Cabinet controversy erupts over Jacob Reese-Mogg’s plans to reject all other EU laws in less than four years, given concerns about the feasibility of reading at least 2,000 pieces of legislation while the civil service faces serious abbreviations.
The Minister for Brexit Opportunities insists that laws passed after Brexit expire by the deadline of 23 June 2026, marking 10 years since the EU referendum.
However, the Guardian has learned that at least two cabinet ministers have spoken out against the proposal, while officials say the goal is “literally impossible” – especially since the Reese-Mogg also spearheaded the massacre.
In a letter to North Somerset MP George Justis, saying that “messing up” with some rules would mean additional business costs and would be a waste of staff time, while high-ranking Whitehall sources expressed fears of mass deregulation. door.
The repulse came amid controversy in the government over how to better promote the “benefits” of British independence. Brussels is ready to take legal action against the United Kingdom’s attempts to unilaterally repeal the Northern Ireland Protocol on Wednesday.
Reese-Mogg plans to publish a bill on Brexit freedoms this summer. In a letter to cabinet colleagues seen by the Guardian, he proposed 23 June 2026 as the date on which the “cessation clause” should be activated, causing all “preserved EU legislation” to be dropped from the United Kingdom. Alternative dates that are “significant in the Brexit calendar” are also being considered, such as 31 January 2030, which will mark the decade since Britain left the EU.
After a review of Whitehall found that there were still 2,194 EU laws in place in 180 unique policy areas, Reese-Mogue said a “push for change” was needed to boost the regulatory reform process, which it will remove unnecessary burdens. “
Ministers were instructed to evaluate the laws affecting their departments and were told that some at higher levels “will have to devote significant resources” – but no additional money will be provided.
Given existing plans to lay off 91,000 civil servants, Reese-Mogg said ensuring compliance with the deadline “will require careful prioritization of political goals throughout the government.”
A team will be set up in the cabinet to help sort out those laws that are “high priority” for conservation, Reese-Mogg added, with a dashboard that monitors their progress and is monitored by a new stellar chamber for opportunities. for Brexit, involving ministers and political officials.
Many laws that ministers may want to keep could be contained in a form of secondary legislation known as a legal instrument (SI), Rees-Mogh assured them, but added: “We cannot predict how complex or clear they will be. SI. ”
The appendix to the letter to the cabinet also acknowledges that there is a risk of “increasing litigation” and that while the government will publicly commit to not violating any international legal obligations, Reese-Mogg is “considering” making it clearer in the text of the bill.
As for the number of laws that can be repealed or diluted, Reese-Mogg said the initiative would be “deregulatory in ambition, but we intend to allow a reasonably broad interpretation of what is regulatory, not limited to reducing costs to business “and added:” Brexit is an opportunity to create our own rules. “
Graphic
He added that as the tax is a “particularly complex” area of EU law, it will be addressed in a “commissioned” bill sponsored by the finance ministry.
Cabinet ministers were given less than two weeks to respond, with some missing the deadline – taken as a sign of unhappiness.
In his letter, Justice, the environment minister, said that such an approach “could mean that time is wasted on trivial matters when I try to focus my staff’s time on the leading EU law bodies that have the most impact ”- e.g. such as the Habitats Regulations and the Nitrates Directive.
Justis said he feared “pressure from the edge of the rock for an early sunset would mean employees would spend too much time” in reviewing less important laws, adding: “Doing them all at once would be inappropriate energy.” .
He also said that “messing” with the details of some preserved EU laws, such as product composition or labeling, “costs money to businesses and is unlikely to make much of a difference”.
Another cabinet member acknowledged that there was concern on Boris Johnson’s top team. “This is not a debate we want to hold in public,” the minister said.
Whitehall’s senior sources said it would be “literally impossible” for departments to go through hundreds of preserved EU laws and come up with plans to preserve, amend or eliminate them without additional resources.
They pointed out that a significant part of the laws passed by the EU were lobbied by the UK government when Britain was still a member, or were passed as a result of commitments to international organizations.
A government insider suggested that the Reese-Mogg plan may not be adopted due to strong opposition, adding that many hours of parliamentary time will have to be devoted to adopting or amending EU legislation at the expense of other key bills. before the next general elections.
Catherine Barnard, a professor of EU law at the University of Cambridge and vice-director of the United Kingdom in the Changing Europe think tank, said: of which it still performs a valuable function. Replacing useful EU rules with national variation will take considerable time for civil servants and parliament when the country has other urgent priorities.
A spokesman for Justis said he would not comment on the leaked letter. The cabinet said the Brexit bill would make it easier to amend or repeal obsolete EU legislation that does not comply with the UK, ending the “special status” that EU law continues to enjoy in our legal framework. and will save businesses at least £ 1 billion in a burdensome EU bureaucracy. “
Add Comment