Key Facts

• Amendment 70 aims to widen the scope of Clause 16.
• The Law Society of Scotland highlighted the narrowness of Clause 16 as a potential problem.
• The amendment would allow relevant national authorities to consider societal and economic changes when modifying retained EU law.
• The amendment offers a means to address lack of scrutiny in specific circumstances.
• There is no definition in the Bill for 'changes in technology' or 'developments in scientific understanding'.
• Clause 16 allows Ministers to make changes indefinitely, unlike other parts of the Bill.
• The Law Society of Scotland suggested the original amendment.
• Clause 16 is intended as an updating power to modify retained EU law in response to technological or scientific changes.
• O'Hara does not seek a vote on his amendment and withdraws it.
• Clause 18 abolishes the business impact target introduced in the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015.
• The Government argues that this change will support a more holistic appraisal of regulation impacts.
• No clear replacement for the repealed sections is provided at present.
• Amendment 64 aims to prohibit a UK Minister from including provisions in regulations under this Act which are within devolved competence.
• The amendment seeks to protect the integrity of the devolution settlement established more than 20 years ago when the Scottish Parliament was created.
• O'Hara mentions that Scotland has had mandates since 2007, 2011, 2016, and 2021 to align regulations with EU standards if desired.
• Brendan O'Hara is addressing concerns over the UK Government's approach to retained EU law.
• Schedule 2 of the Bill is opposed by O'Hara due to fears it will undermine devolved powers in Scotland.
• The Minister argues that the distinction between reserved and devolved competences is unclear, contradicting O'Hara’s position based on the Scotland Act 1998.
• The amendment is necessary to meet the Government's self-imposed deadline.
• The amendment aims to limit the amount of parliamentary time taken up by separate procedures.
• It is expected that this amendment will be used on numerous occasions due to the substantial amount of retained EU law.
• The Bill covers a substantial number of regulations.
• Amendments 88 and 89 aim to ensure instruments made under clauses 15 and 16 are subject to the affirmative procedure in both Houses.
• Clause 15 allows for revocation but not necessarily updates, while clause 16 lacks provisions for any parliamentary scrutiny.
• Stella Creasy expresses concern over the potential destructive impact of the Bill without clarity on future steps.
• The Belgian legislature accidentally included a recipe for asparagus in its laws due to a drafting error in 2021.
• In December 2020, new covid restrictions were implemented without parliamentary scrutiny and could have criminalized children attending school in tier 4 areas.
• The MP criticises the Conservative party's long-standing presence despite repeated rejections by Scottish voters.
• Regulations before 2016 went through multiple stages of scrutiny including Council of Ministers, European Parliament, UK Parliament, and devolved Administrations.
• Grant suggests that introducing the affirmative procedure would ensure better accountability.
• Amendment 69 aims to add a consent requirement for Scottish Ministers before UK Ministers act in devolved areas.
• The Bill includes a sunset date of December 31, 2023, for removing or reforming retained EU law.
• The amendment could potentially cause delays that may prevent necessary regulations from being laid by the deadline.
• The Bill is considered an attack on the devolution settlement.
• A deadline of December 31 was set without Scottish Government consent.
• There are concerns about job cuts and increased pressure on civil servants.
• The Bill seeks to address what to do about retained EU law but does not uphold principles of scrutiny or parliamentary supremacy.
• Former Secretary of State advised minimising the use of delegated powers, which the current Bill heavily relies on.
• The European Scrutiny Committee has never sifted UK regulations before and lacks experience in handling sensitive policy areas.
• Amendment and new clause require publishing impact assessments three months before revoking retained EU law.
• The amendment aims to force detailed consideration of consequences before any action.
• Graham Stuart argues that Departments already undertake proper cost-benefit analysis.
• Amendment would require an impact assessment within three months after any revocation.
• The amendment also proposes a specific assessment of the Bill's impact on UK’s obligations under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement by December 2023.
• O'Hara fears economic sanctions if the level playing field agreement is breached.
• Brendan O'Hara moves an amendment to clause 22.
• The amendment seeks to insert a new section (da) regarding disapplication of the UK Internal Market Act 2020.
• New clause 2 aims to allow Scottish Ministers to provide that EU-derived subordinate legislation is not subject to revocation at the end of 2023.
• The Bill presents an existential threat to Parliament and devolution settlement.
• It is a disaster for crucial parts of the Scottish economy, especially agriculture.
• The United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 created confusion by blurring lines between UK Government and devolved areas.
• Amendment 65 and new clause 2 would ensure Scottish Ministers can remain aligned to EU law without internal market Act interference.
• Farmers feel undervalued and view the Bill as a potential death sentence for agriculture in Scotland.
• The amendment seeks to disapply provisions of the UKIM Act in cases where Scottish Government Ministers use powers contained in the Bill.
• Food standards are a devolved matter in Scotland.
• Chlorine-washed chicken is not allowed according to current regulations.
• Brendan O'Hara represents Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber constituency.
• The UK Internal Market Act is cited as potentially harming Scottish farmers' interests.