Bonfire of EU Laws Becomes A Damp Squib
This afternoon the business and trade secretary, Kemi Badenoch, officially revealed what we all knew was coming for a little while now: the scope of the Retained EU Law Bill will be drastically reduced.
As I have written about on multiple occasions, the legislation was always going to struggle. Simply ‘Thanosing’ all of the EU-derived law in the UK might have been a nice idea in theory for Jacob Rees-Mogg when he introduced the Bill under Liz Truss’ government, but it was always going to run into problems when the rubber hit the road.
For a start there is no, simple definition of what an EU-derived law looks like. Some might be obvious but the statute book is an interwoven pattern where the links can be difficult to detect.
It is for that reason that the government recently signed a £4 million contract with Hogan Lovells to help deliver on the promised ‘bonfire’ of EU laws. Now that the Bill is to become more targeted in what it repeals, this investment feels like yet another waste of taxpayer money.
Beyond that, the Bill in its original form would also have created a great deal of legal uncertainty. This was a point discussed by businesses, environmentalists, and unions alike when they appeared before Parliamentary committees on this subject. It was also a point acknowledged by Badenoch in her statement today:
"Over the past year, Whitehall departments have been working hard to identify retained EU law to preserve, reform or revoke.
"However, with the growing volume of REUL being identified, and the risks of legal uncertainty posed by sunsetting instruments made under EU law, it has become clear that the programme was becoming more about reducing legal risk by preserving EU laws than prioritising meaningful reform.
"That is why today I am proposing a new approach: one that will ensure ministers and officials can focus more on reforming REUL, and doing that faster."
This retreat is to be welcomed but that does not mean the danger has passed.