On Thursday, September 6, 2018, the Speaker of the House of Representatives announced that there would be a general debate on the legislation on the withdrawal agreement on Monday, September 10, 2018. This debate focuses on the Government`s White Paper on legislation on the UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement, published on 24 July 2018. The White Paper does not specify what this “additional procedural step” will be. The question is whether Parliament is legally in a position to require such a measure. This should not indicate that Parliament could not legislate for such an approach, but the question arises as to what would happen if, in the future, Parliament tried to circumvent the citizens` rights provisions in the withdrawal agreement legislation, without complying with the procedural requirements in it. British constitutional law does not clearly address this issue, as it is not certain that Parliament will be able to impose the requirements it must meet by law after its introduction. I addressed this issue in an article published last year following the Prime Minister`s speech in Florence; and while it is worth reseding the subject at this point, it is best to post a more detailed comment until the bill is published. Fourth, one of the most controversial aspects of the Withdrawal Act is the broad powers it gives ministers to amend UK law, including “maintained EU law” (such as ECJ law, which is transposed into national law by law). However, in the short term, these powers will be of limited use and will be unlikely if a transition period is agreed. While it is true that powers are not limited to changing the `maintained eu law`, these amendments will be the main advantage to which powers will be conferred. However, during a transitional period, there can be no “preserved European law” as EU law will remain in force in the UK, in accordance with the terms of the withdrawal agreement and the “saved” Court of Justice.
The withdrawal law must therefore be amended so that the creation or, at the very least, the population of the internal law category of the “retained European legislation” is postponed to the end of the transitional period and does not occur on the day of the withdrawal. The White Paper recognises this: “The transformation of EU legislation into `preserved EU law` … [will take place] at the end of the implementation period. In this context, the bill will extend by 21 months the period during which the amending powers can be used: they are now available to ministers until 31 December 2022, two years after the end of the hoped-for transition period. Nevertheless, legal instruments are already being developed with the intention that they will be put in place in the event of a Non-Brexit Deal in the event of a Non-Deal Brexit within the scope of the powers conferred by the Withdrawal Act, although such legal instruments will not be necessary (at least in the short term), a transitional period should be agreed. I am sure she will agree that it is important for Parliament to have the opportunity to debate the White Paper on the withdrawal agreement next week, in anticipation of the time constraints that are probably being exerted on this House if we are indeed thinking about the withdrawal agreement. Withdrawal Agreement Legislation (245 KB, PDF) The second issue (which contributes to the first contribution) is the conditionality of the already extraordinary legislative programme implemented around Brexit. Such conditionality can be observed on two levels. At the highest level of abstraction, this is reflected in the relationship between the withdrawal law and the withdrawal agreement, the latter being a means of adapting the first to the requirements of a withdrawal agreement not yet concluded (and perhaps never concluded).