Campaign and petition email responses

Amendments to the Retained EU Law Bill

Firstly, I want to emphasise my party’s support for efforts to tackle to tackle the twin crises of the climate emergency and biodiversity loss.

The Scottish Government, under leadership of the SNP, was the first in the world to declare a climate emergency.

The SNP Scottish Government has set ambitious targets to reduce Scotland’s emissions of all greenhouse gases to net-zero by 2045, with interim targets for reductions of at least 56% by 2020, 75% by 2030, 90% by 2040. On biodiversity and nature, the Scottish Government has received widespread recognition for establishing the Edinburgh Declaration and the Edinburgh Process to deliver nature by 2030.

Sunak’s Westminster Government is by contrast weak on climate – opening coal mines and scrapping green grants to name but a few policies. SNP MPs at Westminster will continue to press the UK Government to match Scotland’s ambition to produce and adhere to commitments to make sure we are all doing our fair share in this climate emergency.

Now let me come to the EU Retained Law Bill; SNP MPs have continuously called on the Government to revoke this atrocious Bill and the SNP-led Scottish Government has refused to lodge legislative consent for the Bill [something that can and has been overridden by Westminster].

The SNP welcome the Tory government’s U-turn on a reckless sunset clause which was never going to work. The arbitrary deadline in the Bill was always an ideological attack by extreme Tories imposing a dangerous form of Brexit.

However, we remain concerned that the legislation still gives Westminster the power to change devolved REUL without Holyrood’s consent. The reality of this ‘Brexit Freedoms Bill’ is that it will grant the UK Government freedom to abandon vital legislation that has protected Scottish interests for almost 50 years.

Hundreds of pieces of legislation of critical public importance will still be revoked in due course. Already identified as being revoked are pieces of legislation on for example:

• Pesticide residues: Consumer protection (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/533 of 28 March 2019 concerning compliance with 1950 maximum residue levels of pesticides and providing for assessment of the consumer exposure to pesticide residues).
• Cod sustainability: Animal and environmental welfare (Regulation (EU) 2016/2094 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 November 2016 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks).

We remain concerned that the legislation still triggers a race to the bottom on standards hence the need for so many Lords amendments on scrutiny.

Accordingly, SNP Members voted against the UK Government’s rejection of Lord Krebs’ important amendment when the Bill came back to the House of Commons in May and again on June 12 .

As a Party, we were utterly appalled to see this Tory Government continuously vote that amendment down.

It is deeply concerning that the UK government sees this amendment, which would add a commitment to maintaining existing levels of environmental protection, as “burdensome”. Again on June 12, the Secretary General speaking on behalf of the UK Government said on the floor of the House of Commons that: “Lords amendment 42B is both unnecessary and potentially detrimental to this country’s environmental standards … It is simply not necessary for this commitment to be on the face of the Bill. … Lords amendment 42B would add friction.” Mindsets such as these halt progress on legislating to further protect and enhance our environment back.

The amendment that would guarantee environmental standards should not and cannot be weakened (by inserting a non-regression commitment), require expert advice on any changes to those standards, and ensure the UK fulfils its international obligations (like the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework agreed last year at the COP15 nature summit).

The Scottish Government has written to express their support for this Amendment. This amendment is also backed by more than 90,000 members of the public. In voting this amendment down, the Government are not listening to their own watchdogs as well [The Office for Environmental Protection and The Climate Change Committee. This amendment, if passed in later stages [although we remain sceptical], will help to ensure the UK Government’s promises for ‘proper assessment and consultation’ and protecting the UK’s food standards are delivered.

The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill puts at risk thousands of laws that are crucial not only to protecting and restoring the environment, but also to safeguarding public health and creating a sustainable economy.

We have no objection to an evidence based, consultative process that examines, updates and improves upon EU baseline environmental laws over a sensible timeframe, but that is not what this bill offers. Instead, it seeks to side-line Parliament, businesses and the public from decisions on the fate of laws which underpin protections for matters of great public interest, ranging from levels of pesticides in food to water quality to protections for much loved species such as otters, dormice and dolphins.

Rest assured, SNP MPs will continue to support amendments which make this appalling piece of legislation less bad.

SNP MPs voted in May in favour of amendments that would have committed the Government to consultation and indeed proper parliamentary scrutiny on the face of the bill. It is once again, a shocking state of affairs that Ministers and the Tory Party voted those sensible amendments down.

The SNP remain committed to aligning regulation in Scotland with EU regulation and re-joining the EU as an independent nation. We remain concerned that standards for water and air quality, and providing protection for our natural habitats and wildlife are at risk from this deregulatory programme pursued by the UK Government.

In this legislation, the Government continues to give itself the permanent power to amend REUL – and is not putting any commitment to consultation or indeed proper parliamentary scrutiny on the face of the bill. That means that, notwithstanding the climbdown and Badenoch’s talk of a more targeted approach using phrases like “proper assessment and consultation”, any future government could use these powers to water down protections (the bill does not allow reform to mean raising standards).

For example, the Secretary of State can still change thousands of environmental laws at will, through secondary legislation, without scrutiny.

We as the SNP will support sensible amendments to this Bill to makes a poor state of affairs less bad, but we maintain our overall opposition to the Bill.

We urge the UK Government to abandon these unworkable plans that place ideological principles over the everyday rights people rely on and we will continue to vote accordingly.