Bar Council fears Withdrawal Bill will create confusion

After more than 13 hours of debate, the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill passed with a majority of 36, with 326 votes for and 290 against.

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, described the Bill, which adopts EU law into UK statute, as ‘an affront to parliamentary democracy and a naked power grab by government ministers’.

Both Conservative and Labour MPs agreed that amendments to the Bill will be necessary. Bob Neill, chairman of the justice committee, said: ‘It has already been pointed out that there are difficulties around the Henry VIII powers [that] go beyond that which is acceptable or necessary, and I hope the government will approach this in a sensible and constructive spirit.’

The Bar Council warned ahead of the vote, that the Bill would create confusion and put the rights of citizens at risk.

Andrew Langdon QC, Chair of the Bar, said: ‘After exit day, UK citizens will find that domestic courts enforce the same laws as they do now, except that they may not be able to apply the underlying treaty provision.

‘This could mean that where the rights of EU and UK citizens are interfered with by the same law, EU citizens would be able to challenge that law, but UK citizens would not. It is a recipe for confusion. Far from bringing rights home, this Bill sets up UK citizens for second class status.’

According to Langdon, UK citizens would have less protection against the state than before since they would no longer be able to challenge EU law brought into UK law on the basis of non-discrimination, proportionality, legal certainty or the right of defence. Instead, legal challenges would be limited to more restrictive English law grounds such as rationality, he said.

Langdon gave the example of hill farmers in Wales, who successfully argued that the Welsh Government’s decision in 2014 to give ten times as much farming aid to lowland farmers as hill farmers was discriminatory. ‘That argument will not work after exit day,’ he said.