that interpret pre-Brexit legislation, which the UK has imported onto the statute book. The Government has said nothing about how the courts ought to regard these decisions.

The Government does not have to take a view on this. But if it doesn’t, the courts will take their own.

The role of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

The White Paper talks positively about close collaboration with the devolved administrations, but some big unanswered questions remain.

It is not clear if the consent (via Sewel motions) of the devolved legislatures needs to be sought before passage of the bill. The bill will amend the powers of devolved administrations. This would normally trigger the Sewel Convention, but the White Paper says nothing about the need to get legislative consent from the devolved parliament and assemblies, nor what it will do if consent is not forthcoming.

The Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, David Davis, has reiterated the Prime Minister’s promise that the decision-making powers of the devolved bodies will be “significantly increased” after Brexit. But he also noted that “no new barriers” to the harmonious operation of the UK single market will be allowed to emerge. New UK-wide frameworks will be needed in areas such as fisheries, where EU law currently ensures regulatory consistency across the UK.

These competing principles will need to be balanced, and the Government should seek to develop new UK-wide frameworks in areas such as agriculture and the environment based on the consensus of the four nations, rather than attempting to push these through unilaterally at Westminster.

The role of Parliament

The Government seems to have recognised the careful balancing act that will be required to ensure effective scrutiny can take place in the limited timeframe. 

We noted that the demands of legislating Brexit means that both government and Parliament need “to adapt their normal approach to making legislation and to recognise the value and importance of the other’s role and objectives.” We therefore welcome the Government’s declared willingness to engage in close dialogue with Parliament about how to achieve this balance.

In sum, the White Paper contains few surprises, set out some positive first steps on process, but some big questions remain.

Comments

Scrutinising the extra volume of delegated legislation could be a challenge. Didn't see anything about how Parliament would be helped to carry out its duties - will it get any extra resources (as the Executive has)?

Theresa May and her Brexit staff will have to go ahead in repealing the 1972 Communities Act without agreement as it seems all opponents are not prepared to let the UK govern itself regarding converting EU law into UK law. The other parties are at present being given the chance to make a worthwhile contribution to the democratic process but I feel sure that once the offer is refused by those politicians who are determined to derail Brexit, mainly Labour, who incidentally had only around 10 if its MPs who voted for Brexit showing a complete and utter contempt for their electorate and still doing so, the government will just say WE ARE OUT!, Play by the Henry VIII rules. 40 years in the EU club and thousands of years making this country what it was pre the EU membership we don't need them.

The EU call the UK protectionist over business, but as a bloc they are the same wanting all 27 countries plus us to trade with each other and no other country and there are approximately 183/184 free countries to trade with, it's logical that trade will be much more beneficial to us and not our 1940's enemies and people either don't remember or have forgotten that once Russia were allies in the last century.

Our democracy is under threat. We NEED compulsory voting as they have in Australia! and a recount on the student votes from this 2017 election.

I am in my sixties and am dismayed at the riots, protests, window smashing, car burning groups who cannot accept democracy in any of its forms and being the leftie luvvies who profess the live and let live ethos is thoroughly bemusing to me.

It seems now that if one doesn't get ones own way, keep calling elections until we get the party in that will completely ruin this country.

As usual Conservatives take over the empty Treasury from Labour and fill the coffers up only to have a Labour government in to empty it giving it away to all and sundry who should not have it, all the while taking it off the people who go to work.

Why on earth the students listened to Corbyn is beyond me regarding scrapping tuition fees, it is laughable as Blair bought the fees in when he was in power, hopefully that bit of useful information will have filtered through to the students by now and calmed them down a bit.

I can dream.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.