The new parliamentary session is getting underway, and tomorrow the government will introduce its “Repeal Bill”—the most significant step yet in the Brexit process. This will repeal the 1972 European Communities Act, which gives primacy to EU law. All existing EU legislation will then be transposed into British law. At least, that’s the government’s plan.
This might look like a simple exercise, but in practice it will be anything but. It will be an enormously complicated project, with major swathes of the statute book needing examination in order to see how they will work after Brexit. The government believes that the total body of European law, dating back to 1958, is of around 80,000 items. This includes regulations, EU treaties, directions and European Court of Justice rulings.
In order to get through this mass of legislation within two years, and with minimal disruption to individuals and businesses, the government is proposing to use “Henry VIII powers,” which would enable it to legislate without the usual parliamentary scrutiny.
This is deeply suspect. Given that many Tories have made it clear that they want to use Brexit to scrap workplace rights and environmental standards, currently enshrined in EU law, we are calling for proper oversight and transparency. It is incredibly ironic that after Brexiters spent years calling for more powers to be devolved to parliament, the government is attempting to steamroller the democratic process. The Liberal Democrats will not accept this.
And that is why, as the process gets underway, the government should prepare for legislative war.
We will push the government to guarantee commitment to high standards for the environment, health and safety, consumer protection, as well as employment and equalities rights that the UK currently adheres to as an EU member. After all, nobody voted in June last year to diminish their rights, make themselves poorer or to make their country less safe.
"The government is attempting to steamroller the democratic process"If the government tries to pull a fast one, then the Repeal Bill risks looking like a Christmas tree with branches weighted down with the number of amendments tacked on.
We will also use this opportunity to bring some pragmatism back into the Brexit debate. This is a moment to finally focus on substance, rather than the empty platitudes offered so far by the Brexiteers. A moment to recalibrate the debate to focus on Britain’s economic interests.
I hope that the PM will worry less about appeasing the “kippers” within her own party and listen to the mounting evidence against a hard Brexit.
The Liberal Democrats will of course keep fighting for membership of the single market, customs union and of sensible European institutions like Euratom, the European atomic energy community. Over just the last week, it’s become clear that MPs from all of the main parties are ready to oppose the decision to pull out of this as part of the Brexit process.
Theresa May would rather put Britain’s nuclear industry, and it’s 78,000 jobs, at risk if it means she can keep Michael Gove, Liam Fox, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage on board. If you think I’m exaggerating, just read the comments this week from Nicola Strickland, president of the Royal College of Radiologists, who warned that “Brexatom” could threaten the supply of imported radio isotopes used to perform around half a million scans in the UK a year.
The government’s position on Euratom is a striking example of how its lack of flexibility and self-imposed red lines, like its dogmatic obsession with leaving the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, are putting Britain’s future at risk. Any international agreement will need a dispute resolution mechanism, and it seems the only issue the Tories have with the ECJ is that it has the word European in front of it.
We are at the beginning of a series of very tricky decisions for a government with little room for manoeuvre. The next few weeks will tell us if Theresa May means what she said in her “relaunch” speech yesterday. Is she really ready to listen, compromise and accept that she doesn’t hold a monopoly on the best ideas for securing a successful Brexit?
