Consistently criticises the Government's stance on environmental protection and parliamentary scrutiny. Accuses the Government of wanting to hinder post-Brexit legislation that would enhance these aspects, questioning their commitment to robust environmental standards.

Intervenes to highlight a potential issue with subsections in Lords amendment 42D which may allow the House of Lords to effectively block proposals, expressing concern over this procedural aspect.

My hon. Friend Justin Madders highlighted concerns about weakening environmental protection and the responsibility towards future generations during climate emergencies. Constituents have raised similar worries, stressing the importance of preserving current levels of environmental safeguarding.

Mr. Smith argues against the necessity of the Bill and supports the Lords amendments, believing they make the Bill less harmful. He states that the Bill grants unnecessary powers to the Executive without proper scrutiny mechanisms, and highlights the legislative consent motions denied by Holyrood and the Welsh Senedd as a concern for Unionists in this debate.

He does not see the need for a non-regression clause and believes the British public supports high environmental standards. He suggests that 60 days is too long for scrutiny, but agrees with the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. He calls for a compromise on the number of days or role of the other place in approving regulations.

She criticises the Government's arrogance and lack of respect for parliamentary scrutiny. She argues that the Bill represents a ministerial power grab, not taking back control to the people but to the Prime Minister. She highlights concerns over environmental standards, consumer rights, and employment rights.

Mr. Tomlinson disagrees with the hon. Member for Walthamstow, suggesting that there is a lot of listening and disagreement rather than failure to listen. He appreciates the engagement from the shadow Minister but maintains his opposition towards the Lords Amendment 15D, citing concerns about adding significant time which would place in doubt the effective use of repeal and replace powers before they expire. He encourages the House to bring this Bill to Royal Assent as quickly as possible.