Chamber and committees

Sir Jonathan Jones, do you want to come in?

To come on to that particular point, and others that were raised earlier, irrespective of what the figure for pieces of legislation might be, we know that it will be in the thousands. Does the Parliaments’ capacity to scrutinise relate to officials’ ability to engage with each piece of law before a decision is taken on whether it should be extended? That question is probably more for Sir Jonathan Jones, given his experience.

My final question is on the negative procedure, which has been touched on. Regulations to preserve REUL are subject to the negative procedure whether they are made by the UK Parliament or the Scottish Parliament. Is the negative procedure appropriate for regulations that preserve REUL?

Jonathan Jones or Dr Tucker, do either of you have a view on that?

Dr Tucker wants to come in.

You have just touched on our next area of discussion, which is about consultation with and consent by the Scottish ministers and the Scottish Parliament. That has come up at meetings of the lead committee, but for quite some time it has also regularly come up as an area of concern or frustration for Scotland as regards the UK Parliament. The bill allows the UK ministers to use the power to preserve REUL in devolved areas without the consent of, or without consulting, the Scottish ministers or the Scottish Parliament. Do the witnesses have any comments about what that will mean for dialogue and respecting devolution?

Welcome to the 33rd meeting of 2022 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee. We have received apologies from Jeremy Balfour. I remind everyone to switch their mobile phones to silent.

Agenda item 1 is a decision on taking business in private. Does the committee agree to take items 5 and 6 in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Given the comments that he has already made, the next question is probably more for Dr Tucker, but the other two witnesses are welcome to respond, too.

Could you give us your reflections on the extent to which Parliament, as opposed to ministers, will be able to influence what the statute book will look like as a result of the bill?

I will bring in Bill Kidd, who has a question about clause 16.

Sir Jonathan, you mentioned the word litigation. Paul Sweeney’s question was about clause 8, but it made me think about the bill as a whole.

The word “uncertainty” has been used a lot by witnesses today, about what may or may not happen. Do witnesses expect litigation to take place because of the lack of clarity that is caused by the number of regulations and the volume of legislation that will be covered by the bill? There are 2,400 pieces of retained EU legislation and potentially another 1,400—possibly up to 5,000. I dare say that, at some point in the future, some organisations will operate and take decisions on the basis of what they think is the law, but potentially, because of the sunset clause, the initial law might not exist any more, because it will have fallen off the statute book. Do you expect an increase in litigation as a consequence of this legislation from the UK Government?