Sustainability concerns as UK government considers ditching EU laws

When the UK left the European Union in 2020 it did so with an important policy in place: that all laws derived from the EU, already on the UK statute book, would remain part of UK law after Brexit. This body of law is broadly called ‘retained EU law’.

 

According to the government’s Retained EU Law Dashboard, the policy was designed to ensure no significant gaps in law suddenly popped up after the UK left the EU. According to then-prime minister Theresa May, it would then be up to “democratically elected representatives in the UK to decide on any changes to that law, after full scrutiny and proper debate".

 

Until summer 2022 – when Jacob Rees-Mogg was appointed as Business Secretary (he has subsequently been replaced) – there had been a broad consensus that any changes to retained EU law would be made gradually. Rees-Mogg, however, challenged this approach, claiming that retained EU law lacked the same levels of Parliamentary scrutiny as domestic legislation. This gave way to the publication of the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill. The Bill covers more than 3,700 pieces of legislation that impact over 20 sectors of the economy, across 300 specific policy areas.  

 

The Reul Bill does not require the government to replace laws it allows to ‘sunset’. Further, specific pieces of legislation can be proactively preserved, but this needs to be done before the end-of-2023 deadline. As such there is little time for “full scrutiny and proper debate”. While the Reul Bill does state that this sunsetting deadline could be extended to 23 June 2026, current prime minister Rishi Sunak has confirmed an extension will not be given.

How will the Reul Bill affect life in the UK?

The government says that the Reul Bill is designed to “create a regulatory environment that drives economic growth”, however the controversial move is facing significant backlash from many groups that are concerned it will lead to a watering down of standards, workers’ and consumers’ rights and environmental protection.

For example, a report, The economic costs of the Retained EU Law Bill, by the Economics for the Environment Consultancy, for groups including the Wildlife and Countryside Link, has investigated the potential economic impact that the Reul Bill could have if environmental laws are weakened across chemical regulation, water pollution, air quality and habitats.

 

According to the report, removing or weakening existing legislation stands to incur costs of £82.94 billion over the next 30 years. The report warns that losing Water Framework Directive standards would likely lead to increased levels of agricultural pollutants flowing into water streams, which would increase the wastewater and sewage that is then pumped back into the natural environment. Weakening the National Emission Ceilings Regulations, meanwhile, would lead to poor air quality levels and serious consequences for health.

 

Examples of key retained EU laws at stake There are around 3,700 pieces of legislation at risk of sunsetting via the Reul Bill (although there is evidence to suggest this number is higher – the government says it is continually updating the Retained EU Law Dashboard as it combs through existing statutes). These include:   The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 These regulations require an assessment of likely environmental impacts of development proposals, and are designed to protect species and wildlife habitats from unsustainable developments. The Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 This sets limits on the permitted concentration of a number of harmful air pollutants in outdoor air and imposes duties on the government to measure and report pollution levels and provide information to the public. It is the central pillar of air quality regulation in the UK. The Water Framework Directive This sets objectives and deadlines for improving water quality in rivers, by reference to both the ecology of the water and its chemical characteristics. Meanwhile, the Drinking Water Directive sets safety standards for drinking water. The Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) Regulation This provides protection for human health and the environment against chemicals and makes companies that place chemicals on the market responsible for understanding and managing the risks associated with their use. The General Food Regulation (EU Regulation (EC) 178/2002) This stipulates that: food must not be unsafe; food businesses must be able to trace from where they sourced food and to whom they supplied; and unsafe food must be withdrawn from sale and/or recalled from the end consumer. Meanwhile, EU Regulation (EC) 396/2005 sets limits on the maximum residue levels of pesticides and contaminants in food. The Working Time Regulations 1998 These regulations set limits on the number of hours employees can be expected to work. Meanwhile, the Agency Worker Regulations 2010 work to mitigate discrimination against agency workers by providing protections with respect to pay, holiday and working time conditions, while Article 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union establishes the principles of equal pay for male and female workers. The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 These regulations are a core consumer protection law that prevent businesses from participating in unfair practices, such as false endorsements, misleading availability and pyramid schemes. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 This requires employers to carry out risk assessments and make arrangements to put measures in place to minimise the risk of workplace injury. The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002, meanwhile, impose a duty on companies to control substances that are hazardous to health and prevent workers’ exposure to them.   All of these protections – and more – could be lost under the Reul Bill, and it is not yet clear how, or even if, they will be replaced.

Why the Reul Bill should matter to the average UK citizen?

As well as the threat to democracy and potential legislative chaos the Reul Bill stands to introduce, its measures could have a very real and direct impact on UK citizens. For example:

• Research from the European Commission’s Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES) shows that the Air Quality Standards have led to an increase in life expectancy throughout Europe. 
• The Water Framework Directive sets a high bar for drinking water standards, taking into account emerging pollutants, such as endocrine disruptors and PFAs, as well as microplastics. According to research from UKWIR, some 99.9% of microplastics are removed from UK drinking water as a result of this legislation.
• Government research shows that the Working Time Regulations have had a positive impact on the majority of UK workers through increased employment, increased leave entitlement and more legal protections around work/life balance.  

Changes to legislation, as proposed by the Retained EU Law Bill, would affect the ability of Trading Standards to carry out enforcement work, which in turn would affect ordinary people and businesses across the UK, said the Chartered Trading Standards Institute. 

 

Last year, the institute conducted a survey that showed over 90% of consumers believe that the Government should drop its commitment to sunset legislation by 2023. The Institute has teamed up with a number of consumer interest groups to launch a campaign, Safeguarding Our Standards, calling for the government to drop the deadline. 

 

Of the campaign, Yvonne Fovargue MP, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Consumer Protection, said it is not about Brexit…”Rather, it’s about ensuring that we have good regulation in place that protects consumers and keeps people safe. Yes, we should always keep regulations under review and make sure they are fit for purpose. But let’s not play into a fantasy agenda that equates regulation with barriers to trade and growth. That’s nonsense. Good regulation benefits business and consumers alike.” 

 

The consumer organisation Which? has also called for the deadline to be removed.

What do the experts say?

There is widespread concern from business and political leaders about the future of law in the UK, should the Reul Bill come to fruition. A report from the House of Lords, ‘Losing Control?: The Implications for Parliament of the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill’ makes clear the urgent need to “rebalance” power between Parliament and the Executive (the part of government that enforces the law). 

 

Meanwhile, the government’s own independent assessor – the Regulatory Policy Committee (RPC) – has said the bill is “not fit for purpose”. The RPC says it has “asked the department to commit to assessing the impact of changed and sunsetted legislation, for RPC scrutiny in the future, but the department has not made a firm commitment to do so.”

 

The bill has drawn particular criticism from environmental groups, who say it stands to significantly hinder important climate efforts. Angus Eames, lawyer with environmental organisation ClientEarth, said: “The threat the Retained EU Law Bill poses cannot be overstated. If passed, it could maim efforts to address the climate and biodiversity crises, put the health of millions at risk and subvert the function of the UK’s political system.

 

“Decisions on the health of our environment, the safety of our food and our longstanding protections as consumers cannot be left in the hands of current and future ministers without the input and oversight of Parliament – and this legal analysis makes that painfully clear.

 

“This bill would fundamentally undermine how democracy functions in the UK – which is why we are calling for the Bill to be dropped entirely.”

Has the Reul Bill been confirmed?

The Bill passed through the House of Commons and received its first reading in the House of Lords on 19 January 2023, and its second reading in the House of Lords on 6 February 2023. After this, it will need to pass through the Lords Committee and Report stages and have a third reading. This could happen relatively quickly and it could be enacted as early as Easter 2023.

 

However, it is likely that it will bounce back and forth between the two Houses, as amendments made in the House of Lords would need to be considered and accepted, rejected, amended or alternatives suggested by the House of Commons. This would go on until an agreement is reached. If no agreement is reached and no alternate proposals are given, the bill would fail, although this would be extremely unlikely.

 

Given the potential impacts of the bill, there has been immense pressure from businesses, NGOs and interest groups for the government to proceed extremely cautiously in the face of massive legislative uncertainty. It’s a highly politicised bill which is set to have significant ramifications on the lives of everyone in the UK in one way or another, and the government has set itself an extremely tight deadline to wrangle its consequences.  

 

Further reading The government’s Retained EU Law Dashboard The government’s original EU law repeal proposition The latest version of the Reul Bill Report: The economic costs of the Retained EU Law Bill The UK Chartered Trading Standards Institute comments and survey Which? statement IES research on impacts of Air Quality Standards The European Commission’s guide to drinking water standards UKWIR’s research on drinking water and microplastics BIS research on the impact of Working Time Regulations