Documents to download

The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill completed its passage through the House of Commons on 17 January 2018 and is scheduled to have its second reading in the House of Lords over two days on 30 and 31 January 2018.

Clause 1 of the Bill seeks to repeal the European Communities Act 1972, which would cut off the ‘conduit pipe’ through which EU law flows into domestic law. This would take effect from exit day, which is defined in the Bill as 11pm on 29 March 2019. After exit day, EU law would no longer have supremacy over domestic law. Domestic courts would no longer be bound to follow the post-exit case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (clause 6). To provide legal certainty and prevent gaps in the statute book, clauses 2 to 4 of the Bill would preserve EU-derived domestic legislation, direct EU legislation and certain directly effective EU rights and obligations in domestic law after exit day (subject to some exceptions set out in clause 5 and schedule 1). Critics of the Bill argue that some existing rights under EU law would not be preserved.

Ministers would be given time-limited delegated powers to modify retained EU law in order to: ‘correct’ provisions that would not function effectively or would be deficient after the UK leaves the EU (clause 7); to prevent or remedy breaches of the UK’s international obligations that might otherwise result from leaving the EU (clause 8); and to implement any withdrawal agreement made with the EU under Article 50 (clause 9). The Bill has been criticised for granting wide delegated powers, including the power to amend primary legislation through delegated legislation (so-called Henry VIII powers), without requiring sufficient parliamentary scrutiny.

The Bill also grants devolved authorities similar powers to the UK Government to amend retained EU law in devolved areas (clause 10). The devolution Acts currently prevent the devolved institutions from acting in a way that would be incompatible with EU law. The Bill would prevent them from acting in a way that would be incompatible with retained EU law (clause 11), but it also provides for the UK Government to ‘release’ policy areas from this restriction. The Government stated it intends to do so once agreement is reached with the devolved authorities regarding common UK frameworks in which the powers could operate. Clause 11 has proved highly contentious, with the Scottish and Welsh Governments stating they cannot recommend legislative consent be granted to the Bill in its current form. The UK Government committed to bringing amendments to clause 11 at report in the Commons. This did not happen but the UK Government has said that it will do so in the House of Lords.


Documents to download

Related posts

  • What is the current situation for healthcare in Gaza? Infrastructure damage, risks to health, and UK government response

    Gaza’s healthcare system is in crisis. Most facilities are damaged beyond use, and those remaining open face shortages of water, fuel and medical supplies. Gaza’s 1.9 million displaced people are at risk of malnutrition, starvation and the spread of infectious diseases. The UK government has called for civilians and medics to be protected, for aid and relief agencies to have consistent access, and for an end to the conflict.

    What is the current situation for healthcare in Gaza? Infrastructure damage, risks to health, and UK government response
  • Challenges to a rules-based international order

    A rules-based international order is typically used to refer to the system of political, legal, and economic rules which have arguably governed international relations since the second world war. It has been a long-established concept in UK foreign affairs doctrine. However, in recent years, many commentators suggest that a growing strain has been placed upon this system and that a new commitment to global stability and security is required.

    Challenges to a rules-based international order
  • Office attendance mandate for the civil service

    The Conservative government set an expectation that civil servants spend at least 60% of their working week at a government building or on official business. The Labour government has maintained this expectation due to the “clear benefits of face-to-face working”. Some civil servants have raised concerns about the 60% office attendance mandate, including civil servants in HM Land Registry who have recently voted in favour of strike action.

    Office attendance mandate for the civil service